New section: Key Creatives

  • 1
  • Idea
  • Updated 4 years ago
This is an idea for the future. I realise that such a change would be difficult to implement, but I think it would be for the better of the layout, the contributors and IMDb's mission to catalogue credits exactly as they appear in the source.

I propose a new section: Key Creatives. Although some people don't like the use of the noun "key" as an adjective or the adjective "creative" as a noun, it's a commonly used term in the industry. The name of the section would only appear when editing the page, and the current section names would remain mostly unchanged. The main change would be to how the data is added.

When editing data, Key Creatives would replace the sections designed just for one or two people, i.e. Directors, Composers, Cinematographers, Editors, Casting Directors, Production Designers, Art Directors, Set Decorators and Costume Designers. It would also absorb credits from Producers and Writers, the remainder of which would be moved to other sections or re-purposed.

As a contributor who has recently become much more active and has just read all the guidelines, I can say that one of the most confusing things to new users is that there are sections that are only for one or two people who are separated from the rest of the department. There is then confusion on what to do if the role is shared between multiple people, some of which just worked on certain segments etc. It seems like the current system is designed specifically for Hollywood films and does not translate well to television programmes and indie films that have credits that do not conform to the usual standards. The other issue is that these sections are structured differently to the other sections - there is no space for the role. This is confusing to someone who is used to having to enter a role and it can be unclear what to do if the role on screen (e.g. DOP, Vision Editor) is different to the standardised name for the role on IMDb. Considering IMDb likes names to be entered exactly as they appear on screen, regardless of any mistakes, it's odd that you have the opposite approach for roles - your policy is to standardise the names of the roles to what you would like them to be, regardless of what the creator of the work wanted them to be. Considering the roles are usually not linked to any sort of list of people with that role, it doesn't seem like there is any practical reason why this policy should be in place. This proposal will alleviate all these things, as well as people complaining that their credits are relegated to less prominent positions on the web page that doesn't accurately reflect the credits.

The Key Creatives section will work similarly to how the Writers section currently works but with a role field instead of entering the role as an attribute. You will enter the person's name, role and any attributes as you would with any other section. There will also be an order number, like with the Writers. For example, "John Smith - director - (blank) - 1,1,1". The first number defines the grouping and the second and third numbers define how the names are connected (i.e. "and" or "&"). As should be the case with the Writers (but currently isn't), all roles with the same first number must also have the same role or else a warning will come up. The role should be entered exactly as it appears on screen. When the page is viewed normally, it will display with the role name (e.g. Director) as the section heading. Essentially, anyone who receives a title card credit before the rolling credits would be in this section, and anyone else would be put in their appropriate department. The remaining producers would be moved to the Production Management section, and the Writers section would be renamed Script Department (allowing it to include script supervisors, researchers, etc.).

Example:

Input

Key Creatives

John Smith - directed by - (blank) - 1,1,1
John Smith - screenplay by - (blank) - 2,1,1
Mary Smith - screenplay by - (blank) - 2,1,2
Henry Jones - screenplay by - (blank) - 2,2,1
Matt Clayton - story by - (blank) - 3,1,1
Jane Doe - produced by - (bank) - 4,1,1
Christopher Nolan - executive producer - (blank) - 5,1,1
Emma Thomas - executive producer - (blank) - 5,1,2
George Lucas - executive producer - (blank) - 5,2,1
Michael Bluthe - associate producer - (blank) - 6,1,1
John Williams - original score by - (attribute example) - 7,1,1

Display

Directed by

John Smith

Screenplay by

John Smith &
Mary Smith and
Henry Jones

Story by

Matt Clayton

Produced by

Jane Doe

Executive Producers

Christopher Nolan
Emma Thomas

George Lucas

Associate Producer

Michael Bluthe

Original Score by

John Williams


I'm aware that currently certain credits are in their own sections for inputting data because it's currently the easiest way to process it. However, if this ever changes, which I know many people want it to, this can become an option. On the other hand, surely the way the data is processed does not have to match the way contributors input it and certainly doesn't have to match how the content is viewed.
Photo of Matt

Matt

  • 135 Posts
  • 54 Reply Likes

Posted 4 years ago

  • 1
Photo of Matt

Matt

  • 135 Posts
  • 54 Reply Likes
Nothing happens when I click the edit button on the post for some reason, but obviously John Williams should have an attribute. The attributes aren't really important to my point.