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

 • 

62 Points

1 year ago

Can you guys stop continuing to make update after update which makes the site harder to use.

This place was better 3 updates ago. This latest update is super crap.

27 Messages

 • 

988 Points

1 year ago

"By default, the Credits section is loaded with filters applied for jobs that the person is most known for. In order to see a person’s entire list of credits, de-select all of the applied filters. Filters can be de-selected by clicking the ones that are selected under the Credits section header. You can then open all the job sections by selecting Expand below."

Please - do the opposite. Show all by default, it's sooooooo annoying to click so much to get the full lsit everytime, everywhere...

550 Messages

 • 

12.9K Points

@dopinginho​ I can live with individual sections being expanded or contracted by default, based on how the person is best known. I think the old name page did someting similar.

But what really annoys me is that even for a section which is "open", you only see the most recent credits by default and have to click a button to expand to all credits. It's as if IMDB is implying that the only relevant credits are the recent ones.

A lot is solved by the "Text view of credits", but that link/button should be placed on the initial view  of the name page instead of buried in a sub-menu. At present it is a well-kept secret that would not be found unless someone told you where to look for it. I've not yet heard an explanation of why the "Text view of credits" page is acceptible to IMDB (eg it's coded to be easy to maintain) whereas the original name page was not acceptible/maintainable. If new code had to be written for the "Text view of credits" page, why couldn't the new code have been written to produce the exact format of the original name page be reproduced? I'm not suggesting that it should be the default view for all users - unlike IMDB, I accept that different people want/need different things - but what I am suggesting is that it should be the default view for some users... those who select it as a user preference on the same config page as the selection of Reference View for titles.

Col, I'd be grateful for an explanation of:

- why IMDB can't make an exact copy of the old name page format available for those users who want it, given that IMDB is happy to provide a partial substitute (text view of credits) which is presumably more maintainable than the code for generating the old page (if you have to write code to produce something that's almost right, why not do the full job instead?)

- why the choice of name page format (old or new) can't be made "sticky" on the user preference page. If there is a good technical reason, then that's fine, but if it's "we can't be bothered" or "we think we know better than you", then shame on  IMDB :-(


This whole matter of the new name pages has opened up a much bigger can of worms than you probably evisaged. The vast majority of responses I've seen on this thread have been in condemnation of the new format, with only a few in praise of it. OK, I realised that people are more likely to write feedback if it is negative, and are less likely to be bothered to write if it's to say "I like it", but I don't think that's the full story. IMDB needs to have the courage to admit that they got it wrong and have produced something that mosst people actively loathe. We've tried to be helpful in offering suggestions of ways that the new page format can be improved (things that don't necessarily involve tearing up the new work and goign back to the old way!) but I'm not sure you've really taken on board what it is we are saying is fundamentally wrong with the new layout, which makes it considerably less usable.

I'm all for innovation and improvement. I accept that not everyone has the same needs - I  imagine that broadly speaking users can be divided into casual browsers and full-time submitters of information - so I'm very much in favour of a new page format if that's what users are wanting. All I am suggesting is that the new page format should not be foisted on everyone, and that users should have the choice over how the information is presented, preferably with such a choice ontly having to be made once, rather than every time every name page is loaded (as with the selection of "Text view of credits"). In other words, only ever add new features; never remove existing ones.

(edited)

10.5K Messages

 • 

223.3K Points

That aspect of the question has to do with the Web-browsing experience on mobile devices.

1 Message

 • 

60 Points

1 year ago

I frequently copy several of an actor's movies form the page, on e at a time.  With the new format, I must navigate in to each movie's card, copy the title, then navigate back, then scroll up and down to find my place.  This is extremely inconvenient and annoying.  Keep the auto-navigate ion the movie image, and revert the text back to a link, so research is easier.

I hope IMDB reads and thinks about these comments, but I really do not think they do.  They must justify the cost of redesigning the "new, useful" interface.  I hope this does not kill the future of this once wonderful site.

10.5K Messages

 • 

223.3K Points

Well, there is the text-only version of pages.

28 Messages

 • 

464 Points

1 year ago

I've said it before (when the listings page changed), and I'll say it again. Keep both styles. The original www.imdb.com for everyone sane, and then use the m.imdb.com for the touchscreen experience that you are forcing upon everyone.

At the very least, do what you did with the listings page with the "reference" extension, and have something like 'plain' or basicview' tacked on.

This UX is abominable...

2 Messages

 • 

72 Points

1 year ago

I have been a member of IMDb since you began; in fact, I am in your database.

And I think this new format is TERRIBLE!!!!!

It was so much better before, for research, continuity, easy on the eyes, etc.  I'm sure you will be getting many complaints about this.  Please, please return to the old format!!!!  Now.  Or at the very least, give me an option to do so, because I want very much to be able to do that -- to be able to see my credits in the old format, which preserved continuity with out having to punch a dozen buttons.

I have also made many contributions over the decades, but will find that so much more difficult to do now. In fact, I probably won't bother anymore.  Your loss.

Please, please let me know how I can return to the old format.  We need all that option!!

Also, why did my database entry change today, when you have a message below that is from 28 days ago? 

THIS IS AN UNMITIGATED DISASTER!!!  Shame on you.

Champion

 • 

13.6K Messages

 • 

321.7K Points

1 year ago

On mobile, the text view link does not lead to the text view, it's just the same as the old All Filmography.

Employee

 • 

6.5K Messages

 • 

169.3K Points

@Peter_pbn​  Thanks — this a new bug, sorry.  The appropriate team have been alerted. 

10.5K Messages

 • 

223.3K Points

I was wondering about this too, but I assumed it was intentional.

1 Message

 • 

60 Points

1 year ago

YUCK.

The most obvious problems I noticed with the first few seconds:

Actors with 100's of credits have no paging capability; you just have to scroll and scroll and ...

If I try to select the name of a character, the page jumps to the movie that I'm trying select the character name from, so I'm unable to select any text.

IMO pages with flaws this obvious should still be in trial mode.

10.5K Messages

 • 

223.3K Points

I don't know about the scrolling bit (since I prefer a comprehensive unpaginated view, which I mitigate by using the browser's find tool), but indeed it is hard to highlight some of the text, similar to how highlighting things on YouTube can be very tricky. In some ways, all these sites with "modernized" UI are hard to work with, given certain use cases.

2 Messages

 • 

90 Points

1 year ago

Don't like the new look at all, bring back the way it was, it was far easier to navigate, 

4 Messages

 • 

92 Points

1 year ago

New design is garbage can't even see what movies are in my watch list now when looking at a actors page. Have to manually click each and every time separately.

I also dislike the UI change before that, on front page/movies. I still prefer the one from some years ago....
And that is not the same as the "Show reference view with full cast and crew (advanced view)" option .....

Employee

 • 

6.5K Messages

 • 

169.3K Points

@DexteRNL

can't even see what movies are in my watch list now when looking at a actors page. Have to manually click each and every time separately.

Thanks for the feedback, however, we are confused by your report as the old name pages did not have this functionality either.  

You can now check the watchlist status of any title on a name page by clicking the “(i)” symbol to right of the year — which is at least faster / easier than the old pages.  We did support a watchlist status indicator directly on the new name pages during the beta across the summer, but despite (IMHO) this being a good feature, it was too much of a change for many customers to accept.  We are looking at other options to bring this back over the long-term. 

Hope this helps. 

(edited)

1 Message

 • 

60 Points

1 year ago

I don't totally hate the new design. I think with time I'll get used to it. What I would love to see is the ability to resize the text, because there is A LOT of white space, particularly in the center. Or the option for a dark mode, so you can see the text in white with a dark background

10.5K Messages

 • 

223.3K Points

I might suggest relying upon the tools present within the Web browser being used, but I seen that some of Web browsers (as in mobile versions of them) don't provide a quick (toolbar control) way to adjust things like that, which is very annoying. (I've only ever experienced Chrome, Firefox and Kiwi, along with the pre-Chrome stock browser of Android OS, though. I'd like to get around to experimenting with Edge, Brave, Opera and Opera Mini, Kiwi Browser is spectacular, by the way, but only available for Android.)

Employee

 • 

6.5K Messages

 • 

169.3K Points

@ketpiano​ Thanks for the feedback.  We had a more compact two-column view of the credits in the beta version which was tested over the summer. Unfortunately, the customer feedback at the time showed that overall there were too many changes in the beta for people to handle at once.  The version you see now is a compromise and we will keep monitoring feedback such as yours as the new design settles in.

10.5K Messages

 • 

223.3K Points

I may write a monkey script that forces each movie's the year of release to be closer to the movie's title. I did that with the last generation name page layout, when name reference view was eliminated. I've always found it ridiculous that the gap between these pieces of information was so damned wide.

1 Message

 • 

60 Points

1 year ago

For the love of God, please put it back to what it was. I've been using IMDB for over 20 years and I DETEST this new design. Confusing and just....confusing!!!

8 Messages

 • 

152 Points

1 year ago

To make IMDB usable on the computer, set "Show Reference View" in options, and create a rewrite rule using an extension like Redirector (Chrome) for the new Name Page  (basically rewrite https://www.imdb.com/name/*/ to https://www.imdb.com/name/$1/filmotype)  The only downside is that the text version of the Name Page completely ignores the setting of number of episodes of each series you select in the configuration, and shows all of them.  Thanks again, IMDB.  

(edited)

1 Message

 • 

96 Points

1 year ago

I registered just now, specifically to comment on this issue. Skimming through the comments it seems every issue has been mentioned so I won't go into that, but rather just add my voice to the chorus:

This is singlehandedly one of the worst website redesigns I've ever seen. On some level I respect the bloody-minded determination that IMDb has, to make their website (both browser and mobile versions) as user-unfriendly as they possibly can, but my goodness, this one is spectacularly bad. I'm not even going to try to make revision suggestions, because the entire endeavour is so badly broken that it would be simpler to just start from scratch.

I'm not expecting a rollback, because it's universal corporate strategy to dig in even when really obvious mistakes have been made, but it's really what ought to be done here. Rolling back and saying "we made a mistake" is embarrassing, yes, but it's less embarrassing than having to present a catastrophically bad product on an ongoing basis.

Still, I hope that imdb will come to their senses and scrap this disaster of a project.

200 Messages

 • 

3.5K Points

1 year ago

Another unasked "update" has been made and here we go again. How do I make an actor's films list by rating etc.? Why does IMDb constantly change things around when the entire forum tells them we don't like it and it's becoming more user-unfriendly with each "update".

Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation originally titled Unasked new outlook sucks

7.8K Messages

 • 

168.7K Points

1 year ago

238 Messages

 • 

5.4K Points

@ACT_1​ But only about 500 new "users" per month in this community. 😬

7.8K Messages

 • 

168.7K Points

@plur62​ 😀

n-61052

IMDb member since Fri Nov 18 2022
https://www.imdb.com/user/ur158950000/

hs-60691
IMDb member since Thu Nov 17 2022
https://www.imdb.com/user/ur158920000/

damianlyons
IMDb member since Wed Nov 16 2022
https://www.imdb.com/user/ur158880000/

.

(edited)

238 Messages

 • 

5.4K Points

@ACT_1​ 30,000 new users per day on IMDb, 15 new users per day on IMDb Sprinklr. 😪

Champion

 • 

4K Messages

 • 

243.6K Points

@ACT_1​ Hey, haven't seen you in a while. Glad you're still there. :)

11 Messages

 • 

306 Points

@plur62​ Why do you think that is? How long has Sprinklr been around? I've been an IMDb Member for 17 years and didn't know about this until I chanced upon it by accident when accessing a Name page a day or two ago.