Taylor's profile
Employee

Employee

 • 

2.3K Messages

 • 

40K Points

Tue, May 18, 2021 6:23 PM

Closed

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.

9 Messages

 • 

210 Points

1 y ago

Terrible new "design". Who the hell comes up with this crap?? IMDb was perfectly fine until corporate decided to delete forums and around that time it kept going downhill. I still use it regularly because you have sort of a monopoly but these changes are terrible. Keep on destroying this once great site for film aficionados.

(edited)

8.2K Messages

 • 

186.1K Points

Well, the internal maintenance has been underway for nearly five years now, as all of it appears to be part of one big plan to make the instrument system much more scalable and portable. Some of the things going against the site-native message boards was that it was infeasible to make the boards available in a smartphone "app" version of IMDb, on account of underlying software. That was a problem in the sense that a significant portion of IMDb's visitor/subscriber base would be cut out of certain aspects of the IMDb experience. If a site-native public communication system is ever reintroduced to the IMDb, then it would be long after all the various interfaces have been normalized in functionality. This normalization process apparently has been underway since late 2016, and of course, the IMDb company didn't provide details of the plan, as it would concern all the features that would wind up being removed or simplified, whether temporarily or indefinitely, but Col Needham did more or less reveal that he had big plans for IMDb. I've no idea at all how close IMDb is to the end of the project of sorts, a hypothetical period of time whereby the only remaining "upgrades" or expansions to be undertaken are the ones that customers, fans and contributors have actually asked to be implemented or resolved.

Geodacius

36 Messages

 • 

648 Points

I have an insight into this, and that is that the Java sdk is free to use without license so perhaps that is the reason why they have gone the way of the mobile market.  Development platforms such as Microsoft are prohibitively expensive.

8.2K Messages

 • 

186.1K Points

I remember Microsoft's licensing system for the remote desktop feature of Microsoft's signature computer operating system, and I at least initially thought it was overblown, but I suppose it would've been fair enough if simply much lower prices were charged. I'm not too familiar with the other licensing schemes maintained by Microsoft. I know that I'm usually the kind of guy who would opt to use Gnu Compiler Collection instead of Microsoft Visual Basic (or whatever it was called).

Anyway, regarding the big plans for IMDb, I can tell that the development, porting and maintenance of IMDb TV (initially known as IMDb Free Dive) has been at very high priority. Which is interesting, since it is suggest that the people in charge of IMDb are at least interested in offering a streaming service. I'm not sure how I feel about the streaming of movies and shows being a primary theme of IMDb. I've always seen IMDb as the catalog of the library, not the library itself; the table of contents, not the entire book. As long as the movie "metadata" is all there, I suppose it is cool.

3 Messages

 • 

102 Points

1 y ago

Oh dear. In an effort, I assume, to keep us on each page for longer, they have rendered IMDb somewhat inaccessible to those of us who have processing disorders. I'm autistic and the immediate bombardment with huge images is extremely overwhelming and makes it incredibly difficult to filter out the information I need.

Perhaps if the images were moved to the bottom, and the most relevant information that everyone is always seeking: Episode guide, content advisory and cast and crew- were bumped to the top in a less overwhelming and plainer, easy to read format- like the old IMDb- it would improve accessibility no end.

I can't imagine how much mess this causes screenreaders who read top to bottom and now have to plough through a load of image descriptions before getting to the relevant episode/series information.

An option to switch back would be nice if you're not going to restore accessibility to us.

11 Messages

 • 

194 Points

For someone with a processing disorder, I would suggest going into your settings and switching to the reference view.

To do this, go to IMDB, log in, then click on the little upside down triangle next to your user name (near the top right hand corner of the page) and click on "Account Settings." 

On the Account Settings page, click on the "Content settings" link (under the Preferences heading).

On the Content Settings page, in the Contributors section, click the small box next to the statement "Show reference view with full cast and crew (advanced view)" (a checkmark will appear to indicate you have selected this option) and then click the "Submit" button at the bottom of the page.

 

5.8K Messages

 • 

150K Points

Save this in FAVS for future 

Where is ...
Reference View| Change View  ? ?
https://www.imdb.com/preferences/general

Contributors
[x]  Show reference view with full cast and crew (advanced view)

- - -

https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/imdbcom/introducing-updated-imdbcom-title-page-experience/60a40631c1307254c6cc1b0d?commentId=60a422f593de84003be5b5e6

.

(edited)

4 Messages

 • 

90 Points

1 y ago

The new layout is CRAZY

It's 10 screens wide.  I have to use the bottom slider to read the remaining 90/95 percent.

Data is so sparse. Needs LOTS of scrolling......

I use Firefox. I see Chrome has the OLD (great) layout.

Is there a switch in Firefox to use the old layout ?

Truely DISGUSTED.....  please help     Dane

Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation originally titled New IMDb layout
Geodacius

36 Messages

 • 

648 Points

@DANE

Naw, it is broken in chrome as well.  IMDb management really dropped the ball on this one. 

Employee

 • 

4.8K Messages

 • 

149K Points

@DANE  Thanks for the feedback.  If you are accessing IMDb on a desktop / laptop then the pages should not be 10 screens wide.  Please see https://help.imdb.com/article/imdb/general-information/why-is-imdb-displaying-differently-on-my-browser/GF2ZAR69V859XLHF and specifically note the point on not using plugins such as ad-blockers which may change the display of the page. 

schitlipz

22 Messages

 • 

508 Points

Ah hahaha!  Asking people to modify their browser to utilize IMDb.  Oh dear there is some hubris there.

22 Messages

 • 

406 Points

@schitlipz @Col_Needham 
(i'm experiencing slight panic..)
if it comes to having to switch off ad-blockers in order to be able to add a movie to my lists -
(...morphing into anxiety heat waves) 
i need to find a way around it...lists are holy to me. making lists, going through lists, categorising, adding information ..it's all i do.


[- maybe it's a sign.. maybe i should be spending all that time outside, collecting, categorising... leaves or something..]

@Col_Needham 
1. if it is really you Mr. Needham, which i still find hard to believe, I would like to say thank you for taking the time, trying to answer questions.   
2. where could i get information what education/references would be needed to specifically become a member of the contribution-review/data editing team (or is that something employees of other/all areas do on the side also?) 

Employee

 • 

4.8K Messages

 • 

149K Points

@rice_withaspoon  It really is me. As I mentioned here, I have been to this rodeo several times before so it is easier for me to answer and let the team continue with the actual launch; I may have more experience leading a company through a web redesign than anyone else on the planet, given the IMDb website was one of the first one hundred or so sites to launch back in 1993 (and IMDb itself predates the web, having launched as downloadable software, which I wrote, on the internet in the pre-web days back in October 1990).  We try to avoid full redesigns as much as possible as they are quite disruptive as you can see on this thread. As hard as it might be to believe, we did not set out to annoy people here.  The design tests well and we retained the full functionality of the previous design, plus added many features for customers who access IMDb on a mobile browser. It has significant behind-the-scenes technological advantages. 

One problem with redesigns is that only people who dislike them are motivated to comment. This leads to the false impression among feedback providers that they are speaking for all customers -- reinforced when this is all they see on a public board like Sprinklr.  While more people will dislike it than are actually commenting, it is worth remembering that over 200 million people access IMDb worldwide each month.  The majority of those customers are getting on adapting to and enjoying the new design (or at least the 50% in the current launch set so far).  I liked the 2010 design when it launched. I have been using the new 2021 design exclusively via a staff beta since October 2020, and when I have to switch back to confirm how something worked previously to answer a question here, the old design looks outdated and clunky.  When the 2010 design launched we saw similar shock reactions to the change as I mentioned earlier; the decision to make a similar large scale change in 2021 was not made lightly (and in fact, we have split this one up a little -- in 2010 we changed home, title, name and all of the subpages at the same time; this one is actually more gradual, so we did learn something from 2010 :-))

Our job listing are on imdb.com/jobs although we do not have any vacancies listed there on the contribution vetting team at the moment. Typical requirements are experience with content management systems, a college degree, dealing with a high degree ambiguity (see also Amazon Leadership Principles) and, of course, a love of movies / TV / entertainment. 

Hope this helps. 

Col

8.2K Messages

 • 

186.1K Points

Well, time will tell as to which design held the longest tenure, and there is probably merit in that length.

5.8K Messages

 • 

150K Points

@Col_Needham

One problem with redesigns is that only people who dislike them are motivated to comment

- - -


ACT_1 :

https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/imdbcom/introducing-updated-imdbcom-title-page-experience/60a40631c1307254c6cc1b0d?commentId=60b196c30f440e2527306532


280,000  New Users past week
and only a few of those found their way here
263 New sprinklrs past week
- - -
  
https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/imdbcom/introducing-updated-imdbcom-title-page-experience/60a40631c1307254c6cc1b0d?commentId=60a748ff8c74ef317253ce0e&replyId=60a7df338c74ef317253d8c5


Add 
INTRODUCING: Updated IMDb.com Title page experience
to the top of page:
https://www.imdb.com/

- - -

EDIT to add:

IMDb Users may not want to register here just to post one _____ Comment

Easier back in the Old days...

Board: IMDb Information 
http://web.archive.org/web/20101008172355/http://www.imdb.com/board/bd0000040/threads/

.

(edited)

35 Messages

 • 

474 Points

@Col_Needham 

Of course do only dislikes find their way to the comment section. So when you launch something that big, why don't do a simple poll with two buttons - like or dislike? There would be your answer! Most users don't want to open a new account for the message board for that, only people who are frustrated because they can't find their feature that they're used to or/and have to scroll/click more to get to it.

1 Message

 • 

60 Points

1 y ago

😫 NOT HAPPY, DO THIS:

Go to Account Setting> Content Settings> at the bottom select, tick the box next to Contributors: Show reference view with full cast and crew (advanced view) 

You now have reverted back to almost the same as the previous layout.

😁😊

schitlipz

22 Messages

 • 

508 Points

Thanks, BBogus!  It's a nice start.  However, it still has a long and bothersome list of names without any options to hide or curl them up in any way.

It seems everybody has a different opinion on what is important and useful information, and what we like to see.  I personally liked going to IMDB only after Tomatoes got too scripty.  All I wanted was a title, year, and rating -- easily, and quickly accessible.

Little did I know how entertaining the negative reviews of some movies are.  :D  And that's what is important to me about IMDB.  Of course those same contributors help rate it too.  In fact, I often think the reviews are more entertaining than some of the movies!

In my opinion, if a site depends on user contributions to make it what it is, then it should truly listen to users' feedback as well.  It would at least help with the phenomenon of "brand loyalty".

9 Messages

 • 

210 Points

@BBogus

Thanks for the hint, it helps as a workaround to look up the cast. I have to click on reviews to see the user lists, no idea where polls are, and I have to click on Plot summary in order to avoid all the scrolling. When I click on Technical specs it doesn't show the "Also known as" titles like you find under Additional details. More like this or related news are also not visible.

I'll have to try this for a while (if it stays in the long run) but am still very disappointed with the changes.

9 Messages

 • 

210 Points

@schitlipz I agree that some reviews are often more entertaining than the movies. But I feel many great reviewers left entirely or stopped writing reviews. And I noticed a tendency to rate movies too high resp. a polarization of fanbois hyping up what they love and others who despise blockbusters rating them 1 star even if they likely know the movie merits a 3 or 4 on technical grounds alone.

4 Messages

 • 

208 Points

@BBogus   Thanks for this! It makes viewing much easier for me and is closer to what I considered "normal" for this site.

(edited)

Geodacius

36 Messages

 • 

648 Points

@BBogus

A very nice suggestion, however some movies have such a large list of ppl involved in the making of said movie that scrolling down becomes quite a chore.  Also I would miss having the recommended movies related with said selection detail.  Still, it was a really nice olive branch so thank you for that. 

2 Messages

 • 

70 Points

1 y ago

Where is the Content Advisory Page? Why is it not there? Why did IMDB change the format? Why did they make a mess of it? When can we go back to the old style?

Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation originally titled New page layout

Employee

 • 

4.8K Messages

 • 

149K Points

5 Messages

 • 

100 Points

1 y ago

I am not able to add, from the title page, a movie to a list (or lists) that I have already created. Formerly I could just click on the "+" sign and now that doesn't work. Can you explain how I can accomplish this now?

Employee

 • 

2.3K Messages

 • 

40K Points

@ahaycoman You can add titles to your watchlist by selecting the "+" located on the top-left of the poster image. Additionally, you can select the "+ Add to Watchlist" button or click the down arrow on the right of the "+ Add to Watchlist" button to view, create, or add to your desired list. 

See screenshots: https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/imdbcom/introducing-updated-imdbcom-title-page-experience/60a40631c1307254c6cc1b0d?commentId=60ac1c68b706e8535ffe3821&replyId=60ac1e1915e07e0d7a657c7a 

Employee

 • 

4.8K Messages

 • 

149K Points

@ahaycoman  In addition to Taylor's advice above, if the "+" on the poster is not working, please see https://help.imdb.com/article/imdb/general-information/why-is-imdb-displaying-differently-on-my-browser/GF2ZAR69V859XLHF and specifically check that plug-ins such as ad-blockers are not impacting the functionality. 

3 Messages

 • 

80 Points

1 y ago

Marketing must have thought: We'll make it nice and neat'.

I think: Another failed attempt to improve a GUI by simply making the fonts bigger, expand empty spaces, change actor's pics to a groooooovy round shape and so forth.

Bottom line for me: It lost the appeal to offer a quick look on movie details and leaves you lost in a black and white desert.

If you had instead put a liiiitle effort into making some real improvements (display the movie ratings in an actor's movie list, for starters), THAT would have deserved a cheer.

8.2K Messages

 • 

186.1K Points

Using Evan Peters as an example, there are the URLs https://www.imdb.com/filmosearch/?role=nm1404239&mode=simple&page=1&sort=user_rating,desc&title_type=movie and https://www.imdb.com/search/title/?title_type=feature,tv_movie,tv_special,documentary,short,video,tv_short&role=nm1404239&view=simple&sort=user_rating,desc&count=250. However, unfortunately only one of them is easy to reach by navigating from the IMDb name page about him. I'm so glad, name pages (and also title subpath pages) still have the Quick Links side bar! I sincerely hope that IMDb keeps that format forever, regardless of how mobile device operators feel about it! Given the trend that has been commencing ever since late 2016, I'm legitimately and soundly worried that the feature I so appreciate will be whisked away from us, leaving us to fend for ourselves! I'm thinking about creating a praise thread for it, just to get the jump on the prospective problem. I've predicted certain discontinuations before, and I may be able to predict some more. Why? Because IMDb has exhibited a pattern of behavior in upgrading the website that makes it predictable. Those of us who are critics of the latest redesign need to be thinking ahead, so we won't be disappointed.

1 Message

 • 

68 Points

1 y ago

No offense, but there is too much scrolling on the new site.  The old site was more compact and easier to navigate.  The size of the character photos and names has a lot of wasted space, as well as most of the other segments of the page.  I preferred the old page.

4 Messages

 • 

84 Points

1 y ago

I have been a regular user of IMDB.com for more than two decades probably and I am sorry, but I am saddened by your new format. I wondered if you might take a poll from your users/staff to consider your previous user-friendly format? Now, it's hard to immediately see the stars/Metacritic appears to be out of view or gone and the screen is so huge that you have to scroll through lots of stuff to get to the director, etc. At the very least, maybe you could consider putting the stars/ratings directly under the title of the movie as previously as the place the ratings are in now is an unfortunate place to put them. Thank you for considering taking a poll of your users opinions and this comment.

Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation originally titled Disappointed with new IMDB format.

2 Messages

 • 

62 Points

Same here. With imdb almost from the beginning, have contributed a few things as well, and voted for hundreds of movies and series. I which they would have asked regular users or would give us a chance to keep the old design - like reddit does with old.reddit - instead of just making it mandatory for all. So much worse than before.
Well, I guess that's Amazon for you. :(

4 Messages

 • 

84 Points

Oh my. I don't follow the community but it looks like almost every single poster agrees that the format is terrible. It's actually way more than terrible. It's useless. In addition to having to scroll all over the page to find various bits of information you are looking for, the website actually is so much slower to navigate because of all the ads and images that were included in this new formatting version. I get it about money, but I used to look up a ton of info in a short amount of time on IMDB for movies and because it's not functional anymore, I think I'm going to stick to Metacritic and look at the Google details on IMDB for the relevant information. So disappointed we can't have the option to use the old version.

3 Messages

 • 

80 Points

1 y ago

Terrible. Poorly conceived. Looks like something ten-year-olds might think is neat, but just annoying for anyone with a normal adult intelligence. Nowhere near as useful as the old version. Now I have to click around to find what used to be clearly displayed on the landing page. It's as badly thought out as a Microsoft product.

10 Messages

 • 

352 Points

1 y ago

Sorry for saying it, but every time IMDB decides to change the movie page  it is for worst.

Why impose what we must see instead let us to choose? 

Some people like to see technical infos about the movie instead people fan club things.  Is it a movie page or people page? 

At least put a "view old page" option for us.

2 Messages

 • 

92 Points

1 y ago

You guys woke up and chose ugly ,huh? Its not so much that we all hate change or afraid of change  its that you have made the site as un- user friendly, and ugly as possible. It is  frustratingly over sized and clunky.  So disappointing. 

5 Messages

 • 

92 Points

1 y ago

Please change it back

Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation originally titled Your new website design is horrible

5 Messages

 • 

92 Points

I'm not alone https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/nhk44v/imdb_has_changed_its_layout_to_something/

2 Messages

 • 

70 Points

1 y ago

Really? This "New Look" is VIRTUALLY UNUSABLE. It's useless! Seriously WTF

 

Whoever thought of / designed this / signed off on this crap should be taken out back and shot

8.2K Messages

 • 

186.1K Points

A permanent solution to a temporary problem? Also, that is just plain criminal and immoral, whereas the redesign of the title page experience is completely lawful. Those violent remarks are bound to be purged from the public eye.

5 Messages

 • 

92 Points

1 y ago

This is terrible, what a waste of space, looks horrible.