The fall of imdb

[Not Afraid]

The only think I have found missing from IMDB is my own name in the credits for Waunderlust. It still is my primary source for film information.

[Kevy Baby]

I will always like IMDb because of my listing.

Apparently (in addition to my later work), I was "Robert - First Schoolboy" in Farenheit 451, despite the fact that I was less than 2 years old when the movie came out.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

I care more about the people (actors, directors, writers) and when I look at IMDb I want to know what they did, no matter if it was for the small or large screen.

Yeah, it's still got a fvckton of info, but it's definitely slipping.

[Alex]

Out of interest, do you have any examples handy where someone's information on Wikipedia was much more complete than on IMDb? I've still never really run into that myself (and frequently on Wikipedia a role will be mentioned but there is not information about that movie/TV show other than it existed).

So I'd definitely be interested to know if I am overlooking something.

[lashbear]

Imdb doesn't even list me as "Strapper #1" in the credits http://imdb.com/title/tt0087007/fullcredits#cast Boo hoo

[Tref]

I fault Imdb for their ratings system, which has been totally abused by the studios, inflating the numbers of even the worst dreck. RottenTomatoes.com is my new favorite when I am adding films to my Netflix. Nevertheless, Imdb still rules for checking the careers of even the most obscure actor or director.

[Gemini Cricket]

I haven't had any problems with imdb.com.
I love it.
And it has nothing to do with my new job at Amazon.
In fact, why don't we all log on to imdb.com right now?

[Gemini Cricket]

Originally Posted by Gemini Cricket

I haven't had any problems with imdb.com.
I love it.
And it has nothing to do with my new job at Amazon.
In fact, why don't we all log on to imdb.com right now?

And, yes, this is an April Fool's joke... iSm.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Originally Posted by Alex

Out of interest, do you have any examples handy where someone's information on Wikipedia was much more complete than on IMDb? I've still never really run into that myself (and frequently on Wikipedia a role will be mentioned but there is not information about that movie/TV show other than it existed).

So I'd definitely be interested to know if I am overlooking something.

Seemed to happen a bunch in the last few months. Here's the one that I just found.
The Venture Bros. on IMDb
The Venture Bros. on wikipedia

The Monarch is a main character in the show, the arch-villan. He's not in every single episode, but most. He is not a credited character in IMDb. And like I said, I wanted to add it but couldnt' because I'm not THAT much of a dork that I know exactly which episodes he was and wasn't in.

[Alex]

You've got a user interface problem there, not a data one. The Monarch is fully credited on IMDb. Here he is in the credits for Episode 3 of season 1.

The problem animated television shows particularly create for IMDb is that frequently one person voices many characters. IMDb (and particularly the Full Cast and Crew page you are usually viewing) is primarily focused on telling you who the REAL people involved with a production is and only secondarily on the actual content of the productions.

So, Christopher McCulloch has voiced literally a couple dozen different characters on that show (on this IMDb page you can see them all), so when you look at the cast list for an entire show it is focused on showing the cast, not the characters. Go to the actor page, or the individual episode pages and you get the detailed information you were looking for.

It isn't at all clear in the UI, but when you see an actor listed and his character is shown as Bob Smith / ... the "/ ..." part indicates that there are other characters not listed on the page. When a character plays just a few roles (such as Eddie Murphy in The Nutty Professor) they all show but they seem to have a cutoff when it is more than a half-dozen or so.

Thus, Harry Shearer, at first glance is just the voice of Ned Flanders on The Simpsons. But go here and see every voice he has provided in 413 episodes.

It is definitely a poor piece of UI design (at minimum the ellipsis should link to the detailed section of the actors page. But it isn't a new element of their design so isn't a sign of any recent decline.