How to Streamline IMDb

  • 1
  • Question
  • Updated 5 months ago
  • Answered
Benefits: Easier maintenance for IMDb; easier use for patrons.
Method:  In Sort by -- delete Helpfulness.  It's entirely subjective and often a waste of time.  Delete Total Votes and Prolific Reviewer -- both are irrelevant.  Are prolific reviewers supposed to be better than anyone else?  Bullfeathers!  Many reviews are from members of the production company, which skews the data set because they obviously are biased.  To me, Reviewer Rating starting from the bottom is the most useful because the reviews are the most believable.  I understand there are a few trolls who hate a movie just because it's fun to trash it, but those reviews are easy to identify and ignore.  Similarly, there are reviews that give 10 stars and gush over a waste of film stock, sometimes sarcastically.
Delete Filter By Rating -- if the above is implemented, this will not be useful, for one can easily scroll up or down to any rating.
Photo of Engineer

Engineer

  • 6 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like

Posted 6 months ago

  • 1
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 6272 Posts
  • 7634 Reply Likes
Unconvincing.
Photo of Vincent Fournols

Vincent Fournols

  • 2649 Posts
  • 4373 Reply Likes
Deception: you are actually only talking about streamlining IMDb review section, which is to my eyes the second most useless section on the site (first one being the Parent Guide).
And I share Jeorj's view: many of the reasons brought forward can be argued.
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 6272 Posts
  • 7634 Reply Likes
The Parents Guides are only seem useless because not enough volunteers bother to contribute to them, which in the context of the non-swiki interface is totally understandable.
Photo of Vincent Fournols

Vincent Fournols

  • 2649 Posts
  • 4373 Reply Likes
Having been a parent, I firmly regard this section as totally useless as being completely ideological and culturally constrained. There are too many educational approaches worldwide for such a section on IMDb to be useful. Its inescapable subjectivity stains the purely factual registration of data that IMDb consists in.
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 6272 Posts
  • 7634 Reply Likes
Well, the guides are supposed to focus on the facts. If the guides were gone entirely, where would people go to find the details of the violence and gore in specific movies?
Photo of Vincent Fournols

Vincent Fournols

  • 2649 Posts
  • 4373 Reply Likes
Such a guide does not rely on facts, but on the perception of facts: some facts may be awful for some population and totally harmless for others. Moreover, the perception evolves in time (e.g. "One upon a Time in the West" was forbidden for under aged when it was released in 1968 in France. It is now open to general audiences.)
The rest of IMdb site is totally neutral (regardless of editorial changes): a credit, a filming location, a duration remain neutral meaningful facts over time.

To answer your question:, there are loads of websites which rate the movies according to specific values (no judgement on this), gathering people of the same beliefs or ideologies.
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 6272 Posts
  • 7634 Reply Likes
That is not an answer. The question was about the details, not judgments.
Photo of Vincent Fournols

Vincent Fournols

  • 2649 Posts
  • 4373 Reply Likes
Yes and no: you are focusing on violence and gore, many parents would also focus on language matters, some others on uneasy situations with kids, some on blasphemous representations... It is all a matter of personal values, before being a matter of fact.

(BTW, I hate violence and gore in movies :)
(Edited)
Photo of Vincent Fournols

Vincent Fournols

  • 2649 Posts
  • 4373 Reply Likes
One example: Muslim parents will not want their children to see a movie with the impersonation of Mahomet, when Christians will see no harm to it.
(Edited)
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 6272 Posts
  • 7634 Reply Likes
Well, folks focused on blasphemous representations are or deserve to be irrelevant.
Photo of Vincent Fournols

Vincent Fournols

  • 2649 Posts
  • 4373 Reply Likes
That's what YOU say! From my experience, many IMDb visitors will not share that, even in the US :)
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 6272 Posts
  • 7634 Reply Likes
Ha! Yet there is no section of an IMDb parents guide committed to "blasphemous representation", which has nothing to do with my discretion. I did not design the thing.
Photo of Engineer

Engineer

  • 6 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Well, yeah, streamlining the IMDb review section is streamlining IMDb.

Anything can be argued.  That's why we have a movie rated 10 stars and "The best film ever made!" and also 1 star and "The worst movie I've seen in my life!"

"Its inescapable subjectivity stains the purely factual registration of data that IMDb consists in."  Precisely why I believe in my idea.  Shed some subjective fluff.  Make it smoother.  I know some people have a vested interest in keeping it the way it is.  Maybe a similar improvement will happen during the next overhaul of IMDb.
Photo of Engineer

Engineer

  • 6 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Well, yeah, streamlining the IMDb review section is streamlining IMDb.

Anything can be argued.  That's why we have a movie rated 10 stars and "The best film ever made!" and also 1 star and "The worst movie I've seen in my life!"

"Its inescapable subjectivity stains the purely factual registration of data that IMDb consists in."  Precisely why I believe in my idea.  Shed some subjective fluff.  Make it smoother.  I know some people have a vested interest in keeping it the way it is.  Maybe a similar improvement will happen during the next overhaul of IMDb.
Photo of Vincent Fournols

Vincent Fournols

  • 2649 Posts
  • 4373 Reply Likes
Hi,

My quoted sentence refers to the Parent Guide, not the Review section, which is properly framed in my opinion (but nevertheless almost useless!)
(Edited)
Photo of Engineer

Engineer

  • 6 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
I understood what your sentence referred to, but it perfectly fit my opinion.
Photo of IMDbmember

IMDbmember

  • 63 Posts
  • 119 Reply Likes
So now that reviews are already more difficult to sort through than they were before, you propose making it even more difficult.  Terrible proposal.

Most reviews on IMDb are junk, especially cluttered up with these newly-allowed brief postings.  Prolific reviewer and most helpful are the only options for me to try to find some of the good reviews in crowded fields.  Especially since I can't effectively search an individual user's reviews anymore, including my own.
Photo of Engineer

Engineer

  • 6 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Interesting.  I propose eliminating categories, which is streamling the data base, and you believe that makes it more difficult.  So how about adding another four categories to make it simpler?
Photo of IMDbmember

IMDbmember

  • 63 Posts
  • 119 Reply Likes
Generally, I'm for more options to sort through reviews and make them more accessible--especially those features that IMDb used to offer.

There are a few IMDb reviewers that I follow or look for to see if they've reviewed a particular movie, and IMDb has made this practice more difficult.  I also like to see interesting reviews by those who I'm not as familiar with, and the helpfulness feature, while imperfect, is one of the best means to do this.
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 6272 Posts
  • 7634 Reply Likes
Right. I do not even see understand merits of what is being proposed by the creator of this topic. It simply reads like an opinion piece, without any explanation as to how it would ease maintenance.
Photo of Engineer

Engineer

  • 6 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
It seems one must understand Systems Administration to understand the OP.  If there are less subsets of a data base, it is simpler.  If there are less options for the user to choose, it is simpler.  If there are less data on the disks, there is less compacting, defragmenting, and backing up to do.  My choices are opinionated, yes, but the result is streamlining for easier maintenance and use by patrons.

I understand that some people, particularly Prolific Reviewers, have a vested interest in keeping IMDb the way it is, and that some people want even more choices.  The OP is a suggestion, and I have no expectation whatsoever that it will be implemented.

This conversation is no longer open for comments or replies.