Tmdb is a much nice experience than IMDb. Site loads way quicker, there's no irrelevant articles and ads plastered all over every page, and not owned by billionaire ghouls. I hope it stays exactly the way it is for many years.
Most people weren't even on the internet yet in the mid-90s so I'm curious about what kind of enshittification of IMDB did you see in the late 90s? That's the time I remember it being good still but I don't really recall when the horrible redesigns started occurring.
IMDB started out on USENet. Early versions were text files people edited and shared.
The mid to late nineties is when it became commercialized once it gained popularity on the WWW. People were pissed at them for taking all of the crowd sourced data and profiting from it.
I agree they have no value. Most of the ones I've read have been pretending like they're Siskel or Ebert using an LLM to write some excessively long review just to get likes and climb the influencer ladder.
Seems to be a push from Amazon (they own IMDB if you didn't know) to enshitify user reviews across the board. They're doing it on Amazon for some items as well, but even worse.
Its a shame i really enjoyed the brainrot of seeing assorted yokels prattle on about how project hail mary is an evil woke movie that brainwashed them into being gay and also had too much dialogue and too much emotion and they skipped through everything that wasn't a shot of the CG ships flying around
I'd suggest NeoDB too. It is great for keeping track of not just movies but also books, video games, music and books. https://eggplant.place/ is one of the main instances.
For getting recommendations and looking at ratings I do also like Movielens.
@TheImpressiveX Letterboxd is first and foremost a review site, imo. There are some editorial articles on it, and there are user-curated lists, but it does not have a lot of "social media" features
the top rated imdb reviews have a half decent chance at being interesting to read. the top rated letterboxd reviews are all extremely shit, unfunny jokes
Who cares? The reviews are the worst part of IMDB. I use it to verify facts of a movie - year, actors, director, etc. I have no interest in the weird opinions that end up on IMDB.
The only time I cared about reviews on imdb was this one guy who had a absolutely ludicrous amount of porn reviews and looked exactly like the type of person to have a ludicrous amount of porn reviews.
If you want good reviews use Letterboxd. Funniest meme shit on there.
It did get mildly enshitified recently too though because they moved the reviews under a button in favor of cast and crew listings. Like, no one cares about that Letterboxd, we have IMDB and TMDB for that. We don't need a third option, just stick to tracking and meme reviews.
I'm in all the way until all the data sellers are doing nothing more than selling my personal details back and forth to each other in an endless loop. One day my personal details will be worth nothing and peace will reign throughout the land! /s
My only issue with letterboxd is they pull from TheMovieDB for metadata/director verification and TMDB has some exclusionary/gatekeeping policy where they don't consider films released primarily on Youtube eligible. This has fucked over indie directors like Joel Haver. I think his fans have manually intervened but no policy has changed that I know of.
While it could be regional, I am getting it in the middle of the US and we tend to get this kind of stuff last. Reviews require a login for me right now on Project Hail Mary and the one old movie I checked from the 90s.
I tried in many regions and countries and all of them required login to see reviews. I use a browser that keeps no cookies and deletes all browsing data on exit.
Yep, just tried it again for that movie and I had no problem. I will say this is in the IOS app and in the past when I updated the app it tried to get me to login but it’s always had a skip link.
Between multiple browsers on desktop and mobile, all in private mode or browsers that do not save any cookies or data, VPNed into any country I tried, you now need to be logged in to see reviews. Either you’re logged in, or lived in a place that isn’t Canada, the US, Japan, Denmark, Australia, Norway, or whatever other places I tried.
There's only one user review I've read that I ever got anything out of: it was a review left for Sex and The City Movie 2, and it was hilarious. Just going on about how awful everything in that movie is.
I don’t like IMDb, but I’m not ready to move yet. I’ve exported everything to TMDB (The Movie Database) but I still use both. IMDb has the trivia. TVDB doesn’t have an app. I use Safari web shortcuts for both (and Wikipedia).
Yes and no. IMDb is ten billion percent better in Safari if you have a competent content blocker. On the Android side, I wouldn't make the shortcut, because I assume it would go through Chrome. I'd just use Firefox and uBlock Origin. But yes, IMDb without the app is better. However, it doesn't save searches (which also might be a plus, but if I keep coming back to what I'm watching, having the history does save time).
If a site is perfectly servicable without an app, I'd recommend people just do that all day long. Apps are not the best thing, but they're convenient to a point. I think people should be aware of what apps can do without their permission vs web content. This varies between iOS and Android too, so you gotta know what you're running and what it can do/what can be done to it by others.
App for a web site is ALWAYS worse. I hate that shit. The only time the app is better is if they purposefully make the mobile site worse so you switch to the app. Facebook was excellent at doing this.
The problem is — or, at least, from my perspective as an old school/pre-WWW computer user — that a lot of sites aren't made for mobile. If they are, it's great, it's fine, the app might offer a couple bonuses, but you should have a good experience just using a browser. If they aren't — the app is a must.
Forums are a great example of this. When Android and iOS were new, most forums ran like shit in a mobile browser, and if you had a lot to type, you'd often lose it if you didn't remember to copy it to the clipboard first. Even then, with RAM limitations, you could lose your work. An app was created called Tapatalk, it did require forum owners to install a plugin on their end, but it made forums into an app, and it was good — until they got greedy. Tapatalk was a good way to bypass the ads on the forum ("because phone screens are smaller"). Then Tapatalk started putting their own ads in. They were taking money from the forum operators, not giving them any back, and making money on the whole process. Forums stopped installing the plugin, and many that had it began removing it.
Around the same time, forum software makers, like Invision, phpBB, and vBulletin, began including mobile support natively, so if a forum updated their software, they got mobile support. Thus, the Tapatalk gravy train came to a screeching halt. They'd pissed off forum users and forum owners, and now neither of them needed Tapatalk.
These days, I think most sites are made with mobile in mind. But apps can scrape more data without permission, so they tend to be favoured by the people who run the sites, especially concerning Android users, who can natively run Firefox and uBlock Origin. But they also love Android users who love Chrome, and iOS users in total, because they can get more by those users (generally, a majority of them at least).
iOS can now run uBlock Origin! Before that, there was Wipr/wipr 2 which are still excellent, and the Firefox Focus browser which has some stellar adblocking and wipes all browsing data, cookies, cache, everything every time you exit the browser (or click the button to do it.)
Permissions in iOS have historically been more locked down for apps as well, giving users much more control over what apps can access. This changed a couple years back and now Android gives users more control over what apps can access than it used to.
I remember trying to browse forums before iOS/android were a thing and yah, it was a nightmare. Shoot, when iPhones came out, they couldn’t even copy and paste! I had the first Android phone that was released when it came out, the Dream, and it was revolutionary. I stopped using all Google products and services a long while ago, so iOS was pretty fleshed out by the time I got my first iPhone.
Now, full desktop sites work pretty well on mobile devices—I often prefer them to mobile versions of sites. I’m lucky to have really good eyesight though, so I like my text very small and condensed and all over the screen for maximum info without scrolling.
Yes, uBlock Origin is available for iOS as a Safari plugin. I've used uBO, Wipr2, and Adguard (free, $4-6, and $10 respectively) and Wipr2 is a little better. But I own all of them and I can swap Wipr2 out at any point I like. uBO being free means it's easier to get into for someone new to the platform, though.
Aha, you know what’s up, I ain’t gotta tell you hahaha. I paid the small price for Wipr 2 after loving the first one, and the dev is a really cool person. I don’t use YT much but my one complaint is that it does not tend to block YT ads. Firefox Focus does perfectly, and allows for background play too! I’m interested in adguard to try, but I mostly don’t leave the house and my PiHole lives here for DNS stuff!
Or elimination. Never forget what they took from us, the comments/forum section. IIRC they did it because of creepy people posting "age of majority" countdowns and other creepy content on starlets, and they wanted more Hollywood people interacting with the site (IMDb Pro subs). So they removed the noise. The problem is, there are a lot of inaccuracies and duplications in the trivia and related sections. I would peg that for removal instead.
91 Comments
Psaldorn@lemmy.world · 98 pts · 119d
Used to go to:
Now:
I use TMDB now
LuigiMaoFrance@lemmy.ml · 8 pts · 119d
Tmdb is a much nice experience than IMDb. Site loads way quicker, there's no irrelevant articles and ads plastered all over every page, and not owned by billionaire ghouls. I hope it stays exactly the way it is for many years.
some_kind_of_guy@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 118d
And an API with an excellent free tier
noughtnaut@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 119d
may I make a mention here to a TMDB-based cast lookup tool I made not too long ago?
Twodeg(rees of separation) allows you to find connection between several titles or actors.
Cherry@piefed.social · 3 pts · 118d
Thanks....me too now from the looks of it.
TimboSlice@discuss.online · 2 pts · 119d
Psaldorn@lemmy.world · 42 pts · 119d
https://www.themoviedb.org/
sen@lemmy.zip · 10 pts · 119d
Bookmarked, thank you.
Like hell am I going to create an account to look up an actor. The fuck at they thinking.
osanna@lemmy.vg · 4 pts · 119d
Tmdb ftw
timbuck2themoon@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 119d
Wow. This is super nice. Thank you. Like an immediate upgrade from what IMDb is.
a_good_hunter@lemmy.world · 79 pts · 120d
ENSHITIFICTION
TheImpressiveX@piefed.social · 28 pts · 120d
As opposed to enshigi non-fiction?
a_good_hunter@lemmy.world · 25 pts · 120d
Fuck dyslexia...
snooggums@piefed.world · 23 pts · 120d
angrystego@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 119d
Enshigi reality is a thing now too, I'm afraid.
LordMayor@piefed.social · 14 pts · 119d
Their design, layout and navigation are fucking terrible.
It began as crowd sourced database that became enshittified even before Amazon bought it.
It was cool up until the mid-1990s.
73ms@sopuli.xyz · 1 pts · 118d
Most people weren't even on the internet yet in the mid-90s so I'm curious about what kind of enshittification of IMDB did you see in the late 90s? That's the time I remember it being good still but I don't really recall when the horrible redesigns started occurring.
LordMayor@piefed.social · 1 pts · 118d
IMDB started out on USENet. Early versions were text files people edited and shared.
The mid to late nineties is when it became commercialized once it gained popularity on the WWW. People were pissed at them for taking all of the crowd sourced data and profiting from it.
Boolean@lemmy.world · 62 pts · 120d
Thanks IMDB. It’s been real.
SpicyLizards@reddthat.com · 48 pts · 120d
Then it has no value to casual browsers, which is probably a majority of their visits. No ones signing up for that shit (i hope)
RamenJunkie@midwest.social · 13 pts · 119d
The only reason I ever had an account was the boards which they killed.
Now it just prompts me to log in and its like... why?
CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works · 6 pts · 119d
I agree they have no value. Most of the ones I've read have been pretending like they're Siskel or Ebert using an LLM to write some excessively long review just to get likes and climb the influencer ladder.
BigDaddySlim@lemmy.world · 35 pts · 119d
Seems to be a push from Amazon (they own IMDB if you didn't know) to enshitify user reviews across the board. They're doing it on Amazon for some items as well, but even worse.
https://lemmy.world/post/45764817
tiramichu@sh.itjust.works · 5 pts · 118d
User reviews are a hinderance to the corporate narrative, so no more user reviews
Hubi@feddit.org · 29 pts · 120d
themoviedb.
comorg ist way better anyways.Steve@communick.news · 42 pts · 120d
themoviedb.ORG
Hubi@feddit.org · 1 pts · 119d
Oops, you're right of course.
ZoteTheMighty@lemmy.zip · 3 pts · 119d
This is the way.
klu9@piefed.social · 2 pts · 119d
There are fediverse options like NeoDB & Gush.
NotSteve_@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 118d
They also offer free API keys! I learned the hard way that iMDB does not at all
LainTrain@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 19 pts · 120d
Its a shame i really enjoyed the brainrot of seeing assorted yokels prattle on about how project hail mary is an evil woke movie that brainwashed them into being gay and also had too much dialogue and too much emotion and they skipped through everything that wasn't a shot of the CG ships flying around
crimson_iris@piefed.social · 15 pts · 119d
https://www.themoviedb.org/
Jackhammer_Joe@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 118d
Thank you, Amazon!
I was an ImDB user for over 20 years and always to lazy to search for an alternative - even though I was dreading the development in the recent years.
But NOW I finally switched!
Goodbye ImDB! Hello tmdb.org!
Sibbo@sopuli.xyz · 8 pts · 120d
Aren't there some alternative movie rating databases?
Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe · 18 pts · 120d
Themoviedb.org
RamenJunkie@midwest.social · 4 pts · 119d
Letterboxd.com
three@piefed.social · 0 pts · 119d
no boomers allowed
klu9@piefed.social · 3 pts · 119d
Fediverse has NeoDB
73ms@sopuli.xyz · 2 pts · 118d
I'd suggest NeoDB too. It is great for keeping track of not just movies but also books, video games, music and books. https://eggplant.place/ is one of the main instances.
For getting recommendations and looking at ratings I do also like Movielens.
reboot6675@sopuli.xyz · 7 pts · 120d
Letterboxd is where it's at
TheImpressiveX@piefed.social · 6 pts · 120d
Letterboxd is more like a social media for movies instead of a user movie review site.
thesohoriots@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 120d
It’s also terrifically unhinged
TheImpressiveX@piefed.social · 6 pts · 119d
Was that review written by Peter Griffin?
nitrml@tyrol.social · 1 pts · 103d
@TheImpressiveX Letterboxd is first and foremost a review site, imo. There are some editorial articles on it, and there are user-curated lists, but it does not have a lot of "social media" features
kip@piefed.zip · 2 pts · 119d
the top rated imdb reviews have a half decent chance at being interesting to read. the top rated letterboxd reviews are all extremely shit, unfunny jokes
BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today · 6 pts · 120d
Who cares? The reviews are the worst part of IMDB. I use it to verify facts of a movie - year, actors, director, etc. I have no interest in the weird opinions that end up on IMDB.
Damage@feddit.it · 9 pts · 119d
Then you should use themoviedb.org
Stern@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 120d
The only time I cared about reviews on imdb was this one guy who had a absolutely ludicrous amount of porn reviews and looked exactly like the type of person to have a ludicrous amount of porn reviews.
TachyonTele@piefed.social · 3 pts · 120d
Exactly. This is a non issue. Like being upset you have to sign into Next Door to see Doris down the street complain about things.
RamenJunkie@midwest.social · 3 pts · 119d
If you want good reviews use Letterboxd. Funniest meme shit on there.
It did get mildly enshitified recently too though because they moved the reviews under a button in favor of cast and crew listings. Like, no one cares about that Letterboxd, we have IMDB and TMDB for that. We don't need a third option, just stick to tracking and meme reviews.
BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today · 4 pts · 119d
My son is a big cinephile, and Letterboxd is his go-to. He doesn't even want hear about IMDB.
jbone@piefed.ca · 2 pts · 118d
For more niche content, it's sometimes one of the few viable sources for reviews.
melsaskca@lemmy.ca · 6 pts · 119d
I'm in all the way until all the data sellers are doing nothing more than selling my personal details back and forth to each other in an endless loop. One day my personal details will be worth nothing and peace will reign throughout the land! /s
shellington@piefed.zip · 5 pts · 120d
Are there any good alternatives anyone can recommend?
Do you think it's a prelude to in a year or so wanting age verification on accounts?
Steve@communick.news · 18 pts · 120d
TheMovieDB.org is the best alternative. Much nicer actually.
cerebralhawks@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 8 pts · 119d
I use it and I’ve exported my IMDb reviews to it, but it still lacks the trivia and other cool stuff. I use both, to be clear.
weaselsrippedmyflesh@piefed.social · 8 pts · 120d
I've been using Letterboxd for a while now and am pretty happy with it.
BurgerBaron@piefed.social · 5 pts · 120d
My only issue with letterboxd is they pull from TheMovieDB for metadata/director verification and TMDB has some exclusionary/gatekeeping policy where they don't consider films released primarily on Youtube eligible. This has fucked over indie directors like Joel Haver. I think his fans have manually intervened but no policy has changed that I know of.
https://letterboxd.com/director/joel-haver/
weaselsrippedmyflesh@piefed.social · 4 pts · 119d
Bummer that they do that. Any platform that you can recommend that addresses that issue and is user-friendly?
klu9@piefed.social · 5 pts · 119d
On NeoDB, you can create entries yourself, as well as import from various sources: IMDb, TMDB, Letterboxd, Douban etc
https://joinfediverse.wiki/NeoDB
BurgerBaron@piefed.social · 2 pts · 114d
Thanks for the link!
klu9@piefed.social · 2 pts · 114d
You're welcome :)
BurgerBaron@piefed.social · 1 pts · 119d
Not at the moment, I still use both sites until something better comes along.
shellington@piefed.zip · 1 pts · 120d
Thanks will give it a try.
oce@jlai.lu · 2 pts · 120d
Rotten Tomato maybe? Also recommendations from critics you like.
alakey@piefed.social · 4 pts · 119d
Ok, but why is the button Hub themed 😳
Sunshine@piefed.ca · 4 pts · 119d
Uses Neodb instead.
fodor@lemmy.zip · 3 pts · 118d
I love it when the trash takes itself out
NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone · 3 pts · 118d
Oh no, not the user reviews!
mx_smith@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 120d
This is not true. I have never had an account and can still read the user reviews.
snooggums@piefed.world · 6 pts · 120d
Did you try just now?
While it could be regional, I am getting it in the middle of the US and we tend to get this kind of stuff last. Reviews require a login for me right now on Project Hail Mary and the one old movie I checked from the 90s.
Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 4 pts · 119d
I tried in many regions and countries and all of them required login to see reviews. I use a browser that keeps no cookies and deletes all browsing data on exit.
mx_smith@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 119d
Yep, just tried it again for that movie and I had no problem. I will say this is in the IOS app and in the past when I updated the app it tried to get me to login but it’s always had a skip link.
snooggums@piefed.world · 6 pts · 119d
So it isn't true for you, but it is true for OP and me and other people even if it isn't 100% universal.
RamenJunkie@midwest.social · 3 pts · 119d
Its definitrly true in some places. Last night I went to read a review and it prompted a sign in.
Mayne its different on the web or something.
mx_smith@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 119d
Yeah I’m sure it’s prob location or some other demo they are picking up to enforce that shit.
Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 119d
Between multiple browsers on desktop and mobile, all in private mode or browsers that do not save any cookies or data, VPNed into any country I tried, you now need to be logged in to see reviews. Either you’re logged in, or lived in a place that isn’t Canada, the US, Japan, Denmark, Australia, Norway, or whatever other places I tried.
Zahille7@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 119d
There's only one user review I've read that I ever got anything out of: it was a review left for Sex and The City Movie 2, and it was hilarious. Just going on about how awful everything in that movie is.
cerebralhawks@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 119d
I don’t like IMDb, but I’m not ready to move yet. I’ve exported everything to TMDB (The Movie Database) but I still use both. IMDb has the trivia. TVDB doesn’t have an app. I use Safari web shortcuts for both (and Wikipedia).
tiramichu@sh.itjust.works · 9 pts · 119d
That sounds like a plus to me
cerebralhawks@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 3 pts · 119d
Yes and no. IMDb is ten billion percent better in Safari if you have a competent content blocker. On the Android side, I wouldn't make the shortcut, because I assume it would go through Chrome. I'd just use Firefox and uBlock Origin. But yes, IMDb without the app is better. However, it doesn't save searches (which also might be a plus, but if I keep coming back to what I'm watching, having the history does save time).
If a site is perfectly servicable without an app, I'd recommend people just do that all day long. Apps are not the best thing, but they're convenient to a point. I think people should be aware of what apps can do without their permission vs web content. This varies between iOS and Android too, so you gotta know what you're running and what it can do/what can be done to it by others.
Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 119d
App for a web site is ALWAYS worse. I hate that shit. The only time the app is better is if they purposefully make the mobile site worse so you switch to the app. Facebook was excellent at doing this.
cerebralhawks@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 119d
The problem is — or, at least, from my perspective as an old school/pre-WWW computer user — that a lot of sites aren't made for mobile. If they are, it's great, it's fine, the app might offer a couple bonuses, but you should have a good experience just using a browser. If they aren't — the app is a must.
Forums are a great example of this. When Android and iOS were new, most forums ran like shit in a mobile browser, and if you had a lot to type, you'd often lose it if you didn't remember to copy it to the clipboard first. Even then, with RAM limitations, you could lose your work. An app was created called Tapatalk, it did require forum owners to install a plugin on their end, but it made forums into an app, and it was good — until they got greedy. Tapatalk was a good way to bypass the ads on the forum ("because phone screens are smaller"). Then Tapatalk started putting their own ads in. They were taking money from the forum operators, not giving them any back, and making money on the whole process. Forums stopped installing the plugin, and many that had it began removing it.
Around the same time, forum software makers, like Invision, phpBB, and vBulletin, began including mobile support natively, so if a forum updated their software, they got mobile support. Thus, the Tapatalk gravy train came to a screeching halt. They'd pissed off forum users and forum owners, and now neither of them needed Tapatalk.
These days, I think most sites are made with mobile in mind. But apps can scrape more data without permission, so they tend to be favoured by the people who run the sites, especially concerning Android users, who can natively run Firefox and uBlock Origin. But they also love Android users who love Chrome, and iOS users in total, because they can get more by those users (generally, a majority of them at least).
Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 118d
iOS can now run uBlock Origin! Before that, there was Wipr/wipr 2 which are still excellent, and the Firefox Focus browser which has some stellar adblocking and wipes all browsing data, cookies, cache, everything every time you exit the browser (or click the button to do it.)
Permissions in iOS have historically been more locked down for apps as well, giving users much more control over what apps can access. This changed a couple years back and now Android gives users more control over what apps can access than it used to.
I remember trying to browse forums before iOS/android were a thing and yah, it was a nightmare. Shoot, when iPhones came out, they couldn’t even copy and paste! I had the first Android phone that was released when it came out, the Dream, and it was revolutionary. I stopped using all Google products and services a long while ago, so iOS was pretty fleshed out by the time I got my first iPhone.
Now, full desktop sites work pretty well on mobile devices—I often prefer them to mobile versions of sites. I’m lucky to have really good eyesight though, so I like my text very small and condensed and all over the screen for maximum info without scrolling.
cerebralhawks@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 118d
Yes, uBlock Origin is available for iOS as a Safari plugin. I've used uBO, Wipr2, and Adguard (free, $4-6, and $10 respectively) and Wipr2 is a little better. But I own all of them and I can swap Wipr2 out at any point I like. uBO being free means it's easier to get into for someone new to the platform, though.
Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 118d
Aha, you know what’s up, I ain’t gotta tell you hahaha. I paid the small price for Wipr 2 after loving the first one, and the dev is a really cool person. I don’t use YT much but my one complaint is that it does not tend to block YT ads. Firefox Focus does perfectly, and allows for background play too! I’m interested in adguard to try, but I mostly don’t leave the house and my PiHole lives here for DNS stuff!
debil@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 119d
Yeah, countdown to loginwalling trivia section has begun...
cerebralhawks@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 119d
Or elimination. Never forget what they took from us, the comments/forum section. IIRC they did it because of creepy people posting "age of majority" countdowns and other creepy content on starlets, and they wanted more Hollywood people interacting with the site (IMDb Pro subs). So they removed the noise. The problem is, there are a lot of inaccuracies and duplications in the trivia and related sections. I would peg that for removal instead.
debil@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 119d
Absolutely. And since they didn't lock the section this time kind of hints at the eventual elimination.
workerONE@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 119d
I used to love going to the IMDb forum and reading all of the user posts. There was a troll named Michael flatley that was genius
homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 119d
brucethemoose@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 114d
It’s probably something about protecting against mass scraping, right? Or direct AI click throughs.