Title pages — new version available for sneak peek

Excuse my French, but it sucks ass!! 🙉🙉 Why does every website these days insist on throwing out their tried-and-true designs to replace it with some "sleek" look that no one asked for and everyone hates? You guys have kept it kicking for so long, don't doom the site now with these poor decisions!

Given that no comment will help you ditch the re-design, let me suggest a new feature, minor one, implemented in 2 minutes, but useful enough, for me and others I assume: Make the movie's key data below the title into links, e.g. 1994 R 2h 8min: - 1994 -> link to 1994 movies (not new feature actually) - 2h 8min -> link to Details - R -> link to Parents Guide You can apply the same design concept as for other similar links (underline on mouse over). Of course, adding tooltips wouldn't hurt. I mean, this should have been in place a long time ago, if the same design concept had been followed across the page ;-) Thanks!

Like most everything IMDB has done lately, this new look is trash. Thanks for catering to the legions of cellphone and touchscreen zombies while annoying those of us who use computers and mice. My index finger is going to get arthritis scrolling through all the dead space to get to the info. You've already lost my daily clicks by turning your home page into some regurgitated TV Guide that is mind-boggling in its complete uselessness. (Who doesn't have a guide on their TV or streaming device that already does this, but better?) Now you'll be losing my occasional clicks when I'm searching for information because you've junked up the screen with all this dead space and made it that much harder to get to the information. That's what you used to be about, IMDB: Information. I don't know what you're about these days. Being Amazon's b**ch?

Needs tighter vertical spacing.

So yesterday I was checking out information on a film and noticed at the top of the page a yellow banner which reads "Get a sneak peek of the new version of this page" and thus clicked "Check it out now" only to be greeted by one of the most awful-looking, unergonomic and aesthetically displeasing web pages I have ever seen. IMDB has many, many things it can improve, but this is NOT a step in the direction. I really hope management sees the light and decides to go back to the drawing board before making this permanent. I've been a Top Contributor to the site for several years in a row so hopefully my voice carries a modicum of weight. Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation originally titled The new and "improved" title pages are HORRIBLE

When rating something, you can't easily see how many stars you're picking until you click the star. In the old version you could see the number change as you move over the stars. I realize that there's no such thing as hovering on a touch device, though, so maybe the solution would be to show the numbers inside of the stars.

If you are going to eventually force us to use the new version. Consider the following: - Back to Top button if not then make a sticky header (desktop) - Link to details (We cannot click on the year anymore to get the actual release date instead of the release date based on our location) - If not link to details then make the year in the card title clickable. - Tons of white space (but I see this has already been commented on) I will add more as I come across them. I understand why it is finally happening and aesthetically many will find it pleasing but I do prefer the more condensed version that we currently have.

@Taylor, Employee How many Votes does it take to keep the OLD version ? ? https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6473300/ (Your test sample) New: https://www.imdb.com/preferences/beta-control?e=tmd&t=in&u=/title/tt6473300/ Old: https://www.imdb.com/preferences/beta-control?e=tmd&u=/title/tt6473300/ Votes Jan 13: -14 Jan 20: -17 Jan 27: -21 Feb 10: -23 Feb 17: -21 Feb 24: -22 Mar 3: -25 Mar 10: -25 Mar 17: -24 Mar 24: -25 Mar 31: -26 - - - Where is the "Change View" located on the New version togoto Content Settings - IMDb for The reference version for Contributors ? ? https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6473300/reference Need to keep this option ! ! No "More like this" on reference version for Contributors ? ? - - - Jan 13: 91,800 Sprinklr Members (1,836 pages at 50 per page) https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/leaderboard?dateFrom=ANY&page=1836 Jan 20: 92,000 Sprinklr Members (1,840 pages at 50 per page) https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/leaderboard?dateFrom=ANY&page=1840 Jan 27: 92,150 Sprinklr Members (1,843 pages at 50 per page) https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/leaderboard?dateFrom=ANY&page=1843 Feb 10: 92,400 Sprinklr Members (1,848 pages at 50 per page) https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/leaderboard?dateFrom=ANY&page=1848 Feb 17: 92,550 Sprinklr Members (1,851 pages at 50 per page) https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/leaderboard?dateFrom=ANY&page=1851 Feb 24: 92,700 Sprinklr Members (1,854 pages at 50 per page) https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/leaderboard?dateFrom=ANY&page=1854 Mar 3: 92,800 Members (1,856 pages at 50 per page) https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/leaderboard?dateFrom=ANY&page=1856 Mar 10: 92,900 Members (1,858 pages at 50 per page) https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/leaderboard?dateFrom=ANY&page=1858 Mar 17: 93,100 Members (1862 pages at 50 per page) https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/leaderboard?dateFrom=ANY&page=1862 Mar 24: 93,200 Sprinklr Members (1,864 pages at 50 per page) https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/leaderboard?dateFrom=ANY&page=1864 Mar 31: 93,350 Sprinklr Members (1867 pages at 50 per page) https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/leaderboard?dateFrom=ANY&page=1867 - - - Jan 13: 128,280,000 IMDb Users https://www.imdb.com/user/ur128280000 Jan 20: 128,580,000 IMDb Users https://www.imdb.com/user/ur128580000 Jan 27: 128,800,000 IMDb Users https://www.imdb.com/user/ur128800000 Feb 10: 129,350,000 IMDb Users https://www.imdb.com/user/ur129350000 Feb 17: 129,570,000 IMDb Users https://www.imdb.com/user/ur129570000 Feb 24: 129,800,000 IMDb Users https://www.imdb.com/user/ur129800000 Mar 3 130,050,000 IMDb Users https://www.imdb.com/user/ur130050000 Mar 10 130,270,000 IMDb Users https://www.imdb.com/user/ur130270000 Mar 17 130,500,000 IMDb Users https://www.imdb.com/user/ur130500000 Mar 24 130,765,000 IMDb Users https://www.imdb.com/user/ur130765000 Mar 31 130,975,000 IMDb Users https://www.imdb.com/user/ur130975000 - - - IMDb Statistics https://www.imdb.com/pressroom/stats/ As of December 2020 Total Data Items: 404,763,829 Titles : 7,548,383 Names: 11,214,704 - - - IMDb Top 300 Data Contributors for 2020 Col_Needham, Employee Fri, Jan 1, 2021 https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/data-issues-policy-discussions/imdb-top-300-data-contributors-for-2020/5feed670133633353b3aebaf https://contribute.imdb.com/czone/top_msg IMDb now includes: Over 7.5 million titles with more than 1 million added in 2020 Over 11 million names with more than 800,000 added in 2020 Over 135 million filmography credits with more than 14 million added in 2020 Nearly 5.5 million user reviews with over 800,000 added in 2020 The total size of the database recently crossed 400 million data items. https://contribute.imdb.com/czone/hall_of_fame Top Contributors: All Time RANK TOTAL NICKNAME 1 15,727,335 inespape-1 2 4,836,665 cinelamour 3 2,487,743 pegg1976 4 2,096,458 bradleykent1 5 1,983,776 sarge-19 6 1,569,947 Kurre 7 1,564,740 Woodyanders 8 1,560,966 ahmetkozan 9 1,395,336 elouie2000 10 1,379,841 miriam_v_f .

Please move the genre, language, and country of origin at the top instead of the bottom.Please move Season & Episode numbering to the top.Bury the Ads, Shrink them substantially, or we will switch to open sources like thetvdb or omdb.Add more left margin, it's too cramped to left edge.Other than the above, the broader use of space, smaller margins, larger cast photos and increased padding contribute to a cleaner look but only if you shrink and move right sidebar farther away so it doesn't cramp the main content.

I tried your questionair page and clicked on Report an issue, was differrent or missing and then next and I got the message that my question was sent to you..... My remark would have been that I miss the year, but now I see that that is already noted. One other thing is that I changed emailadress and the old login ID with email adress has become obsolete Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation originally titled Report an issue

Looks good. But there needs to be a dark theme for the whole page.

i like this page in general.

I haven't actually read all the comments on this topic. But if I may say something anyway, I'm kinda dissatisfied with the new title page outlook. I'll try to be as factual as possible, so I avoid sounding harsh. What I'm telling now is just due to my experience. - One of the things I don't really like are the big, circle actor/actress pictures that take much space and are...just too big to my taste. I actually like the old list version better, and please let us just have that. - When I'm searching for a company, a keyword or anything else, I only get matches for titles and actors/actresses, which I did not search for. I hope that gets fixed if we are automatically thrown into the new version. - When I click on the button that's supposed to take you to alternate titles for other countries, the release dates are the only thing that shows up. I hope that gets fixed if we are automatically thrown into the new version. - If I was gonna add or read parental guidances on the new version, no information but numbers of content is shown, unless I click on any of any content like sex, violence or anything else, then I could add or read. Couldn't that feature just stay the same like it's on the old version? - The "All Topics" button did kinda confuse me little bit, but I got kinda used to it fast. - Other great informations, such as durations, genres and a certification that used to be on the top of the page in the old version, are all far down on the new version. I'd really wish for those small informations to get moved to the top like they are on the old version. So in other words, this is just an another feature no one asked for, according to what other users have already said. Everything I've said are the reasons I mostly use the old version when it's still available. This version is so easy as it could get, and I would really wish for the entire IMDb to just stay like that, even with some updates. Additionally, I'd really wish for the permanent option to use the old or the new version, and various preferences, depending on the user's choice. I basically love the IMDb very much and can't really live without it, and I use it a lot, but I only use it on desktop PC, not on smartphone. And using IMDb on a mobile device is not gonna happen for me. So dear IMDb, I hope I didn't sound harsh, but these are just my own complains. Sincirely, Chribren. :-)

I understand that IMDB wants to streamline the browser and mobile functionality into a single thing... While I suppose it is to some extent economically straining to keep up multiple platforms, my issue with this is simple: It undermines the user experience, as desktops&laptops are a very different thing from "smart" devices. When I am on my computer, I want to access a proper webpage, not one "streamlined" for less-capable devices with information crammed into a smaller space. The requirements just are not the same. I'm already fed up with console games ported to computers suffering from the handicaps of their console origins (controls and user interface), and of operating systems hamstrung by the needs of being able to work on both a computer and a mobile device but seemingly primarily aimed for the latter while being forced on the former (Win8 in its time). If it isn't broken, DON'T "FIX" IT just for the sake of appearing "more modern and dynamic". Facebook is an excellent example of a service provider that has constantly worsened the user experience trying to reinvent themselves, and is now barely usable (never mind their other issues). Please don't follow them! Adding OPTIONAL layouts for people who don't like the current one is of course okay, but you'll just have to bite the bullet of not being "100% economically streamlined". If it is a question of remaining viable or shutting down, well, guess you'll do whatever you must anyway and I'd rather have a gutted, ugly service than no service at all, but I do want to voice my opinion.

Not a fan of this new layout at all. What was wrong with the current one? It's much better as a compact view. When everything is spread out like this new layout with no clear sections, it just becomes a nuisance to navigate. The cast needs to be a list view. Why have them in bigger fields with big circles for photos? It takes up too much space and is less easier to follow. The current view is much better because it's compact and more easily split into sections which you need for a page which holds a lot of information.