INTRODUCING: Updated IMDb.com Title page experience

Absolutely hate the new design.  Yes,  it takes up more space and is harder to find information.  I'd rather scan (by actually reading) what I'm trying to find and get taken to  pictures when I click on something - smaller pictures. Looks like you shrunk everything I come to site to find and filled pages with too much what I hesitate to call "style" over substance.  Why did you do this?  Is there any way users can switch back to old design?  Big fail.

Epic Fail.

Complete and utterly horrible. Why do they do this to us?

I agree. The 'new improved' version sucks. 

Hate the new version. I have to scroll three pages to find a release date. 

Despise the new format of IMDB. I removed my cookies in Firefox (old version 48.0.2) and got back the old beloved version of IMDB. I keep getting the old version, then the new version, but when I could no longer get the old version, removing cookies, the IMDB cookies, seemed to restore the older BELOVED version finally!

I will now start checking out Tmdb, since it has a friendlier format, if I find that the NEWER HATED version of IMDB returns to my Macbook Pro on old v. Firefox.

Too bad IMDB thinks destroying their user base is a good thing.

I HATE the new version of IMDB. It is despicable. Who is the idiot that thought it was better?

I - AM - NOT - ALONE!

Thanks for the tip about TMDB. I had never heard of that site but will certainly give it a look!

Plus 1 for the tip about TMDB. Would never have heard of it if I hadn't been sufficiently motivated bythe new IMDB layout to see how I could register my dislike.

Glad I saw the mention of TMDB. Hadn't heard of it before. Sad that something as great as IMDB continues to change itself in ways that I want to find another place to be my first look for info.

@ACT_1 Its disgusting and ugly

@ACT_1  I must whole-heartedly concur.  I HATE this new design.  Is there a way for us to view the page as it USED to be? 

@ACT_1 I just now saw this and clicked on some of the links. This makes the statement that @Col_Needham said this tested well among users as design was being rolled out even more ridiculous. Same complaints, same lack of interest by IMDB to listen.

@ACT_1 This redesign is awful. Information is more difficult to find and digest now. This is clearly a lazy port of the mobile layout to desktop, which has resulted in extremely excessive whitespace.

@senglund

It's so disappointing. I am going to try to taper off use and maybe stop altogether. I don't have the hours of extra time to navigate this unusable interface. It's sad as I LOVED IMDB and came here every day. I thought the pages with this new look were film companies getting carried away with their advertising, but I hated those pages and did not stay. Now every page is that same, unusable nightmare.  

YES!  Agree.  I just went to TMDB and immediately found the info I was looking for, runtime and the actual release date (more than just the year).  I found a new home, as well.  BYE BYE IMDb.  Followed you for years, but moving on.  New design is lacking in design and information.  THANKS for sending me to TMDB.

@starlite

I wish TMDB was a substitute but they are lacking much of the resources on IMDB. That said, I hope the community will migrate to TMDB and that TMDB will make their interface more like the old IMDB. For now, there is really no solution.  

@senglund EVERYONE is doing this and it is UNACCEPTABLE!!!!!

@tcountis EVERY company is doing this, facebook, google, ebay, youtube, etc, etc.

Do they even realise MORE screen space used is MORE TIME SPENT NOT BEING PRODUCTIVE?

It's like they don't even care that your increased time spent on their site is causing MORE EMISSIONS!

Yes, all this BS is causing more emissions then if everyone just left stuff alone as nice and simple.

Congrats idiots...

Anyone knows if it's possible to import all my ratings from imdb to tmdb? (and then to completely forget imdb along with its new nightmarish horrid design)? I've rated over 7000 movies during the last 20 years or so and it would be a bore to do it manually. On the other hand, I understand the new horrible design is here to stay for a long time and there's no chance anyone will listen to us, and I know I can't stay anymore. So, please, if there's a way to import my info to tmdb, share it with me. Thanks.

That's a great question and I look forward to hearing replies to it.

Yes, I did that just today. I imported my Ratings, Watchlist and favorite movies list, as well. I was not able to find a way to import my Reviews. I am making the switch, too.

@Sadie When I posted my dislike of the new design months ago someone at imdb sent this link: www.imdb.com/search. That mostly fixes it. 

I agree. It's a complete mess.

It's not pleasing to the eye, you have to scroll further to see the cast, and sooo much more. Whoever wants to see videos and pics before checking out the cast - especially, as you say, it takes up half the screen.

agree - hate it

It's appallingly bad, who greenlights these changes? Clearly someone who does not use regularly.

I agree as well. I'm seeing two different layouts depending on which browser I use but both have the information sorted in mostly the least useful order possible and one version uses what appears to be roughly twice the space to do so. Was there an actual poll asking users about their preferences? Every time I've been presented with a beta version of the new layout I submitted feedback but that's not quite the same thing as taking an actual user poll.

Also, to add to what DannX68 mentions, what is the point of massive video and photo sections when there is a link to both videos and photos on the bottom/side (depending on the version) of the trailer?

This change is very much in line with the "enhancements" Amazon (IMDb parent company) makes on their main site that make using it a less and less enjoyable experience each time. It's fortunate that Google now shows most of the important information on the side of the search result as I'd rather not visit IMDb if this is what I'm going to have to deal with going forward.

@jamerkk I went looking for alternatives, seems that TMDb is the one most used/recommended. Took a look and it looks a bit more bare as far as info goes, but at least looks like an actual WEBSITE. I imagine with more users it could replace this.

Thank you for this, I will be checking them out.  I opt out of this mobile oriented market nonsense.

I hate this. They should have at least offered us the choice of which format we would prefer. This is garbage.

@Redrusty66 Thank you for providing an alternative. This version of IMDb is not accessible for me.

@Redrusty66 Thank you for telling us about Tmdb, I mentioned it in one of my comments because of you, plus I checked it out some.

@ACT_1 Thank you for mentioning and giving links to Wayback Machine.

It may be possible to use Wayback Machine to access the older and BELOVED version of IMDB. Just choose an older date/year on one of the calendars, then search in old IMDB (from Wayback Machine, see link below).

Apparently IMDB is bound and determined to eventually change to the newer and DESPISED IMDB version, so Wayback Machine may be a work-around.

Highlight COMPLETE link below and open in new window, opens IMDB in Wayback Machine:

http://web.archive.org/web/20190101000000*/http://www.imdb.com/

@stevemusicmaker
Joined Sat, May 29, 2021

- - -

More Wayback Machine IMDb  Samples:

https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/imdbcom/introducing-updated-imdbcom-title-page-experience/60a40631c1307254c6cc1b0d?commentId=60a5933088ecc028d5def7d6

.

Whats with the big black box on every page of imdb??
happens on chrome/firefox on all my 4 computers/laptops.
So perhaps location issue? Im in (Netherlands), and guess its a missing ad?

But anyways I prefer a option in settings to switch back to old layout, I don't like this one at all. And the site is a lot slower in this new layout.
Reference view is not the same as old layout, since you cannot add movies to custom lists, and some other functions are not there in reference mode.

Btw I was still on the old layout 2 days ago, today is 2nd July 2021. looking at the comments here, that means you had both layouts running next to each other. Then why not add an options for users to switch back.

Hi, DexteRNL. I do believe every rendition of IMDb title pages can potentially experience the problem of empty space (or a gigantic ad) just below the navigation/search bar. I've no idea why this still hasn't been mitigated.

@DexteRNL  The issue with the empty ad placements in some countries (including yours, sorry) should be fixed now.  Please can you let us know if not. 

@rustyi  The Parents Guide is in the same place as before -- at the bottom of the "Storyline" section.  Perhaps you checked a title which does not have such a guide?  You can find one on https://www.imdb.com/title/tt9620292/ 

Note that you can always easily access all (available) subpages from the "All Topics" menu near the top right of the new title pages.  See the red highlighting below:

Hope this helps. 

Hate, hate, hate this new format! IMDb needs a new link across the top, Choose Format, letting members keep the style they like. The new style wastes space and seems designed for the less-literate. The old style takes up less server space. What does Amazon have against saving money? Please use your influence as site founder to pass this near-unanimous hatred of the new style to Amazon

@Col_Needham You've ruined IMDB. This design is unbelievably bad. Fire your designers.

@rking333

lol, I also hate the Amazon UI for Prime Video. It's so clunky and impossible to use now, unless you are on mobile and who wants to watch videos on mobile unless you are at the airport or a kid sneaking it during class time.  

@Col_Needham

Hello Mr, Needham.

About the new design, I have only 1 thing to say: A new design must be easier, faster and nicer. And this one isn't. Enough said I think!

@Col_Needham 

The new format SUCKS!

Jeaz,

I respect your opinion to differ from mine.   But I disagree,   the new look, layout , and design{S} are/is  an assault visually and performatively to users of the site.  I also noticed this is your only posting.  (This is my second posting, under this name ) I was a daily user till comments went away   and still a daily viewer.  But  who would spend that much time to make a profile on a new site that (that annoyingly imbd  makes you visit to complain, but does not actually matter ,or really monitor)  You seem like a bot , or a plant  comment. 

I'd give you a thumbs up, but this place doesn't make that thumb thing visible all the time.  And yeah, I had to  "join" this comments section to vent... solely about the new design.

That's how terrible the new design is:  People who would normally not sign in to anything new at all, simply must do so if only to tell them they made a mistake.

I got a feeling they won't listen.  If they make it this difficult to give them feedback, then they don't want any.  Maybe it's time to move along.  A previous poster mentioned TMDB.  Looks interesting.  Not like the old IMDb, but more charming than the new IMDb.

@schitlipz  ok, that's a sign... i somehow landed on there today... and thought wtf is this... i have to check it out. AND i need to know who owns it. if it's amazon i'm off..

@schitlipz

That's true. THey made it incredibly difficult for long time, loyal users to share feedback.  

@lburtts
Joined Wed, May 19, 2021 
- - -

See my message above about

Reference View| Change View

Try that ? ?

.

Ahh, you are talking about checking this box --

Thanks for the tip though, it's still better than the new title page.

@ACT_1 @lburtts  Ahhh this "advanced view" is soooo much better, even though this wasn't what you were looking for, thanks for the tip!!

Agree. It's not bad on a portrait screen but it's much much much worse than the old layout on anything wider than a phone. Please add a way to opt out. 

I hate the new layout, too. Despite what IMDb seems to think, computers are not the same as phones, and in this case, a picture is not worth a thousand words.

Easily the older version

@ACT_1 the version 2016-2020 was probably the best. not perfect, but pretty good. ~(20 years in UX design)

@ACT_1 It boggles the mind how bad the new design is. Every single IMDB re-design has made it worse. The old IMDB is objectively superior.

@JoeJoe

The arrogance is breath-taking. They defy all of the rules of User Experience and User Interface because they feel we must only use mobile now. Apparently they know what's best for us and we are too ignorant to have an opinion that matters. Thank goodness we have these new data and user experience people to tell us what we have to like.  

@ACT_1

Any of the older versions is preferable to this new catastrophe. 

This layout is indeed terrible. The new cast information is just horrible to browse and for example the trivia pages seem unfinished. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119116/trivia/?ref_=tt_ql_trv

@Koza Thanks for the feedback. The trivia page design has not changed for 10+ years. If you are seeing something different, please see https://help.imdb.com/article/imdb/general-information/why-is-imdb-displaying-differently-on-my-browser/GF2ZAR69V859XLHF 

This was my second choice for the problem but didn't get around to checking it out yet. But yes, problem solved on that part, thank you.

Col_Needham - I know your comment is from 19 days ago, but I've been reading these comments for DAYS now. All of us commenting HATE the new design. I know, I know, IMDB has paid for the changes and they won't want to go back. But we're all here to tell you the new design is TERRIBLE. You're being their mouthpiece, whether you are an IMDB employee or not, but don't think you're going to change any minds. LOL  We HATE the new design. We've told you all the details of why we hate it.

@ApplePie

Joined on May 31, 2021
Col_Needham ...  whether you are an IMDB employee or not...
- - -

IMDb staff member Col Needham
Founder and CEO of IMDb.

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1000000/

  
Registered Wed Oct 17 1990
https://www.imdb.com/user/ur1000000/

To contact me or to report a problem with the site, please use our help desk at

http://www.imdb.com/contact

Joined Tue, Dec 11, 2012
https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/users/5f495568917fbb5af045ca7b

.

All right, I did NOT mean to insult you. I had no idea you were the Founder and CEO of IMDB. All it says is IMDB staff member. After all, you don't seem to care whether we are upset about the changes that were made so that made you *seem* to be 'just' an employee. I'm sorry!! 

Now that's funny.

:D

Well, he founded IMDb but then eight to ten years afterward, he sold it to Amazon.com, Inc., and managed to secure a private contract that allows/requires him to remain the chief executive officer of IMDb. I don't remember whether or not IMDb ever had a board of directors, but for the longest time, the identities of folks who serve on it, if it exists, have not been publicly disclosed. I'd imagine that Amazon as a company has significant sayso over some of IMDb's and BoxOfficeMojo's affairs, but I figure it mostly only provides electronic data storage support and liability support, maybe "human resources" support, like engineering support and actuarial support. I lean toward doubting that there is anybody working for IMDb whose performance, work, role or office is not valued in some way by the CEO of IMDb. I don't know whether or not the CEO can create or abolish offices at will, as would be the case in a sole proprietorship.

IMDb does not consider this a reliable source for information

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMDb

Anyone can add data there... 😜

.

@jeorj_euler  & @ACT_1  what do you think, how much of the actual information ( not reviews.. information like actors, plot summaries, episode plots..) are contributed by users? 50/50? 10/90? maybe i am often landing in niches but i find myself missing A LOT of information. ( for example https://www.imdb.com/title/tt10316624/fullcredits/?ref_=tt_cl_sm cast and crew?)
[i find it unfair that important people are not credited and write it down as i'm watching - parallel to working.. - & .. i'm asking myself if it's worth contributing/doing that at all - putting any weight on that. I am tending to think they probably have 'their' people anyway and if they don't, they probably don't care anymore given the changes in all its landscape...

I asked years ago if the Studios, Producers, Directors etc.
could add all the correct cast & crew names here
IMDb could then flag that title as complete
  
Not depend on some Users watching TV or DVDs
or taking notes in a movie theater  etc.

.

Most of the information on IMDb is contributed by film audiences, I believe. Some of it certainly contributed by filmmakers who obviously are going to be focused mostly on their own work and their own circle of colleagues. From what I've observed over the years, the people who are credited in one thing or another are really only focused on the IMDb pages that have anything to do with them or their bodies of work and don't care at all about anything else on the site.

The major studios and some production companies seem to update their content (first entries, local release date etc.), but any contributor can change nearly anything if it's provable. The final decision lies of course on the IMDb staff that approves those contributions. I often needed to add titles that are not entered by the filmmakers or distributors simply because they don't know about it or how to enter sth. or don't care because they think they don't need to because they're not from the US. But IMDb has been grown into an international source of information about movies and series.

I often add or correct data or names. Often the names and characters are written down from the end credits, but sometimes, when you watch a movie you recognize some irregularities with the spelling (a name appears in a scene on screen but has been spelled differently in the end credits). That's where the user contributions come in. Also there are often character names missing, simply because the officials who entered the actors' names didn't really know them yet at the date of entry. And not only with the user contributions often come misspellings or wrong entries, just because the contributors didn't research them for correctness.

But I think, and that's what IMDb is all about, there can never be a completion flag of an entry, simply because someone is adding or correcting something that someone else had missed. And if that correction or addition ist indeed accurate, this would be the best case scenario.

So when you see a movie with less entries than f.e. The Avengers, it could be that there is not more to add just because there was less staff involved, but it could mean too that the movie was entered by an inofficial entity like me or any other contributor that isn't affiliated with the filmmakers.

Wobblesocks
Joined Thu, Jun 17, 2021 
https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/users/Wobblesocks

Thu, Jun 17, 2021 
Hello,
Could someone please tell me who has been responsible 
for the accuracy of the content listed on the IMDB pages?
There are numerous typos, mis-spellings, bad grammar, anachronistic references,
and other amateurish text and information spread across many pages.
Who edits this information to make it correct,
or is the standard going to continue to be at a grade school level?
https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/data-issues-policy-discussions/editing/60cb860896d975337b037731

- - -
  
Michelle, Employee
Hello Will -
In short, the information in IMDb comes from various sources 
and our data goes through consistency checks 
to ensure it's as accurate and reliable as possible.
For more information I encourage you to review the following Help Article.
  
Where does the information on IMDb come from?
https://help.imdb.com/article/imdb/general-information/where-does-the-information-on-imdb-come-from/GGD7NGF5X3ECFKNN

In the meantime, can you clarify where specifically on the site you are seeing these grammatical errors (ie. Plots, User Reviews, Trivia, etc.)?

.

By "filmmakers", I'm referring not only to filmmakers (like executive producers, scene directors, cinematographers and post-production) but also to studio representatives, publicists and casts, just about anybody involved in a production.

[ @ACT_1  jesus christ ... I am amazed. what profession are you in? you constantly have examples and past threads at hand ... ]

@samofnine so how would you define/explain the premise of this site? now?
maybe i'm just too naive, idealistic or misunderstood all this time.. i thought the first and foremost objective is to be the most comprehensive archive?
i seriously imagined nerdy, obsessive people (imdb -staff) to research and check content all day ... (and envied them so so much.)

It's still the resource for people who want to know about movies and series, and also a place where everybody can vote and review titles. It just took a step back with the new layout. You need to klick and scroll more and can't copy text like before, and I hope that the plot outlines for different languages are coming back sometime in the near future. Col mentioned something earlier.

When you add a new movie you have to provide proof of its existence so the IMDb staff can check it out and greenlight the entry. If you want something to be deleted because it's obsolete or faulty, you have to provide an explanation. But often they can't verify it unless you can provide a link that proves it. So, unless it's provable on the IMDb end you have no chance to add, change or correct content.

And sometimes I found out that there are more people with the same name that are indeed the same person, because the person who entered the nth name didn't really knew that this person did something before or was mentioned in another capacity. Also the different english spellings of names from another character system like chinese or russian. Often there are many versions of a name, falsly spelled or interchanged - you go crazy looking for them. That's why I am for an original spelling in their language and an alternate name list like the alternate titles of movies.

But sam, this just proves my point... in not putting more weight on staff for these issues the site's premise gets diluted.. (and by making mega-bubbles for actors, which most of the time don't even have pics, i wonder if the decision to redo the site not only has 'technical reasons' but also a different future vision behind it.)  PS: just now again... i found "Murder at the Cottage: The Search for Justice for Sophie" by chance, thinking to myself: what? how did i not know about this coming on? it is currently running on my screen. I naturally go to imdb, but look at this: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt13610226/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1
Now, you can call me fussy or... just precise... ? - you can't tell me there is no money on their end.. where are their priorities wandering off to I wonder? I would loooove to read their briefing from marketing.. 

@rice_withaspoon  Can you elborate on your issue with https://www.imdb.com/title/tt13610226/ -- thanks. 

@Col_Needham How many more times do we have to tell you, we don't like the new page with the large bubbles for the photographs. We hate them. The old page, which does come up if one clicks on "All cast and crew", but that messy UGLY page is the first we see now when we go to IMDB. You get paid to defend the "new" look but you will never convince us it is better in ANY way.

@Col_Needham Your designers are clueless. IMDB is useless now.

@Col_Needham How about https://www.imdb.com/title/tt13660064/ ? It says it's a "TV Series" but when I searched for it (for quite a while) I found nothing. Then I read the reviews and it seems it's a 'podcast'. The more I look at this new version of IMDB the more I think I'll find an alternative. I just keep checking to see if the site's reverted to a usable interface, perhaps time to give up on that?

@shaunstephens_79119 Sorry for the confusion there; this is part of our expansion into covering podcasts (see https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/data-issues-policy-discussions/policy-update-audio-only-podcasts-can-now-be-listed-on-imdb/5f4a7c7d8815453dba06d6b9).  The new pages will be updated to support the new audio title types soon (something which would have been significantly harder on the old technology).  

@ApplePie I don't know why you apologized, Pie. They surely didn't mind insulting us with this incredibly horrible, tacky Amazon Ad page. And it IS an insult to movie information lovers. This is an app for mindless cell phone and tablet addicts who are too lazy to read.

@Chris_Park As I said to someone else elsewhere in the thread, I have a feeling you're confusing Gen Ys/Millennials (who were born between 1981-1996) with Gen Zs (who were born between 1996-2012) in terms of whom you're intending to insult. It's Gen Zs who are statistically more likely to use phones rather than desktops and thus are likely the ones most being pandered to with this redesign. I know "Millennial" has become a popular catch-all derogatory term for anyone under 45, but it does actually refer to a specific age group who are now as of this year ranging from 25-40 years old, and is the last generation to have all experienced a substantial part of their childhood before the technology boom that occurred in the early 2000s.

In any case, I really don't think this is a case where it's necessary to even bring generational conflict into the discussion at all. Judging from the fact that my Gen X parents, Millennial brother and Gen Z cousins all agree that it's horrendous, I think it's safe to say that this new layout is objectively atrocious no matter how old the person looking at it is.

Sincerely, a Millennial tired of having their generation be blamed for everything, up to and including pointless and ugly changes to website layouts.

@momur Point taken. Nevertheless, the new site is definitely NOT designed for people who are willing to read, and who are believed to want no more functionality than constant swiping, and trailer streaming. I will edit my comment. 

Not entirely true but then again every generation gets blamed for something or another by the previous one(s). Still, as a 43 year old employer of young men and women, no one would confuse me with my employees. They're much cooler (and annoying depending on the day) than I am. 

The people a lot of people are complaining about are millennials because they are now the age of people who are now becoming young and mature adults - 15 (1996) to roughly early 30s (late 80s early 90s) - so they fit the complaint range perfectly! And of course we and they will blame Gen Z for something else. 

One last note - generational ages vary. The one you mention is the most common for that group, but not the only one. I've seen generational groups move up and down slightly over the years.

Why does this matter? It doesn't, just caught me in the middle of my first coffee after I overslept. Now we return to the title pages' shitshow, already in progress. 

@cougs Forgive me for being an annoying little bugger with my constant need to nitpick but: 

The people a lot of people are complaining about are millennials because they are now the age of people who are now becoming young and mature adults - 15 (1996) to roughly early 30s (late 80s early 90s) - so they fit the complaint range perfectly!

You're a decade off. Those born in 1996 are now (or will be by the end of this year) 25. Gen Zs are the ones now broadly "coming of age" while even the youngest Millennials have been full-on adults for several years by this point. That said, apologies for being a nitpicky little so-and-so and we now return you to our scheduled complaining about the new title pages (which is what we're all here for anyway):

8 days in and they're still awful. Honestly, despite Col twice redirecting me to various replies of his throughout the thread which apparently are supposed to explain this, I still fail to see what exactly would have been so hard about upgrading the software but retaining a workable UI that still functions as a database (i.e. IMDb's brand and supposed function). Entertainment portals like the site is clearly trying to emulate are a dime a dozen and this redesign isn't nearly as appealing as half of those that already exist.

Ahaha - see, I told you I wasn't finished my first cup of coffee yet! 43 years on the planet and still can't do simple math.

@Col_Needham Thanks for the reply Col. It still hasn't been changed though and the date of the post in your link is almost 18 months old. That speaks volumes.

@shaunstephens_79119 

It still hasn't been changed though and the date of the post in your link is almost 18 months old. That speaks volumes.

Exactly our point though -- the outdated technology is too difficult to manage and update efficiently these days, hence the start of these changes now. 

@Col_Needham 

Exactly our point though -- the outdated technology is too difficult to manage and update efficiently these days, hence the start of these changes now. 

Technology can be updated or upgraded and still maintain a modicum of user friendliness. The new UI is a step backwards in both appearance and functionality, which is why my settings will always stay in "Reference View".

However; that still leaves a slow loading home page.

BTW, request your devs to add a "More Like This" category, somewhere in "Reference View" in small form factor like they did with "Photos and Videos".

@Col_Needham But the new look has been live for a while now - surely then the 'podcasts' category should also be live?

Or is it just a 'facelift'? The same backend but with a new and ugly UI?

@Col_Needham 

" the outdated technology is too difficult to manage and update efficiently these days,"

I'm not sure that is a valid statement.  Technology does not become more difficult as it gets old.   its the same tech, it hasn't changed.  what does change is the developer's fascination with that which is new and shiny.  i have seen this in some of my own developers.  in order to promote their latest fancy they creatively find one reason after another why this old stuff has to be rewritten/redesigned.  not unlike the child who just doesn't want to go to school today, there's one excuse after another.

and even if there was a legitimate reason to change technologies and redesign your website (like better support for mobile devices), it should be flexible enough to do so without tragically destroying the existing UI functionality or look-and-feel.   if not, then either you are looking at the wrong technology or your developers are not applying it correctly.

either way, what you've currently got is a mess.  don't take my word for it, or those who have taken the time to comment, why not put in a prompt allowing the user to choose the old or new format, and keep track of what gets chosen most.

if your developers tell you that this or that has changed and they can not support the old pages in parallel, you should need no more evidence that you have picked the wrong people.  any further paychecks for them is throwing good money after bad, and its time to look for backups of the old code.

The software infrastructure of the world is extraordinarily complicated, though. Too many "apps" have too many dependencies, and upgrading one thing may require upgrading another and another, so on and so forth. Sometimes this causes functionality to be lost, lest it be rebuilt from scratch in new languages, new protocols, new standards or so. Maintaining compatibility, portability and scalability doesn't become less challenging over time but rather usually only more challenging. When it comes to data, all too often developers make the mistake of modeling the data to conform to a 16-bit, 32-bit, 64-bit or 128-bit limitation, instead of trying to plan for sizes and complexities that are, for lack of a better description, astronomical.

Right, and that's the part I don't understand. Why didn't the designers bother to organize the components of the UI the way the previous one was organized? Why didn't they bother to make the redesign capable of morphing between the old desktop view and the old mobile view, just based off the window dimensions? Instead it is just a bewildering blend of the two. The way the horizontal scrolling worked has also been altered. But of course, that goes back to the redesign of the homepage, since it seems to share the same lousy new "mechanics" as the redesigned title page experience.

Yes, horrible, looks like an actor/actress fan club thing.

@bderoes There is also no option to give feedback on the layout, design, features, or anything to do with the new format. I think they must have known that a large percentage of power users of the site were going to hate it. I hope I'm wrong, but they haven't been receptive so far.  

@bderoes  We will flag the CS option issue to the team, thanls. 

The issue you highlight is a very specific issue with the AKA titles which has now been fixed on https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1221127/releaseinfo (your assumption was correct -- the DVD title is not enough to change the title at the top of the page; the old software has bugs in this respect which we are not replicating as we move pages over to the new technology). 

It means nothing to them. We're stuck with it whether we want it or not. Our only choices are to get used to it or find a suitable replacement for IMDb.

@Col_Needham fire all your UX team, a 7 year old could design better than this.

Why would he ever fire the UX team? He is clearly more than satisfied with their work.

The Emperor's New Clothes (1953)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yug222XydFg

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0150462/

@Col_Needham This redesign is terrible.

Too much white space.

https://www.imdb.com/preferences/general?ref_=helpms_ih_dw_language

I set country/title to be English, so why on https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0210916/ and many other pages do I see the Chinese title instead of the English title that's set? It's a bunch of crap.

No. Close, but no cigar.

Absolutely agree

Hi, I see it here, is that what you're talking about?

Yes. Thanks for pointing it out. I missed it.

Thanks @just_a_few_questions . Also, @Prman please see the "All Topics" menu as highlighted above on https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/imdbcom/introducing-updated-imdbcom-title-page-experience/60a40631c1307254c6cc1b0d?commentId=60a4a383b7af171b5e8a2a30&replyId=60a4c96088ecc028d5deea50 

@Col_Needham is it true? what @Dan_Jr wrote below?
are you targeting a different audience? or do you think: "ah,..they'll get used to it. like they do with everything else..."

i thought this is the most comprehensive (movie)archive aiming to grow by user contribution. i thought that is why there are no disqus options..because you lack funds for moderators etc...
 

@Col_Needham This new design is garbage.

I am in complete agreement with what was written by Dan jr

Here here.

@Dan_Jr i literally never watch trailers on imdb. i am also multiple times a day on this site. (obsessive with lists) 
i genuinely wonder what the goal here was/is.. i never click on imdb's 'more to explore' ... only other people's lists. how does imdb even make money with 'us'?  is it the 14-20 year olds that click on everything on their screens? i never thought about the systems and behaviour on here until these excessive changes are shoved into my face, diluting this place... - like, i get so frustrated when information about movies/documentaries isn't listed.. stuff that should be on there. i imagined: how cool would it be if i could work there completing information. i could do that all day long day in day out. - idealistic i know. so yesterday i actually looked at their jobs. i couldn't make up what they are after in the long run. but no job listing hinted towards wanting to foster/be the most comprehensive, extensive, most accurate etc...movie archive. so what could the real (& realistic) goal be?  

Right, if I want to watch a trailer, then I visit the video gallery corresponding to a title page.

Agreed. This new design is objectively worse and more difficult to use.