Major keyword problem that needs attention

  • 2
  • Idea
  • Updated 2 weeks ago
I am a male feminist, and there are many keywords that should NOT be allowed.  Now, I am not in favor of banning, but these keywords are so sexist and subjective that they DO NOT meet IMDb requirements,

Although almost all keyword that includes the words "feminine" and "masculine" are suspect, I am referring to keywords like:  pretty-woman, attractive-woman, thin-and-attractive-woman, slim-and-attractive woman,. sexy-woman, sexy-legs, pretty-legs, thin-legs, shapely-legs, woman-with-masculine-hair,  woman-with-short-masculine-hair, thin-and-attractive, slim-and-attractive, etc., etc., etc.  And there are often "masculine" versions of such keywords.

With IMFDb's commitment to the f-rated keyword, and with the sociological evolution of our times, such keywords should not be allowed -- if for no other reason than they are so subjective.  Not only is beauty in the eyes of the beholder, but so are attractive, thin, etc., etc. etc.

I hope this receives some serious attention, and that those who contribute such keywords are notified that they do not meet IMDb standards and should not be submitted.


Photo of Bradley Kent

Bradley Kent

  • 141 Posts
  • 167 Reply Likes

Posted 2 months ago

  • 2
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 9637 Posts
  • 10790 Reply Likes
PC Gobbledigoop. This is not a Problem but more of an Idea. So it would have been better described as such.

(Edited)
Photo of Bradley Kent

Bradley Kent

  • 141 Posts
  • 167 Reply Likes
The problem is that keywords are meant to be objective . . . not subjective, not evaluative, nor opinionated, but factual.

What is beautiful?  What is pretty?  What is attractive?  What is handsome?  What is sexy?  etc.  These are opinions, not facts.
(Edited)
Photo of Nikolay Yeriomin

Nikolay Yeriomin, Champion

  • 2029 Posts
  • 2439 Reply Likes
One of the reasons why threads like this always end up being controversial is appealing to objective. Pretty much nothing can't be objective and keywords are no exception. That's why there are so much of them: there's something for everyone to make-up one's mind, filter movies etc. 
Photo of Bradley Kent

Bradley Kent

  • 141 Posts
  • 167 Reply Likes
Here's another "goodie": creamy-legs.
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 9637 Posts
  • 10790 Reply Likes
As Some Congressman or Senator once said, "I can't describe it, but I know it when I see it"!
THAT is fact.

What is beautiful?  What is pretty?  What is attractive?  What is handsome?  What is sexy?
 etc.

Well I CANT describe it, but I do know it when I SEE it!


Photo of Bradley Kent

Bradley Kent

  • 141 Posts
  • 167 Reply Likes
"I can't describe it, but I know it when I see it"!


In no way is THAT fact.  In FACT, that is a very definition of subjectivity.

"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder."  As is "attractive," handsome," creamy,": sexy," etc.
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 9637 Posts
  • 10790 Reply Likes
PC Gobledigoop again.
Why should anybody dictate what is acceptable!
Not you or I are in charge.
So move along and find another topic that you can find consensus on.
You are trying to Force your OPINION on all.
There are things I find objectionable.
But I also recognize someones opinion on the definition of subjectivity and objectivity may differ from mine. Acceptance of other peoples right to their opinion and living with that right makes this country great. We can agree to disagree. And acceptance of those differences and their right to express something we disagree with is what free speech is about. Banning words is censorship. It is a totalitarianism concept that has no place in a free society.
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 9637 Posts
  • 10790 Reply Likes
sociological evolution of our times?

THAT is an opinion. Not a fact. It is based in a Utopian philosophical ideal by a run amok academia. It is not reality.
Photo of Horst

Horst

  • 234 Posts
  • 308 Reply Likes
I stopped reading at "I am a male feminist"
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 9613 Posts
  • 10783 Reply Likes
I can tell he does not like 2 1/2 Men!
Now the real question is......does he like Sex and The City?
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 6416 Posts
  • 7881 Reply Likes
A supporter of equality of the sexes is oddly often described as "feminist", whether such a supporter is male or female. The term was not really intended to mean "female supremacist" or misandrist, but some females who describe themselves as "feminist" may subscribe to a kind of bigotry toward males. Regardless, people who describe themselves with such a term are probably setting themselves up for problems.
Photo of Horst

Horst

  • 234 Posts
  • 308 Reply Likes
while proudly wearing his #metoo shirt Ed
Photo of Horst

Horst

  • 234 Posts
  • 308 Reply Likes
exactly Jeorj
there is nothing wrong with stepping up for female rights (although i wonder why those who permanently do focus on the industrial world and not those parts that really need more gender equality)
but if somebody starts a post on a movie-themed board with these words, it's pretty much the equivalent to "I am not a racist but...". you know immediately all that follows afterwards is nonsense
(Edited)
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 9613 Posts
  • 10783 Reply Likes
Confucius say, "Reality Bites" Back when poked at!

Photo of J.

J.

  • 252 Posts
  • 342 Reply Likes
It doesn't matter what our subjective opinion is; it only matters what point of view the movie is taking. Maybe some oddball finds Ingrid Bergman, Kim Novak or Elizabeth Taylor to be ugly, but it's clear that CASABLANCA, VERTIGO and CAT ON A HOT TIN ROOF present their characters as beautiful.

The same oddball might find Margaret Hamilton to be gorgeous, but in THE WIZARD OF OZ both her characters are meant to be seen as ugly. Keywords like attractive-woman and ugly-woman are not subjective if the movie makes it clear how we're supposed to view the characters.

The keywords would be subjective on most nonfiction titles, such as THE VIEW, ELLEN, THE RACHEL MADDOW SHOW, JUDGE JUDY, etc.
Photo of Bradley Kent

Bradley Kent

  • 141 Posts
  • 167 Reply Likes
"if somebody starts a post on a movie-themed board with these words, it's pretty much the equivalent to "I am not a racist but...". you know immediately all that follows afterwards is nonsense"

Wow!  We will see what the future brings.  Guess IMDb better start eliminating the" f-rated" keyword.

Thanks, he said, cynically, for calling me "nonsense."  That's obviously "subjective," and not "objective."  "Nonsense" would be a terrible keyword.
(Edited)
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 9637 Posts
  • 10790 Reply Likes
An irrelevant non-sequitur.
What did I say earlier? Hmm..........
Stop trying to force your you ideas on the rest of society.
You have made your point. Move on.
No one here is agreeing.
Yes you can go find a person or two to rally around you that are not regular participants. They are not in the majority.
PC Gobbledigoop is ruining America.
Live and let live.
Speak and let others speak whats on their free mind. 
Dont ask others to change what they speak to please you.
It is selfish and removes free speech.
We'll see? You are proclaiming your own disappointment.
Start viewing the world in Widescreen.


(Edited)
Photo of Bradley Kent

Bradley Kent

  • 141 Posts
  • 167 Reply Likes
Please... look in a mirror, and say these same things to yourself.
Photo of Horst

Horst

  • 234 Posts
  • 308 Reply Likes
How did you like LvT's Nymphomaniac duology, Bradley?
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 9637 Posts
  • 10790 Reply Likes
I noticed you have NOTHING to say.
And it takes 2-3 hours to reply.
I have NOTHING to say anymore.
And it will be 20-30 Years before I reply Further!
See Ya!
Bye Bye.
Cheers
Thanks
G-Day
OH I did the mirror Thingy
It felt good.
(Edited)
Photo of tt

tt

  • 6 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
The movie.
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 9637 Posts
  • 10790 Reply Likes
X or R Version?
Photo of tt

tt

  • 6 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
Does it matter what version if you are a male feminist.
Photo of tt

tt

  • 6 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
What about "Grind" that has a brother-brother-brother's wife "love triangle."
Photo of tt

tt

  • 6 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
You're smart Ed Jones (XLIX) you will work it out. You don't need me to tell you what the answer is.
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 9637 Posts
  • 10790 Reply Likes
I have NOTHING to say anymore.

Does not mean I wont comment.
It means I have nothing to SAY, cuz I said it. I don't repeat myself as you do.
Gotta fire up the DeLorean and hit 88MPH!
A trip to Sept 1955 would do you fine.

(Edited)
Photo of Nikolay Yeriomin

Nikolay Yeriomin, Champion

  • 2029 Posts
  • 2439 Reply Likes
Bradley, although that was not touched upon yet in this thread, many feminists think that "male feminist" is an oxymoron and a rather offensive one. I, for one, can't bring myself to call me as such. Mainly because I simply think I'm not doing enough (yet) to counter-act causal discrimination in Post-Soviet countries where it is still a very common problem, because USSR, as we all know, was not a definition of progressive state. I also think that concentrating on small victories like removal of certain keywords might not be the best way to do something about a problem. Your views on that subject are far from extreme and have a lot of reason in them, but vector in which this thread is heading demonstrates well enough that your approach might be a bit heavy-handed. 

That said, some of these keywords definitely need trimming and reconsideration. 
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 9579 Posts
  • 10765 Reply Likes
Bradley Kent
Now this is how you make change Brad. Read what Nikolay says. It makes THE most sense. It respects both sides opinions. It is how we should all try to work together to form a solution. Your My way, or the Highway attitude, is insensitive to the others that you consider not worthy of a position at all. You are right and all others have no say at all. Change IS a slow process. Your insensitivity is amazing considering you are a proclaimed feminist.
Photo of Bradley Kent

Bradley Kent

  • 141 Posts
  • 167 Reply Likes
Would love s response from the IMDb staff on this issue (Not feminism, but keeping keywords objective rather than subjective.)
Photo of Marco

Marco

  • 808 Posts
  • 836 Reply Likes
Ed, Horst. Might I ask you to try and behave like adults? Obviously, you don't have to agree with Bradley regarding this specific issue, but why you both feel the need to behave as childish as you do while he's just trying to make the database better is beyond me.
(for the record, I won't respond to any more of your posts on this thread because I don't want to get sucked into some verbal ping pong game with you guys, but I did feel the urge to say something regarding your behaviour.)
Photo of Marco

Marco

  • 808 Posts
  • 836 Reply Likes
Ed, Horst. Might I ask you to try and behave like adults? Obviously, you don't have to agree with Bradley regarding this specific issue, but why you both feel the need to behave as childish as you do while he's just trying to make the database better is beyond me.
(for the record, I won't respond to any more of your posts on this thread because I don't want to get sucked into some verbal ping pong game with you guys, but I did feel the urge to say something regarding your behaviour.)
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 9637 Posts
  • 10790 Reply Likes
I agree with your assessment Marco. 
While I can be serious.
I see things in life and try to add levity.
That has nothing to do with a perception of how an adult should act.
I think...... what would Robin Williams say!
I act like a free spirited adult. My perception.
So while I may agree, I gotta be me!
Thanks
Cheers
(Edited)
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 6416 Posts
  • 7881 Reply Likes
Hi, Marco. Thanks for asking them to be less mocking of the creator of this topic. Describing their behavior as "childish" probably has or probably will upset them just slightly, so everybody please be cool.
Photo of Horst

Horst

  • 234 Posts
  • 308 Reply Likes
oh marco dont be a party pooper
I tried to reason with Bradley on a genuine level and his reaction was either non-existent or resulted in more nonsense
lets just have a bit of fun here :)
Photo of Bradley Kent

Bradley Kent

  • 141 Posts
  • 167 Reply Likes
Well, I certainly am a contributor, and I use keywords for many things. As a film researcher, writer and former teacher of film history, I am often looking for films about a certain subject, for myself and at the request of others.  For example, I curate a film society at a community center, and am often looking for films about a particular subject for particular programming, like the magna carta Japanese cuisine, parental abuse, world war two in Italy, deception, vikings, film-noir, Abraham Lincoln etc.  I view IMDb as an archive used for research.  As such, I want keywords to objectively represent the content of a title.  I also think of film students who may want examples of titles that utilized split screen, blurry vision, subjective comer, slow-motion, etc.

If I want subjectivity, I go to user and eternal reviews.  There, one can express a opinion about anything -- content or aesthetics.  But the keywords are an objective index to the content of a title, and are, therefore, an excellent research tool.

If you don't need or like the keywords, don't use them.
(Edited)
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 9637 Posts
  • 10790 Reply Likes
Look at you.
I, I, I     !!!!!!!!!!!!
Forget We, We, We the rest.
You have even forced your I am the only thinking authority for your Students.
Shame on you.
Look at your Statement!

I want keywords to objectively represent the content of a title.  I also think of film students who may want examples....................

Well I think of those that don't also. This is not a one sided world!
It seems you have no room for that kind of thought.
Repressed thought= Socialism
Repressed thought= BAD
Proof that Academia has no room for diversification of thought.

Have you given up yet?
You are in the same room with a Captain of his Debate Team.
Care to continue?

(Edited)
Photo of Nikolay Yeriomin

Nikolay Yeriomin, Champion

  • 2029 Posts
  • 2439 Reply Likes
Bradley, being a researcher myself (political studies in international relations with movies being one of my research areas) I admire your point of view, but what makes you think that these keywords are not in use with other researchers, for example, psychologists? Considering that nowadays we have a vote system in which people judge certain keywords as being useful (or not), they can provide valuable data in some areas. Data on how people perceive other people might be valuable to someone and might be way more on second sight then idle sexist remarks. I used to think that keywords in general are ineffective myself, but I came a long way since then. When I'm adding keywords to the title I'm trying to add as much as I can, ranging from specific objects to generic situations, because I know that someone, somewhere, might require sufficient data in that regard.
(Edited)
Photo of Bradley Kent

Bradley Kent

  • 141 Posts
  • 167 Reply Likes
You are making so many facetious statements and false assumptions that I will no longer respond to you, other than to say that I was captain of my debate team, too, and even taught Debate as a college professor.  You don't know me.  You don't know my students.  You don't know my commitment to diversity, personally and professionally.  Goodbye and Good Luck.

P.S. I still would like a response from the IMDb staff.
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 9637 Posts
  • 10790 Reply Likes
There will be no reply that will satisfy you.
These Keywords have been around a long time and will stay as long as the references are still used by the general public.
You are most definitely NOT the General Public.
As to your no reply...........
Typical response by someone that has no counter reply.
My statements are based on logical extrapolation.
Occum's Razor is in use here. Beware of well though out replies!
Promise to stop?
Please?
Thanks.
Good day Sir.
Photo of Horst

Horst

  • 234 Posts
  • 308 Reply Likes
you can be the Godfather of debate with 3 Nobel Debate Prizes under your belt, but that won't change a thing if you see something as fact while everybody else considers it factitious Bradley. and rightfully so.
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 9637 Posts
  • 10790 Reply Likes
But in this ever changing world in which we live in...........makes you give in and cry......You Dream and it Dies!
Dream on, Mr Kent.
Reality Rules.
Dreams do come true in Oz.
This IS Kansas.
Photo of J.

J.

  • 252 Posts
  • 342 Reply Likes
On fiction titles, attractive-woman, sexy-woman, etc. are objective, as are other keywords with value judgements, such as wise-priestbrat, mad-scientist, ugly-cat or stupid-cop.
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 6413 Posts
  • 7879 Reply Likes
What?
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 9637 Posts
  • 10790 Reply Likes
So the attractive sexy woman witnessed the wise priest, mad scientist, and the stupid cop trying to get some brats ugly cat out of a tree! A new episode of The Rookie! The most facetious fiction I ever heard of! Subjectively objective conjecture on my part though! Surely you don't ObJECT
( Jeorj Jectson ) His boy Elroy too.
(Edited)
Photo of Marco

Marco

  • 808 Posts
  • 836 Reply Likes
Quite some years ago, the keyword beautiful-woman was deleted. I think it was because the keyword was pointless as it could be added to literally hundreds of thousands of titles in the database (but was actually mainly added to porn flicks for some reason). I feel the same goes for a keyword like pretty-woman (https://www.imdb.com/search/keyword?keywords=pretty-woman). It's currently attached to 27 titles, it's subjective as hell and could be added to about 98 per cent of the titles in the database, making it useless to have around.
For me, this whole discussion doesn't have anything to do with being politically correct or not. It has to do with trying to decide whether or not IMDb should want subjective keywords. I would say IMDb should not want subjective keywords because I don't see what purpose they serve. For every instance of the keyword 'pretty-woman', the keyword 'ugly-woman' could also be added, making both keywords pointless.
Regarding females that are considered sexy or pretty by a character in the film: I don't see the purpose because I feel it could be added to the lion's share of titles in the database. But if IMDb wants to list is, perhaps something like 'character-feels-another-character-is-sexy' could do the trick? I agree it's not a sexy keyword, but at least it's way more objective than 'sexy-woman' and it's also less ambiguous


PS: there already is the keyword 'smitten-by-a-beautiful-woman': https://www.imdb.com/search/keyword?keywords=smitten-by-a-beautiful-woman .


Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 9637 Posts
  • 10790 Reply Likes
The Keywords need a serious overhaul. I am not disagreeing with the poster. It is what he wants to remove. And whats acceptable to leave alone according to him only.
I agree with your assessment.
Keywords need to describe situations, not things.
Example:
Gun.....Out, Gone By By. Not descriptive and Generic.
Gunfight
Gunslinger
Gunrunner
Airplane Gunner
Tank Gunner
Etc Etc
The problem is that there will be zero consensus on this.
So things must remain as they are. A literally useless system.
Either scrap it, or don't even bother tinkering with it.
Thanks Marco.
Ed
Photo of J.

J.

  • 252 Posts
  • 342 Reply Likes
Pretty-woman is an objective keyword. It is always clear whether or not a movie has a woman we are meant to view as pretty.

But I agree with you, Marco, that the keyword is useless. As you suggest, it could be applied to nearly every fiction title in the database.

I don't agree that ugly-woman is useless. It is much less common that a movie has a woman we are meant to view as especially ugly. I'm looking at Hitchcock's filmography, just for reference, and I can't think of a single one of his movies where the keyword fits. Stage Fright has Joyce Grenfell, the "Lovely Ducks" woman at the carnival, but she is meant to be viewed more as eccentric than ugly. Saboteur has the fat lady and the bearded lady in the circus troupe, but they are meant to be seen as bizarre. Frenzy has Anna Massey, who many view as Hitchcock's least attractive leading lady, but at no point are we encouraged to view her as ugly.

Ugly-woman would apply to:

THE WIZARD OF OZ (1939), where Margaret Hamilton plays two characters that are ugly;

YOU ONLY LIVE TWICE (1967), where James Bond is put off by a woman he finds unattractive;

SWING SHIFT CINDERELLA (1945), where the wolf is pursued by an ugly rich grandma;

and "Eye of the Beholder" (1960), an episode of THE TWILIGHT ZONE where the protagonist is so ugly that the state threatens to banish her if surgery doesn't cure her ugliness.

If I ran the keywords, I would keep ugly-woman and banish pretty-womanattractive-woman and sexy-woman. The bot would tell contributors: "IMDb finds this keyword to be redundant, as nearly every fiction title has a woman the audience is meant to view as attractive."
(Edited)
Photo of Horst

Horst

  • 234 Posts
  • 308 Reply Likes
" I think it was because the keyword was pointless as it could be added to literally hundreds of thousands of titles in the database (but was actually mainly added to porn flicks for some reason). "

And? There are many other keywords that can be added to hundreds of thousands of titles and they would fit. Nobody complains about these. Or about many other subjective keywords. And don't even try to deny that you are all about political correctness and the stupid idea that a woman should only be cast because of her talent, not her looks. Is there sexism in Hollywood? Absolutely? But if you are stupid enough to censor completely harmless stuff like "beautiful woman" in a desperate attempt to make actresses seem like "lookless" creatures, then clearly you are overshooting the mark. And if you are complaining about keywords fitting literally every movie, then my suggestion is you start correcting these first:
https://www.imdb.com/search/keyword?keywords=man&ref_=ttkw_kw_3
https://www.imdb.com/search/keyword?keywords=woman&ref_=ttkw_kw_3
https://www.imdb.com/search/keyword?keywords=boy&ref_=ttkw_kw_3
https://www.imdb.com/search/keyword?keywords=girl&ref_=ttkw_kw_3

should take a little while and then you can move on to your political-correctness-induced idea of removing beautiful women from imdb




Photo of Horst

Horst

  • 234 Posts
  • 308 Reply Likes
"perhaps something like 'character-feels-another-character-is-sexy' could do the trick?"

man that reference is really reaching new levels of embarrassing lol why are you so scared of saying a woman is beautiful?
Photo of Bradley Kent

Bradley Kent

  • 141 Posts
  • 167 Reply Likes
Finally, there are postings that are addressing the issue I was raising.  Thanks.
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 9637 Posts
  • 10790 Reply Likes
Let's make this very simple a Keyword should make reference to a Key Point in the story.
As this reference goes, Keyword attachment in the database is a dismal failure.
Photo of Bradley Kent

Bradley Kent

  • 141 Posts
  • 167 Reply Likes
Excellent suggestion:

If I ran the keywords, I would keep ugly-woman and banish pretty-womanattractive-woman and sexy-woman. The bot would tell contributors: "IMDb finds this keyword to be redundant, as nearly every fiction title has a woman the audience is meant to view as attractive."

Similarly, handsome-man could be banished, while, in certain cases, retaining ugly-man.

What does the staff think?

There are other "general" keyword (i.e., man, woman, etc.) that could be applied to almost every title and could also be banished.  An exception (as there always is) in certain cases would be "human-being," especially when humans are not the norm (as in some science-fiction titles).
(Edited)
Photo of Bradley Kent

Bradley Kent

  • 141 Posts
  • 167 Reply Likes
While very general, "boy," "girl" and even "child" have value.  For a character whose age is below 5, I use "little-boy" and "little-girl."  I use "boy" and "girl" for those 6-to-12 years of age," and "teenage-age-boy," "teenage-age-girl" and "teenager" for those 13-to-19 years of age.  I sincerely do not mean to raise any more political hackles, but "girl," in particular, seems to occasionally get used for females over 19.  Others may do so, but I also do not submit "pretty-girl," "cute-boy" or "beautiful-child" -- never "beautiful-baby," since some surely feel that EVERY baby is beautiful.
(Edited)
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 6416 Posts
  • 7881 Reply Likes
Ah...
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 9637 Posts
  • 10790 Reply Likes
Ah indeed.
Spencer Gifts Candle going on here!
Photo of jxx

jxx

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
 "little-boy" has been referenced in newspapers lately.
Photo of Jeorj Euler

Jeorj Euler

  • 6416 Posts
  • 7881 Reply Likes
Well, it is just that I apply the keywords "boy", "girl", "young-boy", "young-girl", "little-boy" and "little-girl" slightly differently from the way Bradley Kent does, so it should occur to us all that the adjectives "young" and "little" are subjective to a degree or at the very least ambiguous, because the cutoff points are unspecific. I do not even use the keywords "teenage-age-boy" or "teenage-age-girl", but rather "teenage-boy", "teenage-girl" and "teenager". Interesting.
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 9637 Posts
  • 10790 Reply Likes
Alright everybody here. Lets play School.
In this exercise we will have one movie.
119 Plot Keywords are in the movie.
Now as part of or school lesson we shall address the term Key Word.
Keyword describes a point in the plot that is "KEY" to the plot! Emphisis on a KEY POINT.
A point that is a definitive point that without this key point or these key points, the plot unravels.


Of the 119 key points listed, many are repeated with a slight variation on wording.
Many are not key points at all.
I can see no more than 5 definite Key Words.
An argument could be made for inclusion of an additional 5, making the total 10.

Can you identify the 109 useless keywords that really are not "KEY" to the plot?


The Movie is High Noon starring Garry Cooper
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0044706/keywords?ref_=tt_stry_kw



one against many
2 of 2 found this relevant

street shootout
1 of 1 found this relevant

fistfight
1 of 1 found this relevant

two gun holster
1 of 1 found this relevant

double gun holster
1 of 1 found this relevant

battle
1 of 1 found this relevant

brawl
1 of 1 found this relevant

shootout
1 of 1 found this relevant

gunfight
1 of 1 found this relevant

real time
1 of 1 found this relevant

quick draw
1 of 1 found this relevant

justice
1 of 1 found this relevant

frontier justice
1 of 1 found this relevant

morality
1 of 1 found this relevant

revisionist western
Is this relevant?

mexican
Is this relevant?

bartender
Is this relevant?

pistol
Is this relevant?

allegory
Is this relevant?

outlaw gang
Is this relevant?

small town
Is this relevant?

husband wife relationship
Is this relevant?

honor
Is this relevant?

confrontation
Is this relevant?

cowardice
Is this relevant?

courage
Is this relevant?

will
Is this relevant?

shot in the back
Is this relevant?

held at gunpoint
Is this relevant?

male protagonist
Is this relevant?

19th century
Is this relevant?

western town
Is this relevant?

kiss
Is this relevant?

beating
Is this relevant?

face slap
Is this relevant?

violence
Is this relevant?

church
Is this relevant?

fire
Is this relevant?

arson
Is this relevant?

eye patch
Is this relevant?

sheriff
Is this relevant?

retirement
Is this relevant?

grudge
Is this relevant?

quaker
Is this relevant?

church service
Is this relevant?

wedding ceremony
Is this relevant?

justice of the peace
Is this relevant?

train whistle
Is this relevant?

hayloft
Is this relevant?

national film registry
Is this relevant?

gun holster
Is this relevant?

gun
Is this relevant?

holster
Is this relevant?

cult favorite
Is this relevant?

blockbuster
Is this relevant?

fight
Is this relevant?

boyfriend gilrfriend relationship
Is this relevant?

desert
Is this relevant?

based on magazine article
Is this relevant?

1880s
Is this relevant?

dual wield
Is this relevant?

western hero
Is this relevant?

colt .45
Is this relevant?

tough guy
Is this relevant?

one day
Is this relevant?

old west
Is this relevant?

punched in the face
Is this relevant?

warrior
Is this relevant?

evil man
Is this relevant?

gun battle
Is this relevant?

marshal
Is this relevant?

responsibility
Is this relevant?

newlywed
Is this relevant?

gun violence
Is this relevant?

quitting a job
Is this relevant?

wild west
Is this relevant?

old flame
Is this relevant?

one man army
Is this relevant?

outlaw
Is this relevant?

frontier town
Is this relevant?

hostage
Is this relevant?

deputy
Is this relevant?

ex convict
Is this relevant?

lawman
Is this relevant?

mislaid trust
Is this relevant?

conscience
Is this relevant?

revenge
Is this relevant?

death
Is this relevant?

u.s. marshal
Is this relevant?

male female relationship
Is this relevant?

train station
0 of 1 found this relevant

horse
0 of 1 found this relevant

train
0 of 1 found this relevant

hero
0 of 1 found this relevant

blonde
0 of 1 found this relevant

badge
0 of 1 found this relevant

saloon
0 of 1 found this relevant

jail
0 of 1 found this relevant

barbershop
0 of 1 found this relevant

famous score
0 of 1 found this relevant

famous song
0 of 1 found this relevant

clock
0 of 1 found this relevant

wedding
0 of 1 found this relevant

time for title
0 of 1 found this relevant

cowboy hat
0 of 1 found this relevant

cowboy shirt
0 of 1 found this relevant

cowboy boots
(Edited)
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 9637 Posts
  • 10790 Reply Likes
To start things off, the last 18 "Keywords" are NOT key to the plot.
The last 3 are absurd. What else would one wear in the old west in a western? Speedos? Tennis shoes?

Point is that I'm making is that it seems apparent that keywords are so out of whack to the point where they are absolutely useless.

Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 9637 Posts
  • 10790 Reply Likes
If a words meaning is to be ignored and is up to the reinterpretation of the user, than language looses all meaning and comprehension.
Photo of J.

J.

  • 252 Posts
  • 342 Reply Likes
I know, but again, the IMDb plot keywords have always gone far, far outside the strict definition of what the term "keyword" means. Whether that's good or bad is a separate issue, but it's been that way since at least 1999.
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 9637 Posts
  • 10790 Reply Likes
Then we would all be speaking a foreign language in English that cannot be interpreted except by that speaker. Or for that matter any language!
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 9637 Posts
  • 10790 Reply Likes
PLOT PLOT PLOT Keyword
Then a new category is needed for Trivia Keywords.
Photo of J.

J.

  • 252 Posts
  • 342 Reply Likes
Please stick to one post per reply. I reply to one post only to find that you've written two.
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 9637 Posts
  • 10790 Reply Likes
J.
You have made my point here all by yourself.
Kudos my friend.
The keyword system needs a major overhaul.

Photo of J.

J.

  • 252 Posts
  • 342 Reply Likes
Please stick to one post per reply. I reply to one post and then see you've posted twice.
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 9637 Posts
  • 10790 Reply Likes
If there is no gunfight and the movie revolves around a murder we never see, but the gun is being hidden so the police can't find it, then the hiding of the gun is part of the plot. Gun would be a keyword.

A Cop that works all day carries a gun. If he does not use it ever than gun is not a KEY Plot Word.

A cop that never carries a gun, IE: Sheriff Andy Taylor would be OK with no-gun or Cop without Gun or some variation. Or for Deputy Fife. Gun with only one bullet.
If a gun is used it should be in. But is not part of the plot if it is a normal tool used in job performance.

You are asking to breakdown every key word and its correct and incorrect application.

That is my exact point here

If we have spent this much time on GUN, than how many words can be used here in a for and against any specific Keyword.

All Keywords are all Subjective as of today.

The whole thing needs a serious overhaul.
Photo of J.

J.

  • 252 Posts
  • 342 Reply Likes
I have made no argument as to whether or not the keywords need an overhaul. I am not offering an opinion on that.

I was explaining why a movie with the keyword gunfight needs to have the keyword gun as well. It doesn't matter that gun already has 9000 titles. A keyword search can be refined.
(Edited)
Photo of Ed Jones (XLIX)

Ed Jones (XLIX)

  • 9637 Posts
  • 10790 Reply Likes
Focus on the big picture
Gun or any keyword you may pick does not matter.
The point is the poor choices that are used AS keywords in all titles.
Photo of J.

J.

  • 252 Posts
  • 342 Reply Likes
Then you're arguing that IMDb needs to change how they define keywords. It's clear from their contributor page on keywords, and from precedent since 1999, that they have an open and generous view of what is acceptable.

As I understand it, you are NOT arguing that we should keep the keywords as they are and simply call them something besides "plot keywords."