INTRODUCING: Updated IMDb.com Title page experience

@shaunstephens_79119  Thanks for the feedback.  Just to let you know that no information has been removed from the new pages vs. the old ones.  Please let us know if there is anything specific which you are unable to find. 

@Col_Needham All objects are huge, a black background on the top, on which everything merges, your ratings, wishlist are loaded longer than other parts (this was not the case before)

Director, writer for some reason moved under the Top cast table

I just want it to be before the changes

@Col_Needham On second look I can find all of what I want when I get past all of the distractions of large pictures taking up most of my large desktop monitor. However I'm unlikely to scroll through a seemingly endless page of pictures and videos, risking RSI to find it.

Other sites do pretty pictures and videos for the attention-span challenged. (Youtube, Instgram...) IMDB used to be data-dense and easily accessible, exactly what I wanted when I needed to find information about a movie or TV show.

I really don't know why you did this. You already had a mobile interface so this really only affects those using laptops or desktops who tend to have large screens. The size of the text is ridiculous, I find myself leaning back in my chair - what a waste of a large monitor! Take a look at Wikipedia, lots of text and a few pictures, it's great resource and its popularity is going up and up. IMDB used to also be a great resource but now it looks more like a teenagers fanzine.

The cool thing about YouTube's several redesigns in the past decade is how they have not been outrageously stark in contrast to one another. The same general basic exterior skeleton and orientation has been maintained. I don't know much about Instagram as I didn't begin visiting it until the past few years, but seemingly it has maintained a consistent outline for quite a while.

@sss_sss_6922125  Thanks for the feedback, but the director and writer are still near the top of the page, see red highlighting in the grab below from https://www.imdb.com/title/tt9620292/ 

Hope this helps

@shaunstep

Believe me when I say that it's hideous for us mobile users too. Almost unusable. I don't want to have to pause a film just to quickly look something up, because I have to wade through pictures and videos and trailers

@Rekrul

In your analogy; they are actually "paying" customers.

IMDB is free for non-paying customers so they don't care about our complaints, even if 99% of us complain about this atrocity.

IMDB-Pro on the other hand, is more user-friendly but it is for paying customers, so they will not attempt the same with their customers without having an "undo" button or provide their "paying" customers with the option to choose between two different designs.

This is all part of their marketing agenda and they couldn't care less about our disapproval or dislikes. 

Even Reddit provided all users (paying and non-paying) the option to choose between their old or new design.

@Rekrul

^ This comment!!! Yes! 

@linux_lad

We are not "free" users. They use our time to make money. We've provided TONS of content, helping them w their SEO. They also blast us with ads and practice data harvesting. They take and take. The new site is designed to redirect us to more ads and more time wasted trying to maneuver around. Luckily, I've realized I don't need to use IMDB. I've stopped and to my surprise, I just don't miss it enough to tolerate the horrible UI and arrogance.   

Good news! www.MetaCritic.com . Since IMDB insists we don't know enough to know what we like (and/or don't care) I've found an excellent alternative: https://www.metacritic.com/movie/the-godfather   .  https://www.rottentomatoes.com/ is another option, but I prefer MetaCritic. The old IMDB was best, but with the changes It's simply not worth the wasted time. The new IMDB User Interface purposely makes it harder/longer to navigate and purposely directs you to the parts they want us to see, but not what we want. MetaCritic has a white screen (user friendly) once you scroll down. It's much easier to see and use. It already has a lot of critiques (including aggregated ones) and we can start adding future critiques directly there. Overall, it's quite nice. The problem with it is that is lacks the filming locations and the actor bios don't have any pictures (like old IMDB, not the new pictures they have). Also, the actor part takes and extra click to see, as opposed to showing everything on the opening page. I am trying other places for those things. Another option for occasional use is Wikipedia, although the data there is almost always incorrect. 

I've HAD it with companies forcing this giant bubbles, goldfish-intellect-level, ADHD, 12 year old kid, manipulative UI for cell phone. No. Despite what some research says, we DON'T all have to move to cell use only. Just. No. 

The first few days I had to forcibly stop myself from automatically going to IMDB multiple times a day, as I did prior. Now I am used to the new options and I don't even miss old IMDB. If they ever go back to a sensible, NON-MOBILE-PHONE site for desktop I would probably go back, but to my shock I barely miss it now. 

@Plethora  this is pretty good  thank u screw u imdb

Just to to note, IMDb staff are apparently not allowed to discuss with anybody other than the affected member the reason for a ban/block against an IMDb user account. On the old IMDb forum, the one native to the website itself, there was a way to tell whether somebody deleted their own account or were blocked from posting, since back then, the IMDb company didn't usually right away altogether delete accounts against the respective wills of the respective registrants. I do not believe any account is deleted for no reason.

Even though I registered on IMDb back in 2000, I didn't know about the message boards back then, so I probably didn't post on them. I went almost a decade without really visiting IMDb that often, since I don't write reviews or make lists. I'd only rate two titles at the time. When I did become an active contributor, it was in the mid-2010s, and I recall having to go through a SMS verification step in order to be able to participate on the message boards. The experience was rather addictive for me, so contributing was a minimal focus of mine until the boards shut down. I suspect that the company leaders' inabilities to deal with abusive moderators might have been a contributing factor in opting to not only take the boards software offline but also not bother to instate a site-native replacement. This all is kind of explained away as forum administration not being a "core competency" of the IMDb company. Yet they've kind of managed the GetSatisfaction/Sprinklr forums for IMDb in an increasingly smooth way. Striking the balance is tricky, though, because even here sometimes trolls monetarily run amok, and there is, should I preface it, not enough "deescalation" for lack of a better word. The spammers are a whole other story, oddly, since their presence is more visible on Sprinklr than it has been on GetSatisfaction; a signal that the automated spam filter of the previous platform may have been overly aggressive.

@jeorj_euler 

Message Boards started May 7 1999 
New Message Boards started Aug 6 2002 
about 266,164,000 messages were posted  Aug  6 2002 ... Feb 20 2017 
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur1879104/   - Aug  6 2002  -   1,879,104 Users 
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur73070000/ - Feb 20 2017 - 73,070,000 Users

IMDb Message Boards Announcement:
We have decided to disable IMDb's message boards on February 20, 2017. 
This includes the Private Message system 
Boards Closure FAQ 
https://help.imdb.com/article/imdb/new-features-updates/boards-closure-faq/G5HU888HZYE8LF79

Col_Needham, Employee
Fri, Feb 3, 2017
IMDb message boards
https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/imdbcom/imdb-message-boards/5f4a79a38815453dba84300d

http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.imdb.com/boards/ Message Boards

Feb 20 2017 
http://web.archive.org/web/20170220000011/http://www.imdb.com/boards/ I Need To Know 

http://web.archive.org/web/20170213122005/http://www.imdb.com/board/bd0000001/threads/

Boards Closure 
FAQ by Col Needham

Wed Feb 8 2017

http://web.archive.org/web/20170219202927/http://www.imdb.com/board/bd0000001/thread/265872671

  
cms
IMDb member since December 2001
former IMDb staff, programmer. beatworm.co.uk
Once upon a time, I developed the message boards system. I know what mjeyds means.
https://www.imdb.com/user/ur1488088/

.

The thread won't be deleted, but most likely some (more) of the response messages to it will be purged in the process of closing to new comments.

@aeon_rio  Thanks for the feedback. Please can you provide an example of the running times issue and we will take a look.  There is a bug with episode running times which are currently investigating (please see https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/imdbcom/introducing-updated-imdbcom-title-page-experience/60a40631c1307254c6cc1b0d?commentId=60da03ef1afd8f2bd42cb20d) but series pages should be okay. 

@Col_Needham 

It used to be there. So now I have to scroll all the way down, passing the Episodes, Videos, Photos, Top Cast, More like this, storyline, Did you know, User Review, FAQ, Details and aaaah... there it is

In the Technical Specs, the runtime is 57 minutes.

@aeon_rio  Thanks for the example. This is a bug, sorry, and the team are taking a look. 

@aeon_rio  Thanks again for the problem report.  This has now been fixed and episode running times are back in the top section.  For example: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0944947/ 

@forthehorde Thanks, good catch and not intentional.  We will re-open the bug report. 

@forthehorde  Thanks again for the problem report, the mini-series issue has also now been resolved. 

I second this. I'm so disappointed that the new version we the desktop users didn't ask for, is now forced to us. Information is harder to find (unless we actually learn to use it and get used to it), actor pics is just being too big, etc. Just as many of us already mentioned in the now closed forum about the new design.

Another thing, the duration is now far down instead of being on the top together with release date, original title and more. More scrolling required.

If anybody actually like that design, that's fine, I respect their choices. But whoever made the new version could at least let us actually choose to either use the new or the old version, as we always could until now. I just don't like everything to be so fancy and giant as ever possible, and all we desktop users have asked for is just to have searching for information to be just as plain and easy as possible.

@VoidZero

load times and overall slowness of the redesign 

I guess I'm not the only one experiencing this.

Bottom line is that they don't care about our complaints and they are not going to do anything about it since we are not their paying customers such as with their IMDB-Pro which appears to be more polished and user friendly than this new UI.

Thanks for the feedback @VoidZero 

I've passed this information to the team to take a look to see what's going on. 

@Taylor

Since the new UI was pushed, this overall slowness and load times has been constant.

@linux_lad 

Same as the home page they changed a year or two ago. I haven’t visited home page a single time since.

? ?

steve, Employee
Mon, Jan 27, 2020
Closed
Updated a month ago
  
INTRODUCING: Updated IMDb.com homepage experience
https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/imdbcom/introducing-updated-imdbcom-homepage-experience/5f4a7c778815453dba05bf8f

.

@ACT_1 

Yes, but it was only one page, now there are couple of millions title pages affected. :)

Edit: 7,809,040 titles.

@Aettos

They already have the mobile version with that awful design (m.imdb.com).

They should not have implemented it on the desktop version as well which would have provided all users with the option of choosing the mobile version or the desktop version with the old design.