Taylor's profile
Employee

Employee

 • 

2K Messages

 • 

36.8K Points

Tue, May 18, 2021 6:23 PM

INTRODUCING: Updated IMDb.com Title page experience

INTRODUCING: Updated IMDb.com Title page experience

We are excited to announce the launch of IMDb’s newly refreshed movie and TV show pages! The renewed page is meant to make your IMDb experience easy and enjoyable, and its design represents the diverse interests of global entertainment fans. The refresh reflects IMDb customer feedback and research designed to enhance entertainment content discovery and navigation.

Please note, we are gradually launching the new design to a selection of IMDb customers. If you do not yet see the design, we expect to make it broadly available in the weeks ahead. Thank you for using IMDb!

For more information, check out this Help article.

Responses

schitlipz

22 Messages

 • 

508 Points

3 m ago

Oh it's so BAD!

I just flipped over from my second attempt at watching Aquaman and thought to write a review on IMDb this time, but it wasn't meant to be.

IMDb only frightens me away now.  It is way too weird.  It's either too roomy with too much white space and silly assets, or it's way too crowded with names.  Or both!

@Col, why hasn't a roll-up or hide function yet been implemented to the unceremonious roll out of names in the detailed view?  Seems like it would be really easy to do.

3 Messages

 • 

130 Points

3 m ago

adding episodes to lists is so slow. The interface is so laggy in comparison to the old layout where all you had to do was mouse over the + icon and the lists would appear instantly. Now I have to press the plus button on the right and then wait 15 minutes for the lists to show up.

8.1K Messages

 • 

184.5K Points

Absurd...

1 Message

 • 

78 Points

3 m ago

Nooooo! The new design is NOT good. Bring me the old one.

2 Messages

 • 

70 Points

3 m ago

I like the old version much better. Hoping that IMDB will give everyone the option of selecting the old version instead of the new version only.

21 Messages

 • 

358 Points

Sadly they won't do that. Having worked as a computer programmer I know that maintaining two versions of all those pages with all its many intricacies would be too hard. The best we can hope for is that there is enough protest that they go back to the old pages. And there's probably no chance of that happening because now they've spent all the money and time on programming these new pages. If only they had done some 'mock-ups' of what they planned and shown them to us - we would have all spoken up in time to prevent the changes. 

8.1K Messages

 • 

184.5K Points

We'll see how long this design lasts, seeing as how redesigns occur every so often over the course of years or decades. I think, I'd be shocked if this one lasts ten years.

3 Messages

 • 

130 Points

3 m ago

Please, at least add  the year of the movies listed in the "More like this" section... We need to click on "i" to see this completely basic & essential info... Frustrating...

Thanks!

Geodacius

36 Messages

 • 

648 Points

3 m ago

I don't know why everybody is complaining about the new page.  I didn't come to IMDb.com to research info on movies and tv shows, I came to watch the adverts on the side. ;)

2 Messages

 • 

70 Points

3 m ago

The new page design makes common library labeling and research use of the page painful and awkward.

1.  Now, if I highlight the stars of a film, the names cut and paste all crammed together.

1.1.  It seems someone sacrificed the perfectly common sense comma delimiter with a tiny picture of a dot.  This does not extract easily.

2.  Linking to a cover icon for a show is nearly impossible!

2.1.  Right-clicking on the picture for the cover icon no longer shows a link.

3.  If ain't broke...

3.1.  The site was not only not broken, it was fantastic and eye-catching and gorgeously organized. 

3.2.  Why the sudden change?  Is this some middle manager's vanity project gone wrong?

Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation originally titled Use of information from the site now takes painful extra steps
Geodacius

36 Messages

 • 

648 Points

3.1 is the best statement of all.  The old page was the best version.  I remember when they changed it 10 years ago and I didn't really mind the change.  This one is like taking a steaming dump on all the work that has ever been done in the history of this site.

2 Messages

 • 

70 Points

3 m ago

I am sorry, but this new version is really bad.

Everything is just enlarged and you have to scroll, scroll and scroll again to find the information you are after.

Why do this? I am 40+ years old, have poor eyesight and an old tiny smartphone, and still no problem at all using the old version. Are you afraid that the next generation of movie enthusiast are half blind?

Style over substance, back to the drawing board. It should be quick and easy to find all relevant information, for most people Imdb is just a fact site for movies.

User friendly design first, always!

Geodacius

36 Messages

 • 

648 Points

3 m ago

The designers of IMDb need to think about what the classic actors would have wanted.

8.1K Messages

 • 

184.5K Points

How does anybody know what class actors would have wanted?

Geodacius

36 Messages

 • 

648 Points

Probably recognition for the work that they have done.

11 Messages

 • 

380 Points

3 m ago

Terrible, brainless, wildly inefficient, far too much scrolling. Tell me this was not the work of a millennial. I double dare you. It is faster to do a Find for trivia than it is to scroll to it. Did you people not test this thing? Who cared about cure large round photos of actors? 

I cannot believe that any adults were involved in this design. It is now too much of a chore to find things, so expect a drop in submissions across the board. Seriously. Wait a couple of months and the run the numbers. 

This is typical of millennial thinking. All flash and no common sense whatsoever.

8.1K Messages

 • 

184.5K Points

Maybe so, but it kind of has "gen X trying to pander to gen Z" written all over it. The design is so derivative in many ways, like some kind of stock code library to which only Alphabet, Facebook, Twitter, Blogspot, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, Electronic Arts, Take 2 Interactive and few others have access was used. What are they going to do when gen Z outgrows the nonsense? Haha.

schitlipz

22 Messages

 • 

508 Points

Before we blame our youth, perhaps the old farts need a good finger-wagging.  This new design and its feedback are probably a kick in the butt to whoever spearheaded it.

We can only speculate as to the "why" or "how" unless it is told forthright.  I think Colin said something about the technology, but I don't know what he was talking about.

Nonetheless, there are good kids out there that don't need or deserve any blame, who are just trying to earn a buck and start their lives.  They have enough anxieties in this modern world, with automated kiosks and robots taking many traditional starter jobs.

The kids are fine.  Mostly.  If anything, they are the ones being misguided by media culture, rather than them misguiding it.

Alrighty then!  Hey @Col, how about them roll-ups?  Too many names.  Nobody needs to know the name of the floor sweeper.

Geodacius

36 Messages

 • 

648 Points

I wouldn't go blaming the younger generations, plenty of them have a good education and a decent amount of wisdom passed down to them from their parents.  This is clearly the work of bureaucrats looking to keep their jobs by making work where there was no reason to work in the first place.  It happens all the time!

schitlipz

22 Messages

 • 

508 Points

On the other hand, with the hospitality industry in shambles, I can imagine some young workers finding a place, perhaps through nepotism, where they shouldn't be.  Undeserved power usually results in havoc.  Maybe that's why we're not getting any straight answers.  Might be the boss' kid.

Oh dear!  Now I'm beginning to play into the imagination game.  It's not so great to speculate.

6 Messages

 • 

132 Points

Besides the vanishing likelyhood that a tributary of Amazon the size of IMDb is going to let the work experience trainee redesign the website regardless of who their parent is, I think your post might be a step too far.

No matter how much we may dislike the new site, it doesn't belong to us, and the actual owners don't have to answer any questions they don't want to. Lets try and keep it civil. ( And I still think the new site sucks. )

schitlipz

22 Messages

 • 

508 Points

@roomtone Who's post went too far?  Civility, what's that?  And as for not being answerable to the consumers... bwahahaha!  I'm outta here, but first:

The bottom line is the users (shades of Tron).  Without them they get no ad revenue, and a lot of their assets are generated by these good people here.  The hilarious movie reviews are the only reason IMDb got high usage out of me, until my visits bottomed out with the transformation to the layout.

They might not want to answer to their users.  I assume that's why they have no feedback form on their main site and instead outsourced it to the person running this board.  That's pretty weak in itself.

Nobody here was born yesterday.  Speaking of which, it's time I take my email notifications off.  Everybody take care and enjoy the future.  Maybe we'll cross paths again.  It's a small world.

[Just figured to me that the MS bing search engine gives the movie ratings of both IMDb and Tomatoes.  Thought I'd share.]

2 Messages

 • 

92 Points

3 m ago

The new font and typeface sizes are ridiculously huge and clunky. There needs to be an option to revert to the "classic" style layout. 

If the whole site was in this style then I guess I could change the browser zoom setting for the site, but doing that to make the title page usable just makes everything else unreadably small. 

No idea if you tested this on a deskop/laptop device, but it's not working for me!

(Windows 10, Chrome, 1920x1080 screen resolution)

6 Messages

 • 

114 Points

I can pretty much guarantee they tested it on desktop. Then they looked at their user stats, decided that the 10% of desktop users didn't matter, and implemented it anyway.

1 Message

 • 

80 Points

3 m ago

I hate it! Not navigable. Exactly what a website shouldn't be like.

1 Message

 • 

60 Points

3 m ago

Much less user friendly, harder to find information, one wonders what the rationale behind the change was, exactly how you make more money out of creating a worse user experience. Whoever created the original page should be given their job back and a raise.

13 Messages

 • 

226 Points

3 m ago

Is there any way to change it back? Everything is so spaced out. Why do companies keep doing this? It looks like a website for children. It sucks. Is there a petition to change it back?

15 Messages

 • 

404 Points

Prettier isn't always better.  I'd rather have reliable functionality, than glitz and glam.

9 Messages

 • 

202 Points

3 m ago

Well you know I like the new version, I've been here for a pretty long time, and there's been a lot of changes since then, but even though I like the new, I would also like the ability to change colors of the site, also for those who prefer the old version may have that availability to change to the old.

9 Messages

 • 

202 Points

And yes it's a bit too large, because I use chrome I always have to zoom it down.