Bethanny's profile
Employee

Employee

 • 

4.1K Messages

 • 

44K Points

Thursday, October 20th, 2022 2:07 PM

IMDb Name Page Redesign

IMDb Name Page Redesign

Image

 

We are excited to announce the launch of IMDb’s redesigned Name pages! These pages are meant to make your IMDb experience easier and more enjoyable by providing better access to photos and videos, an upgraded view of an individual’s credits, and improved mobile navigation making it easier to view IMDb features on the go. These enhancements reflect changes suggested by IMDb customers, as well as our own in-depth research designed to enhance entertainment content, discovery, and navigation. More information is available in the FAQ on the help page.

We hope you enjoy these latest improvements, and thank you for continuing to make IMDb the world’s most trusted source for movie, TV, and entertainment content.

— The IMDb Team

 

English | Français | Deutsch | हिन्दी | Italiano | Português | Español

1 Message

 • 

60 Points

1 year ago

Why must everything be so slow? Every redesigned page is much slower than in old design… how many JavaScript libraries do you need to display a simple movie list? And I don't talk just about download speed, there is slow-down just after download, everything is sluggish. It could be done so much better… simpler and quicker.

10.5K Messages

 • 

223.3K Points

Might be interesting to check the total amount of bytes of data is downloaded just to properly display a page on the new software platform. It's sure to be way over half a megabyte, which doesn't seem like much, until things add up. Even with a fast connection, a fast GPU and lots of RAM, delays will emerge whenever any of these things are somehow (and for whatever reason) operating at nearly capacity. There is a thing called virtual RAM too, or swap, and it is slower than raw volatile RAM.

2 Messages

 • 

72 Points

1 year ago

The credits feature has been ruined by the redesign. The thumbnail images of movies add absolutely nothing and make referencing anyone with a long list of credits an unnecessarily time consuming task. The old format was far more user friendly.

Employee

 • 

6.5K Messages

 • 

169.3K Points

@Hangerz22You might find our update from last week helpful, particularly the point around the “All credits” view -> https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/imdbcom/imdb-name-page-redesign/6351563ae7100d725d54c0bb?commentId=63878b2b038ef261b8f4b7fb

10.5K Messages

 • 

223.3K Points

1 year ago

Here is a screen cap of an example of what I see most of the time whenever I click the "all topics" button:

"We are unable to load this content at this time. Please refresh the page or try again later."

11 Messages

 • 

170 Points

@jeorj_euler​ 

Yes, it's useless.  

Employee

 • 

6.5K Messages

 • 

169.3K Points

@jeorj_euler​ Please follow the advice in https://help.imdb.com/article/imdb/general-information/why-is-imdb-displaying-differently-on-my-browser/GF2ZAR69V859XLHF as you appear to be the only person reporting this specific issue. If you can reproduce it with a clean, modern, supported browser and operating system, off VPN, and without plug-ins, please let us know (a) which browser / system configurations were still broken like this (b) the results of a speed test from fast.com or similar (c) in which country you are located.  Thanks. 

10.5K Messages

 • 

223.3K Points

Right, but that is no excuse for designing the "all topics" to be dependent upon AJAX/fetch, which creates somewhat of an obstacle to forcing it to load automatically as the page loads. The reason for having all these third party scripts (all of my own design) in the first place is because of the terrible aspects of the design (or broken things) that have existed since apparently 2010. The situation is even worse now, because the new design is made in such a way as to "resist", so to speak, these corrective scripts. Because IMDb only party-way through the software platform migration, I'm inclined to wait until it finished before reworking the scripts.

11 Messages

 • 

170 Points

@Col_Needham​ 

You've got to be joking.  I've just read dozens of others complaints on here!  It is still doing it, and I can't even see a person's history now at all.  

Why did you change something that worked fine before? I won't be using this anymore.  Truly hideous layout and even worse service.  

1 Message

 • 

60 Points

1 year ago

nobody needed this change, like the last not so long ago. what's worse, it's a bad change. everyone's here to tell you. you're literally wasting money paying people to do a job that's not needed, but nobody's good enough to tell your bosses.

2 Messages

 • 

84 Points

1 year ago

Option in settings to switch to old format please?

Sorry, but this "improvement" is just...not. It's clunky, unintuitive, and not at all user friendly. No one wants to read a whole other page on "how to use" your site. Formerly you could see everything at a glance, or with a bit of scrolling if the credits list was long. You even have to search for the bio link now.

2.7K Messages

 • 

47K Points

@zydecopolka​ 

You even have to search for the bio link now.

And even worse, the bio link only has some of the relevant info on each celebrity -- for example, their social media links are not included on their bio pages. 

With the old name pages, everything used to be in one place, at a glance: the person's birthdate and birthplace, the intro paragraph from their bio, their social media links, their trivia, and most importantly, their full filmography. 

Now, with the redesign, only some of that stuff is available on the name pages, and all of it is broken up into several different subpages (most of which are not easy to find the links to directly from the name pages). 

A lot of people have complained about the "Known For" part of the redesigned name pages. But that isn't really the problem, since that also existed on the older version of the name pages.

The bigger problem is the removal of the full filmography from the name pages, combined with placing movie images/posters into the truncated filmography that now appears on the name pages. Those changes were unnecessary and they are causing the vast majority of the problems people are complaining about here.

(edited)

Employee

 • 

6.5K Messages

 • 

169.3K Points

@keyword_expert​ 

Now, with the redesign, only some of that stuff is available on the name pages, and all of it is broken up into several different subpages (most of which are not easy to find the links to directly from the name pages). 

Sorry, but none of these things have been removed from the new name pages. No changes have been made to the name subpages either, and we ensured that all content / links present on the old name pages are still on the new ones. If there is anything missing it is simply an oversight and we will take a look — please provide a specific example using archive.org to illustrate, thanks. 

[Edited on 12/14 to acknowledge that the "Available on Prime Video" widget has been removed, although more wide availability information has been added to each individual title in a filmography to compensate instead; discussion and details here]

(edited)

2.7K Messages

 • 

47K Points

@Col_Needham​ 

Filmographies

Regarding people's full filmographies, I didn't realize it until you brought it up, but apparently that info is still there on name pages, but only with a bunch of counterintuitive clicks to pull it up.

A related problem is that the name pages seemingly arbitrarily choose which project type to feature as the default for each person, which leads to odd results, like making it appear at first glance that Fred Armisen is more known for being a composer than an actor, and Barbara Streisand more known for being an actress than a musician. (I realize some of these problems predate the redesign, but these problems are more pronounced with the redesign, because the different modules for accessing filmography credits are now somewhat buried behind counterintuitive filter buttons rather than text labels like the old design.)

Fred Armisen

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0035488/

https://web.archive.org/web/20220408042709/https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0035488/

Barbra Streisand

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000659/

https://web.archive.org/web/20210304020404/https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000659/

"Did you Know" section

Here are some examples of name pages where the "Did you Know" section has been removed in the new redesign:

Tiphany Adams

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm4970055/

https://web.archive.org/web/20191028134257/https://www.imdb.com/name/nm4970055/

Hannah Diamond

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm5730258/

https://web.archive.org/web/20210804170635/https://www.imdb.com/name/nm5730258/

Arthur Hughes

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0400458/

https://web.archive.org/web/20210309123416/http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0400458/

Birthplaces

Regarding birthplaces, with the old design the birthplaces were prominently stated at the top of the page next to the birthdates. The new redesign only states the birthdates, with no mention of birthplaces, at the tops of the pages (except for people who have narrative bios that mention their birthplaces). That led me to believe that birthplaces are now omitted from name pages. After receiving your response I looked more closely and realized that birthplaces are still on name pages, but they are placed way down the pages toward the bottom, after some irrelevant stuff (like the huge module for "IMDb Best of 2022").  I prefer listing birthplaces along with birthdates at the tops of pages, as in the old design. 

Subpages and "All Topics" menu

As for the subpages, while it's true that these have always been separated from each other, my point is they were all more easily accessible from each person's name pages, which was essentially a usable "master page" for each person. Now, with the redesign, the links to many of the subpages are buried under the cryptically labeled "All topics" menu, which is practically hidden in the top right corner of the page, separated from other labels that clearly have something to do with the person  (like "Biography" and "Awards"), making this stuff nearly impossible to find unless someone tells you where to look. Here was my feedback on this issue, previously stated in this same thread:

The choices I see in the top right-hand corner are "Biography," "Awards," "Trivia," "IMDbPro," then a button with a search image and the vague text label "All topics," then a button to share on social media, in that order.

The top part of the screen should be completely redesigned to include more options in a true top menu. I would list them in an order something like this: "Biography," "Credits," "Photos," "Awards," "News," "Did you know?," and then maybe a "More" option. Each of those choices should allow for a pull-down menu from which additional choices could be selected.  The vague "All topics" button could be done away with, and the choices currently presented there could be incorporated into the menu items in my list. 

That would allow for a true top menu that would be more intuitive and useful, and it would not take up much more room than the current design.

p.s. Also, "IMDbPro" could be eliminated from the "top"/"corner" menu, because there is already a link to "IMDbPro STARMETER" right below it.

Part of the confusion for me with the current corner menu is that "All topics" is separated from the other choices by the intervening "IMDbPro" option. This makes it look like "IMDbPro" and "All topics" do not relate to the celebrity on whose page these choices appear, but rather are general options to log in to IMDbPro or explore "all topics" on IMDb generally. 

By the way, thanks for causing me to take an even closer look at the redesign. I am realizing that it is not quite as bad as I had believed. A lot of the problems actually have to do with how the information is presented, rather than the absence of the information. But overall there are still a lot of improvements that could be made...

(edited)

Champion

 • 

4.9K Messages

 • 

117.3K Points

@Col_Needham​ 

Specific things missing:

Related News  (saw that it's on the left instead of right now)

On Prime Video

User Polls (I have seen this on other people)

Example:

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1259728/

https://web.archive.org/web/20220827034346/https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1259728/

I confirmed using the filmosearch for this person that IMDb has 9 Prime Videos, so that category is not absent for lack of data.

(edited)

Employee

 • 

6.5K Messages

 • 

169.3K Points

@bderoes​ Thanks for the examples ...

Related News  (saw that it's on the left instead of right now)

We are not sure what you mean by "on the left" ... the news widget is further down the page after "Did You Know?" and before "Contribute to this page" and then also in the "All topics" menu -- it is in the "Popular" section at the top. 

On Prime Video

This has been expanded to all our supported streaming providers so it is in the pop-up "(i)" menu to the right of the year of each title.  For example:

User Polls (I have seen this on other people)

Ah, but this person is not the direct subject of any of these polls so this was confusing; if a name actually appears as an option in a poll, the widget is still present.  For example, see https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0428065/ 

Hope this helps.

Champion

 • 

13.6K Messages

 • 

321.7K Points

@Col_Needham​ 

And if a name is linked in the introduction of a poll, the poll should also appear on the name page. This appears to be happening correctly.

There is a small issue with the poll widget that I tried to report in the feedback form during testing: No thumbnail image shows up when the poll is based on an image list.

Example: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm6854116/

Employee

 • 

6.5K Messages

 • 

169.3K Points

@Peter_pbn​ Thanks -- that's a good one.  We will make sure the team sees it (and sorry it got lost on the original feedback form). 

Champion

 • 

4.9K Messages

 • 

117.3K Points

@Col_Needham​ 

Having Prime Video information on each title is not comparable to having a list of titles that are available. I'm reporting the absence of this widget from the old layout:

(Side note: amazing that you've already forgotten that Related News was on the right column of the old layout. Hence my missing it initially in the new layout.)

Edited to add: It might be nice to see a Watch Options link in the upper part of the Name Page (over the Add to List button, as it is on Title pages) with the Prime Video list as the pop-up. 

(edited)

10.5K Messages

 • 

223.3K Points

Great catch, bderoes! I tended not to think of that feature since I'm often looking at the name pages about people who aren't credited in a movie or show that is available to watch for free (or so) on Amazon's streaming service with a Prime subscription.

Employee

 • 

6.5K Messages

 • 

169.3K Points

@bderoes​ Thanks for the extra explanation ...

Having Prime Video information on each title is not comparable to having a list of titles that are available.

I understand the difference now and will amend my post above, sorry; it turns out this was a deliberate removal partly due to only one provider being supported, and therefore the resulting lack of clarity and accuracy on full availability.  This better belongs as an additional filter option with support for all of the providers we cover though (as on the iOS app) vs. a separate widget.  We will take this suggestion back to the team. 

It might be nice to see a Watch Options link in the upper part of the Name Page (over the Add to List button, as it is on Title pages) with the Prime Video list as the pop-up.

Thanks. In the meantime you can filter by availability (still only for Prime Video) and title type via any of the views which place you on /name/filmosearch (such as "by Rating"). For example, https://www.imdb.com/filmosearch/?explore=title_type&role=nm0428065&ref_=filmo_ref_typ&sort=user_rating,desc&mode=detail&page=1&title_type=movie&watch_option=has_video_amazon_instant_video 

(Side note: amazing that you've already forgotten that Related News was on the right column of the old layout. Hence my missing it initially in the new layout.)

Ah sorry, I consider the page as having a main section and a right- hand side vs. a left and a right :-) Anyway, glad you found it, regardless of the terminology. 

44 Messages

 • 

1.4K Points

1 year ago

Here's another example of what I find so freakin' annoying about this 'improvement':

It's possible you might guess whose page I'm looking at, but I doubt it, even from the pictures that are shown. Give up?

What does the crap I've circled in yellow have to do with -name withheld since we don't have spoiler tags-?

Champion

 • 

4.9K Messages

 • 

117.3K Points

@xianjiro​ 

If you go through the gallery, the person in question does appear at #104 of 132.

https://www.imdb.com/gallery/rg1269013248/mediaviewer/rm2788575488/

1 Message

 • 

60 Points

1 year ago

In general, I like it. But it would be very useful to see in the Credits section the Top 3 genres of each item, its rating and my rating without a need to click every time on the Info button.

Employee

 • 

6.5K Messages

 • 

169.3K Points

@Jeksonic​ Thanks -- is this is a request to make the detailed pop-up automatically open upon mouse-over vs. a click?  

2 Messages

 • 

70 Points

1 year ago

Please can you help me. Since page redesign I can't expand credits menu in edge or chrome browsers in regular mode, just in private mode. 

Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation originally titled problem with expanding credits

Employee

 • 

6.5K Messages

 • 

169.3K Points

@janeveleski​ Please see https://help.imdb.com/article/imdb/general-information/why-is-imdb-displaying-differently-on-my-browser/GF2ZAR69V859XLHF ... it is likely a plug-in such as an ad-blocker is incorrectly blocking the page content.  Please let us know if this solves the problem. 

147 Messages

 • 

2.4K Points

1 year ago

I've noticed that with the new format, the IMDB will show the birth date of people, but will no longer show where they were born.  For example, Yolonda Ross at https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0743931 shows that she was born on August 4, 1968 and doesn't list the place of birth.  But in her biography section at https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0743931/bio it not only doesn't show that, it also doesn't show her place of birth which is Omaha, Nebraska.  I know it is still in the database because when I checked her DOB when I tried to edit, the information was there.

Was this an intentional change to no longer show the place of birth or is it an error?

Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation originally titled The places of birth are no longer showing up on IMDB biographies.

Employee

 • 

6.5K Messages

 • 

169.3K Points

@justin_6415368​ 

For example, Yolonda Ross at https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0743931 shows that she was born on August 4, 1968 and doesn't list the place of birth.

Places of birth (and death if applicable) are in the Personal Details section, further down the page:

Our testing showed it was better to keep the display of the dates more simple at the top of the page, plus there are other considerations in the placement.  The birth location can always be included in the mini-biography text where interesting, and all automatically generated biographies include it where known, as is also the case with Yolonda Ross: 

Hope this helps. 

2 Messages

 • 

70 Points

1 year ago

Hate the new format.  Can't find what I'm looking for.  Rapidly getting off of the imdb habit!  And also don't appreciate the difficulties thrown at me as I've tried to criticize the new format.  Don't blame you for making it difficult, though.  I imagine you're getting mostly bad reviews!

6 Messages

 • 

120 Points

1 year ago

Not a fan of the new web design, but there are plenty of threads about that.

What I don't understand is why "Self" credits remain second-class credits here. A person with 20 "Self" credits and one "thanks" credit has the "thanks" credit as the main entry on their page, with users needing to click the tiny "Self" button to see those credits.

Why doesn't the category with the most credits get treated as the default category for any given person?

Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation originally titled Why are "Self" credits still treated as the lowest of the low on IMDb?

6 Messages

 • 

120 Points

1 year ago

New web design is terrible. Credit lists should be visible by default, at least for the category or two with the most credits. The buttons for hidden credits are so small, it's easy to miss them.

3 Messages

 • 

90 Points

1 year ago

I want to see movies vs TV shows rather than everything in a row

Champion

 • 

4.9K Messages

 • 

117.3K Points

@SteveG​ 

You can do that now. Click the blue down-arrow for Filter options, which begin with an option to sort by Project Type.

4 Messages

 • 

132 Points

1 year ago

Name pages do NOT separate TV and Film despite that being the Setting I have selected.

Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation originally titled Name pages do NOT separate TV and Film

10.5K Messages

 • 

223.3K Points

Hi, Eric Simpson. You're right, and it is due to the migration to a new software platform. Hopefully this problem will be resolved in the future. For the time, being you'll have to manually adjust the display of credits every single time you visit or reload an IMDb name page.

Champion

 • 

4.9K Messages

 • 

117.3K Points

The way to separate the credits on the new format is to use the blue down-arrow at the top of the credits, and select sorting by Project Type.

2 Messages

 • 

70 Points

1 year ago

The new design absolutely SUCKS!  Go back to the old format and we will forget about this abomination that is the current IMDb design.