MovieChat Forums > General Discussion > OMG, they're gone!

OMG, they're gone!


The boards on IMDB... there's nothing anymore, i just looked...
Wow! I just feel weird, like i just lost a very good friend.

reply

I think use of the word 'customer' may be a tipoff in more ways than one. IMDb has stressed the fact repeatedly that the boards don't pull in revenue (at least not enough by their standards). Best guess is that one of the 'new features' that little sermonette mentions will be the institution of paid messaging boards, a la IMDbPro.

Pro wasn't intelligently marketed when they debuted it several years back--they tried pretty much ramming it down regular users throats, and weren't offering any particular attractions over and above the fact that it was a sight designed 'for professionals in the business'. They weren't even guaranteeing troll-free, moderated boards for what was--and still is--a pretty exorbitant fee. In other words, unless you needed the site for industry contacts, there was little practical reason for Joe Average User to fork out $100+ per year to post some messages on chat forums.

They've learned from that failed business model, and will now switch over to a money-generating forum site, with, hopefully, better moderation and likely fewer boards. The problem they'll face is that they've lost customer trust through this move of imploding the existing forums; and if enough alternative talk sites take off successfully, there's a good chance IMDb will never win back the level of usage on any forums they may offer, no matter what benefits they throw in.

reply

I agree, Amy. It's going to be difficult for the IMDB to get its mojo back. Once they had it, but they let it go. There are a lot of p!ssed off people out there. I'm more forgiving than most but their total destruction of the message boards was a slap in the face.

If they'd announced it sooner, or actually had a kind of town meeting or open forum on the message boards issue, such as it could be called, they might have worked out an arrangement, something like this site but more complete, spun off from the "old IMDB", with mods, probably a monthly or yearly fee, with some links to the "parent" site. They were so frickin' draconian. It's like they dropped an H bomb on the members.

reply

I was on the board when they poofed.
My personal messages went away.
Then the movies. I had just watched Victor Frankenstein so I was browsing that board. I went to rate the thing & the board vanished that fast

reply

Not sure yet if I'm deleting my account because I want to see if I can cause some kind of headache there still for them. I did go through the hundreds of films I rated and changed every rating to "2". lol Not sure if it means anything but I just wanted to skew the ratings for the films because I'm sure in some way film ratings are important to IMDb and who makes the films.

I rated them all a "2" because I heard at one time (although it's unconfirmed) that IMDb gets rid of all the "10" and "1" votes so fanboys and haters are taken out of the ratings equation.

reply

I know it's a sad day for everyone even me i haven't been on the boards for long but i have been a number of Imdb for 9 plus years.

reply

Ditto, Cookie.L.A. Exactly!

reply

Tel, good to see you here (wave emoticon, lol). I'm not terribly surprised to see this move, in a way I'm somewhat more surprised it didn't happen sooner. Col Needham showed no interest at any point in working with the users to try and improve the forums, or to save them. He's an odd duck, to say the least, and his attitude toward his creation has always been ambiguous; certainly after selling it to Amazon it became clear that he had no intention of working for the users behalf. IMDb 'staff' was clearly more about the 'cool kids' getting to be in on the fringes of the red-carpet scene, and certainly the passion for educating their user base about film had died some time ago. That they finally decided to become totally bald-faced about their bottom-line motives for operating the site should really shock no one, I guess--but it's saddening nonetheless.

reply

Yes, and unfortunately what you said is true for most entertainment sites and TV channels and sub-stations. There's scarcely anything black and white left on even the (till recently) avant garde digital channels. Most of their movies and TV shows are post-1980 and '90. Sadly, it's not just the IMDB.

On the other hand, I haven't seen our Canadian friend around on any boards lately...

reply

Waiting to see if she puts her head up someplace--most likely that V2 board, or whatever it's called (I keep meaning to sign up there, haven't got around to it yet).

So agreed on the sorry state of B&W--films fare a little better, but television is virtually off the table. I was just mentioning to a friend last night, when have you last seen a rebroadcast of the original B&W 'Dragnet'? Hardly a classic, but since the color reboot turns up with some frequency on those retro channels, you'd think the earlier version would be a natch to be shown as well. But no dice. One of the few places I've seen some more obscure B&W television series turn up is that Sony 'GetTV' channel, but even they seem to be phasing a lot of that content out. It's frustrating, and the more so because many of these shows are getting more and more difficult to come by even on DVD.

On the other hand, I admit I'm enough of an old timer to be completely gobsmacked when coming up against a generation that thinks shows produced in the 90's are already ancient artifacts. Time, thou art not friendly to those with long memories...

reply

I've learning to live with the death/dearth of black and white on broadcast television, Amy. It's not easy. but is there a choice? I've noticed an uptick in black and white films lately on a couple of channels, but not much more. Aside from Me, This and the wretched Decades channel I don't think there are any black and white old TV shows out there anymore.

reply

It's one reason I somewhat like the Sony-owned GetTv channel--they do run a fair number of B&W's (for now anyway) that are rarely seen anywhere else. But as I noted, even they seem to be scaling back on that. I think it's an unfortunate given that we'll see less and less of this programming as even these 'retro' subchannels skew to attracting a younger market.

I've heard a lot of complaint about the Decades channel, which I don't get. In my area This shares frequency space with some other sub in the daytime, so instead of anything remotely classic, we get Steve Wilkos and Jerry Springer. When This finally signs on in the evening, it's mostly films, almost no television shows. ME seems to run the same endless spate of Hogan's Heroes, Gilligan's Island and the like. AntennaTV does at least give a lot of their airtime to genuinely classic comedies, but they're mostly the Seventies color ones. Their B&W roster isn't much more imaginative than ME's.

reply

The thing about the so-called retro sub-channels is that they're not retro, Amy. They use words like classic to describe shows like Wonder Woman and The A-Team. It's pathetic. My sense is that there's much less affection for the later post-black and white shows than the older, earlier ones, but that's me.

For me the golden age of television is 1955-66, sort of, again, IMO, what the 1930-50 are to movies those eleven years are to television. I have a lot of (mostly on-line) friends who agree with this assessment but there apparently aren't enough of us to make those old shows tick in terms of ratings. What difference does it make what action series they show? Seventies or Eighties. Does it matter?

A certain sameness crept into television in the Seventies and even more so later on. The earlier classic shows were different. Peter Gunn was a very different kettle of fish from Hawaiian Eye and neither much resembled Richard Diamond. Westerns were different, too, with the tone of The Rifleman not at all like Bonanza's and with both unlike Have Gun Will Travel. Yet even the Norman Lear comedies, all the rage in the Seventies, seem to blur into one another after time, All In The Family excepted.

reply

I can agree with you totally on the misnomer of 'classic' as applied to a lot of the content of these channels. A good many of the shows, such as the ones you mentioned specifically (A-Team, WW) appear to be the ones that are being re-marketed to young audiences as tie-ins to movie remakes (usually horrendous) of these series. In essence, they're a bountiful supply of cheap commercial for the latest Hollywood 'product', and of course Hollywood feeds endlessly on itself; in this re-boot crazy culture these channels are often not much more than a hall of mirrors. I suppose I tend to less mention the really golden era precisely because it's just not there anymore, for the most part. You make a very good point about the variety of style to be found in the popular 'genre' categories--private eye, western...'Coronet Blue', one of the few titles I've seen turn up from that particular period is indeed quite different from Hawaiian Eye, and the point is valid that many of these types of series tended to dissolve into the action shoot-out mold that became standard issue by the Seventies, though there were a few notable exceptions.

When I mention color comedies, I tend to to refer to the ones that were mold-breakers for that era--All in the Family, MASH, Mary Tyler Moore, Barney Miller. They are classic in the fact that they set a new standard for their particular genre, and even today still stand out as sui generis among television comedies. God knows, many of these subchannels run far more homogenized dreck than not--Antenna runs the truly godawful Small Wonder on weekends, and has the gall to refer to it as classic comedy, and that's just one example. Much of the product that gets aired on these channels seems to fall under the category of tickling the baby boomer's sense of "gosh, I haven't seen that in ages" nerve, rather than any intrinsic merit of content.

I'd have to conclude that you're more than a little correct about the lack of programmer enthusiasm for TV shows from the era you mention--unless they're pieces of indelible pop culture such as The Twilight Zone they tend to fall into the deep wastebasket of shows that are deemed as having no longer any sort of interest or relevance to the coveted 18 to 40 year old demographic, and languish away unseen. I don't know what can be done about this, apart from making the shows more available on home media, and of course the same trap applies--they're deemed as having little market, so they don't get put to disc, tape or whatever the current popular media format is. Like pre-sound film, the television content of that era would appear to have a certain niche market, but unlike silent film, golden era television lacks the cultural and critical clout to get it revived in ways that might create appeal to a current audience.

reply

Thanks, Amy. It's great to have someone to talk to (so to speak) on this site. I've seen a few familiar names here but not a whole lot of action. The boards here are imperfect but it's what we've got. It's like the Titanic sank and we got rescued, not on the Queen Mary but a mid-sized vessel, not elegant but good enough, and that's the way it (frickin') is. The guys running this ship are performing a miracle.

Those classic TV shows were featured on MeTV a few years back. Did you catch any of it? They had a great Sunday Night Noir but were good every night of the week: if it wasn't The Untouchables it was Peter Gunn, if not Gunn then The Fugitive. Also, the Hitchcock hour and Thriller. It was grand viewing and I loved it, then they started to scale back and I began to get that sinking feeling.

I think they did the best they could under the circumstances. There must have been a lot of posts on their site and on Facebook crying out for classic black and white shows, so they gave it a shot. That's my take. And a great shot it was. If the audience was out there,--and a lot of us were--they'd have kept it up. I don't think it was a conspiracy that did the black and white shows (and movies) in. It was low or at best fair to middlin' ratings. Broadcast TV is a business, and they play, of necessity, to a wide audience. They're not running an art gallery. I know business. Life is like that.

What makes me feel worse about the decline of classic films and TV on broadcast TV is that young people are spurning that stuff for almost exclusively new, super-duper, up to date stuff, complete with CGI and all the trimmings. They do NOT like the "stately", to a Millennial the sloth-like pace of old shows and movies. It's all about instant gratification and short attention spans. I read somewhere on the Web last week that even sporting events,--a freakin' multi-billion dollars business--are going to have to be shortened, sped up and altered to suit the "low tolerance for boredom" of younger fans. For real. This is the future. Sometimes one has to be thankful for what one's got and leave it at that.

Over & Out.


reply

Tel, I like your boat analogy--the Titanic meme got a workout in the last days of The Forum That Shall Not Be Mentioned By Name, and that's the perfect follow-through. Not luxurious quarters, but a decent berth and that'll suffice for now. A high-five, shout-out, show of love should go to the creators of this site. In the short time allowed, they did indeed perform a little herculean miracle--I tried to promote them around on some of my favorites boards during the final week before the shutdown; I'm hoping more survivors are out there waiting to be seen above the water line as the days and weeks pass.

I recall the initial Me format with real love, Tel. They tried, in fact, to replicate the programming schedule of the CBS 'golden age' comedy years, running MTM, MASH, Rhoda and a number of other shows in a 'block' format that was great fun. The Noir night was fantastic: I'd often sit up way past bedtime to catch all the shows (arriving bleary-eyed at work Monday morning, lol). I was so pleased that it seemed a channel which was really going to live up to its pledge to bring back the best of the past had finally arrived. Then came the--alas, probably inevitable--scaling back, and the introduction of 'stunt' programming to appeal to a younger crowd--Brady Bunch marathons, endless replays of Gilligan's Island, the emphasis being placed on what the hipsters and millenials found amusing. The audience who wanted the cream couldn't compete with the need to draw the younger crowd; as you say, it wasn't the vast lowbrow conspiracy, it was simply the usual numbers game that did in Me's initial format. And no, sadly they're not running an art gallery, and the days of the cable 'boutique' channels who could afford to do just that got plowed under in a similar way in an avalanche of cheap-to-produce reality shows that drew in the inevitably larger crowd of mouth-breathers like a magnet, shoving out everything else in the wake of the dollar bonanza these shows proved to be for their parent networks. Business...it's life alright, but it still tarnishes everything it touches.

And yes--the bad news becomes worse with the fact that you'll always draw the kiddies with the latest, shiniest set of bells and whistles, because that's the nature of children--short attention spans and a craving for novelty. The horrible part of this reality is that it's now surrounded by a cultural reality that takes low boredom threshold in its stride, and no longer tries to provide the young with the critical and cultural tools to supersede those cravings and find worth in the older, slower models. Much as I think entities such as The Children's Television Workshop, in their heyday, did to improve the vast wasteland of kid's programming back in the day, I can agree with the conservative argument that shows such as Sesame Street and The Electric Company created their own set of problems in helping to spawn a generation of minds that required jumped-up, hyperactive presentation as a must and left little room or inclination for slower and more thoughtful presentations. Eventually we'll reach a point where even the traditional 60-second commercial will become too lengthy for the average viewer to tolerate, and where we'll be when that happens God alone knows.

reply

I was really p!ssed off that they had the temerity to give only two weeks' notice, but to *then* destroy the boards earlier than they'd said, was the very.last.straw. I went back late afternoon to copy info from several PMs that I needed, and everything was GONE.

I just signed up here, after having looking at all of the alternatives I'm aware of. I like this place best. Probably will also sign up for TMDb, and PreviouslyTV, and thus far have only seen a few people whose names I recognize (either here or the other two sites), which makes me very sad. I feel a real loss for not having any way to communicate with the many virtual friends I've met and discussed things with over the years on the IMDb boards, and can only hope they make their way here, as I did.

Many thanks to Jim for taking on the daunting task of creating this site, including the previously existing threads from a good number of the top IMDb boards (film and TV), which has made me feel more at home and I'm sure I'm not alone on that. MUCH better than starting with blank slates on the forums.

I'm with many others who will avoid IMDb, and Amazon. You don't just destroy a significant long-time community this way without a backlash.

reply

I belong to all 3 forums, and so far they're the 3 best that I have come across. I tried the IMDB 2.0 and the Got forum, and occasionally monitor them, but they're not really to my liking. I like this board the best because of its nice, simple, platform, and because Admin managed to archive most of the threads from my favorite board at IMDB. Unfortunately, it didn't seem to be enough to keep the board alive, since most of the people never showed up here for whatever reason, despite my pushing this site pretty heavily in the waning days of IMDB.

So far I've only ran into 3 members here that I remember from IMDB, and 2 over at Previously TV. We're all scattered about now, and sadly, it's quite possible that those contacts are lost for good.

The site below Catbookss is another one that looks like it might be okay.

https://onemovieavenue.com/

reply

Thanks, Wanton. I haven't heard of OneMovieAvenue before, and will take a look. Funny how many have used the word "movie" when TV shows have become more or at least as important as movies these days.

I too took a look at IMDB 2.0 and the GoT forums, and didn't find either to be a good fit for me. Yes, I like the simple platform, and the replication of the IMDb forums. I never really cared about the general boards -- only those to do with individual TV shows or films, but acknowledge that many others frequented those boards and they are, therefore, important to them.

It's the same for me; thus far I've only recognized 2-3 people from the IMDb boards by their new screen names. I've used my old IMDb name, as I said I would when posting my goodbyes. I don't know how many I've known have registered under different names, so I'd have no way to recognize them, which to me is a shame, but is their choice. I hate this scattering to the winds of a community.

I too like this simple format -- even more so now that there is nesting of posts. It's clean, simple, and elegant.

I only learned about this site at the very end of the demise of the IMDb boards. I'm thankful to the one or two people who PMed me with this URL. Wish I'd had time to thank them personally, but IMDb/Amazon didn't allow it.

reply

My pleasure Catbookss. I kept the same name as well for recognition purposes. If we get the signature option at some point, then this will enable the user to enter their previously known identity if they so wish.

Just a heads up. Previously TV only covers tv shows, not movies, but I like the forums. They don't have a board for every show, but are adding them weekly. One thing I like about this site and The Movie DB is that the show page is already there, you just have to start a thread.

I never posted in the general boards at IMDB. I do so here, because at the moment, it's where all the activity is. Yes, it's pretty awful the way that IMDB/Amazon gave us such short notice before throwing us all under the bus 😨

reply

I just took a look at OneMovieAvenue. Do they have forums, Wanton? If so, where?

Yes, I knew PreviouslyTV is only about TV. I'd prefer a site about both, but having read the forums there for a few of my favorite shows, found the posters there appealing. I like that the show pages are already here too. One drawback to PreviouslyTV is you can't just start threads. Have to wait for a mod to create one and can only post in the mod-created threads. Very glad that's not the case here, or at TMDb.

I'm doing the same thing, coming to this general board primarily, and starting out with a post or two or three on my favorite show boards. It is active on this board! Between suggestions and so many of us still feeling a need to vent and mourn our loss.

reply

Good to know about not being able to create your own threads over at Previously TV Catbookss, I did not know that, so thanks for the heads up.

“I just took a look at OneMovieAvenue. Do they have forums, Wanton? If so, where?”

Here's what I did Catbookss. I typed the name of my most active forum, “little house on the Prairie”. When it came up, I was given 4 selections, and I selected the one on the far right. When I scrolled down, I saw a list of threads. I then clicked on “see all threads”. I've included the link below. Here's the funny part. All of the threads look as if they were archived from another site, but that site wasn't IMDB. I say this because if you notice, the threads all have the same date of February 17th. I have not tried any others Catbookss, so I can't speak for any of the other forums.

I did notice something that was interesting while there? At the bottom page of this site, it has a logo in bold letters that says: “Powered by The Movie DB”.

https://onemovieavenue.com/Little-House-on-the-Prairie/1/385812/threads


reply

Oh for Pete's sake, for some reason I can't type into their search box. Probably a problem with my browser.

Thanks for the breadcrumb trail to their discussions! Interesting that their threads look to be archived from yet another site. I wonder which one.

I noticed the "powered by TMDb" thingy on the bottom of the page :)

reply

There doesn't appear to be too much going on over at The One Movie Avenue site Catbookss, best that I can tell in my limited searches. Previously TV is probably the most active of all that I have found, but not overly so. The Movie DB is a good site, but pretty much a cyber-ghost town outside of the general discussions area. It looks like we'll have to start all over and build up our online communities once again.

This site and Previously TV will probably be my main haunts, with random visits to The Movie DB.

reply

"This site and Previously TV will probably be my main haunts, with random visits to The Movie DB."

Same for me, Wanton. Really wish I'd heard about MovieChat sooner, and could have told the people on my favorite boards about it before the whole ship sank into oblivion. Oh well.

reply

Have you seen the site in the link below Catbookss? I just saw it yesterday for the first time when someone here posted it in a different thread. It appears that the Admin got every single thread, or darn near it from the old boards up until 2 weeks prior to the closing. Somewhat tricky to navigate, so just type your show in the search box.

I think it's a good link to have if for no other reason than to be able to read through the old archives. Not much activity though, and MovieChat will still remain my main go to site.

http://imdbarchive.com/

reply

Wow, this site looks exactly like That site that won't be mentioned. What was the owner thinking, why didn't he advertise it some more? Whoever did this, nice job.

reply

Yes, I was pretty amazed Apis. I think the person that posted the link said it just launched the other day. Good effort, but even less marketing than the other replacement sites, which is why it's a ghost town. Still, I'm happy to read through my thousands of posts that I never thought that I would ever see again 😀

reply

-

reply

True 9. I have to wonder how all of this would have went down had we been given more notice. Still, I am glad that I'm able to read through my favorite threads. I had been a member at the original site since 2008 and had quite a few posts under my belt over the years.

I have now what I consider to be 4 good choices, so that makes it a little less convenient to keep up with everything as before.

reply

-

reply

"I hope with more time that passes all these sites will be a le to build up a rich trove of valuable posts."

Me too. Sadly, my primary board, the little house on the prairie board, is deader than Disco.

reply

I suggest starting a thread and letting it show up on the trending section to let others see that there is someone there. Our own contributions are going to make the biggest impact in regards to traffic right now.

We should take that quote, "be the change you want to see in the world," and make it, "be the activity you want to see on the boards," lol!

I hope your board picks up again! Still such a shame IMDb has left us in this spot, but I doubt they wanted to even allow us the proper time to collect and get something else going...they knew what they were doing by only letting us know a few weeks in advance. Ugh.

reply

Thanks DreamersxDisease . I've been doing my part to try and pump some life into the old board, and to a point it's working. I dropped the link to this site like crazy over at IMDB in its waning days. But you could tell that no one was even reading my posts when someone would respond shortly afterwards with a comment to the effect of “Any parting advice before saying goodbye”? Sigh ☹️


reply

Yeah...it was frustrating. I did see a lot of people linking this site or TMDB, but everyone was so upset or preoccupied with the boards closing that I don't know how many people seriously looked into them...I admit to being weary about them myself, at first.

I think, as long as we have posters like you and a handful of others (9 included) who are putting in a real effort, we'll be in a pretty good spot though!

reply

Thanks for the kind words DreamersxDisease 3.

I was more of a lurker back at IMDB, but did put in probably hundreds of posts over the years.

reply

Hey Dreamers, where is the trending section? I thought I'd seen it somewhere, but looked again yesterday and concluded I must have only seen one on TMDb instead of here.

I don't want to be paranoid, but I'm thinking IMDb may have given such short notice for exactly that reason.

reply

I mean the trending bar that is right when you come onto the site showing you where the latest posts have been made.

And I agree with IMDb and its timing. I believe it was both just a disregard for us as well as purposeful in the hopes we couldn't really gather ourselves and move as effectively elsewhere.

reply

Sheesh, I never even noticed that's what that was, even though it clearly says Trending! I must have assumed it was about trending shows/films, not message boards :)

I'll be making good use of it now. Thanks!

Petty of IMDb. They didn't want us, but didn't want us to be able to organize and gather somewhere else?

reply

I think the trending bar has been very good for this site and probably has increased activity. Seeing that boards are alive & getting traffic, hopefully will motivate more people to get involved!

And yes, IMDb wanted to get rid of their cake and have no one else eat it too...if you will :P

reply

Hopefully it's just me who didn't know what that bar was, but in case not, if it said "Trending Boards [or Forums]" that would help.

I wholeheartedly agree that seeing boards here are active is very important. It's what turned me off about TMDb (plus I found the interface over there to be too busy). I went to my favorite shows' boards, and there was nothing there. At least here, if you can't think of a new topic, there are the archived threads to post on.

reply

There were a couple threads about it when it was new (jim makes his own thread for every major update it seems), so I hope people got the memo then! And now, because it is quite helpful.

I was on TMBD, but couldn't get into it, and the activity there was just as dead...though I'd say maybe even more than here now.

reply

lol still mourning imdb boards full of trolls?

reply

-

reply

Hey Wanton, no, I haven't! Thanks so much for posting it. I'm going to bookmark it in a second.

reply

Still mourning?

reply

If IMDb was so good why did you hate its moderation ?

reply