Slashdot Mirror
IMDb Turns 15
An anonymous reader writes "15 years ago today, Col Needham posted some shell scripts to rec.arts.movies which allowed anyone to search lists of actors, actresses, directors, and biographies. From this humble beginning -- which predates Yahoo, Google, and even the web itself -- the IMDb has wrangled the collective wisdom of millions of submitters to become not only a top 100 website but also a standard Hollywood tool for filmmaking. IMDb is celebrating with a retrospective of the last 15 years of IMDb and movies. Congratulations to IMDb and the internet community that built it."
Its easy to see that the IMDB is one of the oldest if not the oldest internet services (I'm not talking about protocols). And it also predates the web. I was wondering if any of you could name other Internet services that predate the web and still exist today. What constitutes a service is probably difficult because things like IMDB made a move from Usenet to Web which are two very different protocols (although they used them simularly).
DISCLAIMER: Again, i'm not talking about protocols like HTTP, Usenet itself, IRC, etc.
I just want to say Thanks! to everyone who has contributed to the the IMDb effort. Indeed, time and time again I have found it to be the ultimate resource when it comes to films. The database is always very complete, the summaries and cast lists accurate, and all in all it is a very helpful website.
Many cheers and pip to them all! May they continue to provide such a useful service for years to come.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
Leaves me with the feeling that bigness + age != niceness.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Without you I wouldn't know that actor's name that was in that one movie that uhh... oh wait I know this one, he starred with umm, shit, what was her name?
As a gift I will unblock all the ads for one day!
crazy dynamite monkey
Cheers!
-Buddy of DoQ
Google groups link: http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.movies/bro wse_frm/thread/47bf560d092d9314/2c3c98e25987bf44?l nk=st&q=group:rec.arts.movies+author:needham&rnum= 2&hl=en#2c3c98e25987bf44
No. It means they've been married 16.
--- Original Message ---
IMDb trivia page for Needham
(Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on 04:12 PM October 17th, 2005 (#13811674)
Spouse
Karen Needham (22 July 1989 - present) 2 children
Does that mean she is only 16?
For more information, click here.
More than just top and bottom 250 movies http://www.imdb.com/Top/
http://www.imdb.com/interfaces
http://us.imdb.com/Licensing/structure.html
http://us.imdb.com/database_statistics
Don't get me wrong, I love IMDb but I can not think of many single sites that can kill as much time as IMDb. Somedays I find myself looking at obscure actors/actresses just to see if I can find them in other films elsewhere, reading bios looking for the brother of the guy at the party in "Sixteen Candles", so one and so forth... The number of hours I spend on IMDb is not a kind number to consider.
People think I watch a lot of films when the truth is that I just read too much IMDb for my own good.
Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
IMDB is just fun to play around with. My friends and I have this challenge to see who has the most entries for acting in the IMDB. Orson Welles was the top guy for about a week. Then Peter North took over. He stayed there for a long time until it occurred to me to look up Mel Blanc. Anybody out there know someone who can beat Blanc (898 entries for acting)? Anybody out there want to guess on tops in other categories (writer, producer, notable TV appearances)? Is there a way to search IMDB for these statistics (of course, that would be cheating)?
The original Usenet post is here, courtesy of Google.
ITS A MOVIE SITE. When the hell were movies NON-BLOODY-COMMERCIAL?!
The site has a huge database, it's very easy and trustworthy to use.... it has some crap. So what? So does every site that needs to make money.
Shut it.
I love IMDB, but I really think they ought to change their name by now. They have info on movies, television, video games, you name it.
I think it is the fact they have a four-letter domain that is the stopper. Finding a short domain name is tough, or in the case of four letters, impossible.
Click here or here.
I don't know about others but I've really come to dislike imdb.
1. The design is terrible. I find it unappealing. (not that this is a necessity, but it would be nice to see a facelift). I think it's the choice of font.
2. The layout is terrible. There are no borders to show logical divisions in the content. It still feels like an online list of data circa 1990.
2. Too many ads, in too obtrusive places
3. A9 box right by the search box. At least use some integration between the two like Wikipedia does with google. Don't try to sucker users into using A9 when clearly this isn't what they want.
4. Required to register to even *look* at the discussions.
5. Trivia and other user contributed stuff is always redundant and filled with grammatical errors.
6. ?
They have info on movies, television, video games, you name it. Something more befitting of a database that has more than just movie information.
Indeed. Just look at Burger King. They lost a lot of ground on McDonalds because everyone thinks they only sell burgers. No fries, no Coca Cola, just burgers. Altho I am shocked at the lack of Scottish dishes at McDonalds. I felt betrayed.
The same thing holds with RadioShack. I thought it was radio only until I found out they also sold TVs and phones. WTF is going on around here?
Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
# Agent information and other data has been moved off of the free IMDb site and onto IMDbPRO, which I refuse to use.
There's little real need for the non-industry to know agent information.
# To insert data into this database, such as photographs of my favourite actors, costs money. This was
supposed to be a free site.
It's absolutely free to use. A site of that size can't live off of goodwill, sunshine, and gumdrops. I'll take a bit of annoyance to have it retain the useful information.
# Flagrant product placement. Virtually every "article" on IMDb's front page is a paid advertisement. Most "articles" are just used to link to Ama$on items.
They are a resource, not a content provider. There are thousands of useful review sites What else do you want? If you really want to complain about sucking the corporate teat, at least bitch about AICN, IMDB makes no pretenses of objectivity.
# IMDb has given nothing back to the community; rather it takes from the community (the poor) and gives to a large e-tailer (the rich).
It provides a huge service to the community. They don't owe *you* specifically a damn thing.
I count 7...
I'll form my OWN solar system! With blackjack! And hookers!
Guess I should be on the lookout for "Legend Of Zorro" to be appearing here soon as well...
Be sure to remember the Programmers Prayer
Here's the mandatory google link:
After a quick search, here is the oldest google groups reference I could find.
It drive me *nuts* that they don't list any information about the music used in the movies.
It's a vital part of every movie, as vital as any of the other info listed, but for some reaon imdb always excludes it.
What gives?
... how The Man with the Smallest Penis in Existence and the Electron Microscope Technician Who Loved Him is not on the Top 250 movies of all time list?
And now, for a sig that's a complete copout.
What? The IMDB was created before Al Gore invented the Internet? *duck*
No sig for now.
AOL still exists
When the hell were movies NON-BLOODY-COMMERCIAL?!
While I have my disagreements with the original post, your rebuttal is lacking.
Movies are shared culture, and despite how the MPAA likes to assert property rights to every dimension of commercial film, movies are more than simply business. The stories they borrow from and the stories they tell are all public knowledge and are not owned by anyone.
So the history article says the site was founded with lists long culled by rec.arts.movies regulars, and that these lists are the "backbone" of the site to this day. Did any of these people ever get paid, particularly when Amazon.com acquired the site?
http://web.archive.org/web/19970122085113/http://i mdb.com/ (couldn't use HTML link for it, so copy and paste that (no spaces)).
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
I love IMDB, but I really think they ought to change their name by now.
Or drop the "I'm" and just be "Debbie".
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
If by "wrangled" you mean "took contributions that users gave to the community for free, and used them to make money" then yes. Wrangled. Our friends at GraceCDDBNote are great wranglers too.
If it helps, there is also AllMovie which is pretty decent. It's not a bad alternative, I suppose, but it's not nearly as complete as imdb. I still use imdb, but at least if you're going to list 15 bitches about imdb (which, for the record, you only list 7), might as well list an alternative.
As a sidenote, AllMusic is bad fucking ass. Completely OT, but I thought I'd mention it as a sidenote for any readers who've never been there.
I don't agree with your points as I am a bit liberal on such huge sites and I better clear something since I am directly connected to some actor who is listed on IMDB site.
o
You can't post headshot of him/her even if you pay for it. It has to be done with his/her agency or the person him/herself.
There is always copyright involved in movie business, its one of the reasons. Photo is not a feature for fans, its for artist/agency.
quoting from imdb
http://www.imdb.com/help/show_leaf?photossubmitwh
Who is allowed to submit photos?
First and foremost, FANS ARE NOT ALLOWED TO SUBMIT PHOTOS.
For People: You may submit a photo for yourself or an authorized representative may submit a photo on your behalf. Examples of authorized representatives include your agent, your publicist, your parent, or even a friend you asked to help you because you're no good with computers, just so long as they have your express permission. If you're submitting a photo for a person who is deceased, you must be that person's heir or have permission from their heir(s).
...and so does most of the people on IMDb forums
..a community project which evolved into a company just bringing money to a very small percentage of people involved in the original project. How sad.
Movies are shared culture, and despite how the MPAA likes to assert property rights to every dimension of commercial film, movies are more than simply business. The stories they borrow from and the stories they tell are all public knowledge and are not owned by anyone.
Er... how very... communist(?) of you.
The fact of the matter is movies have been a business since they were invented. This is not like the music industry, where music existed prior to the music industry - movies did not exist prior to the movie industry. Movies were an industry ever since Thomas Edison invented the kinetograph, which he developed specifically looking for new ways to make money. Movies themselves have been copyrighted for as long as it occured to anyone to do so. That includes the stories, which sure as hell are owned by those that write them, at least until they sell those stories to a studio or producer (at which point they are then owned by the studio or producer). Movie plots don't write themselves, despite the wishes of most Hollywood producers.
Sure, movies are a part of our culture, but just because something's a part of our culture doesn't mean it's not also copyrighted (and copyrightable) as well as a commercial enterprise.
Since IMDb is more for reference, I personally prefer rottentomatoes.com for my "scoop" on movies.
I also like boxofficemojo.com to track a particular movie's progress at the box office.
I think the only thing that I use IMDb for is to look what movies a particular actor starred in and vice versa.
Even prior to Col's nifty script (which quite certainly was the beginning of the searchable IMDB), there was this innocent little posting with "THE LIST" as its subject. I don't recall the original author.
:-)
The body of the article was a rather short (5 - 10, IIRC) list of actresses. This list was better known as "the list of actresses we wish we could boink".
We guy-nerds (and maybe some properly-inclined gal-nerds) added to THE LIST for a few weeks until some decided that our salaciousness required male targets as well. Eventually, the lists, umm, grew and the "want to boink" aspect somewhat, umm, fell off.
So, before it went legit, the forerunner of IMDB was completely founded on fantasizing about sex.
Internet Media DataBase?
Modern copyright is theft of culture from everyone and it retards the progress of the useful arts and sciences.
Reasons why IMDB is great:
1. Ranking system provides great amusement and opportunity for arguments as great but controversial films are low rated whilst fanboy-fueled crap rises to the top.
2. Ill-informed, narrow-minded comments let you feel superior.
3. Quotes section has endless repeats in case you forget half way down the page.
4. Quotes full of mistakes to test your knowledge.
5. Several films or programmes all with exactly the same name with no way of telling which one is which, this makes using the site more exciting.
6. Reviews by shills, all exactly the same with the names changed. This saves time as you don't have to read more than one type of comment.
7. Forum which you have to pay to access, just to find out it's rubbish. This teaches you to be more careful with your money.
For all these reasons, IMDB is a fantastic site. Here's to another 15 years!
The Oracle of Kevin Bacon
I don't know how long I spent looking for an actor with a Bacon number of 5, but I finally found one. Now if I could only remember his name!
-- Give us your technology and we'll give you all the cow lips you want.
The ratings are somewhat helpful. I find that the audience is a bit too young and haven't seen enough films not made by Spielberg and Lucas, but you take that into account. And there's always been the film studies poseurs, the 13 year-olds, the fanboys etc that you have to filter out when reading reviews but that has always been part of the fun. Marketing shills are becoming too numerous and tedious though.
Still it's very useful for settling arguments and figuring out where you've seen that babe/hunk before. Also it can be cathartic to post a rant about how badly you just wasted your last 10 bucks...
Sure, movies are a part of our culture, but just because something's a part of our culture doesn't mean it's not also copyrighted (and copyrightable) as well as a commercial enterprise.
How does your statement conflict, rebut or otherwise disagree with my point that, "movies are more than simply business"?
Really, what is the point of your entire post?
Do you like jousting at windmills and strawmen or something?
Didn't Al Gore create this?
Perhaps they could change it to "The Internet Media Database." It would be a little more indicative of what they do, but wouldn't require a domain change.
I happen to find IMDb to be too commercial for me... Too many ads, too much "Buy this at Amazon" buttons, it really becomes a chore to find information on IMDb these days. Recently, a couple alternatives seemed to have popped up, one of which being a wiki by the name of MovieWiki. It still seems to be in the works, but with more help, it could be an awesome replacement for IMDb. (Disclaimer: I work there)
1. Ranking system provides great amusement and opportunity for arguments as great but controversial films are low rated whilst fanboy-fueled crap rises to the top.
2. Ill-informed, narrow-minded comments let you feel superior.
3. Quotes section has endless repeats in case you forget half way down the page.
4. Quotes full of mistakes to test your knowledge.
5. Several films or programmes all with exactly the same name with no way of telling which one is which, this makes using the site more exciting.
6. Reviews by shills, all exactly the same with the names changed. This saves time as you don't have to read more than one type of comment.
7. Forum which you have to pay to access, just to find out it's rubbish. This teaches you to be more careful with your money.
Are you talking about IMDB or Slashdot?
I use IMDB but I'm not a big fan. I have over 300 films under my belt and yet I have maybe a dozen listings. They demand verification of credits so I gave up on them years ago. They had two glaring errors in my listing so I contacted them both times and both times they refused to correct the mistakes until I threatened legal action. I nearly lost a job because a Producer believed the credits on IMDB were accurate and questioned my resume. I was forced to verify some of my biggest credits before he'd accept the bulk of my resume. Most put too much faith in IMDB which makes it dangerous to the working people in the industry. A friend has an academy award and to this day they refuse to acknowledge it in his bio. It's a handy but over used service given how wildly inaccurate the information can be in the listings and they aren't inclined to correct errors.
It's a binary 15....
Nothing? Nothing at all? Not even a free ad-supported site that gives you information on every movie you've ever heard of, and a hundred times more that you've never heard of? I use it all the time, and have never given them anything, except a bit of information here or there over the years.
I've always thought of IMDB as precisely the kind of information resource the web was made for. Each of hundreds of thousands of contributors spends a small amount of time entering what they know, and everyone gets the benefit of all that information, 24x7, for free. What do you expect from them?
My fear was always that they'd take the information away by making it a subscription site, but they haven't done that. They may be Amazon (whom I don't like either), but give them a break already. Would you have sold for $20 mil?
I'll also throw out a couple of sites our research lab runs. MovieLens is a long-running personalized movie recommender that has a reasonably active, large userbase and that has generated a lot of research in collaborative filtering and HCI. More specific to the movies-and-wiki theme, we've got a fairly new site WikiLens that combines community addition of content (based on PhpWiki) with ratings and recommendations. Neither is a replacement for IMDb but many people have found MovieLens to be darn useful and we're hoping WikiLens will take off as well.