Reduce the minimum size for IMDb user reviews

Hi teachersuw - We have updated the minimum length for reviews to 600 characters to ensure the most value to our users. For more information on what to include and what not to include, please review our Help page. Cheers!

1. I'm at nearly half "Your Review" box & still need another 150 characters (assuming a space is not a character). 2. Why add time wasting as a desirable trait both for the writer & for the reader? 3. You are forcing reviews to approach the "spoiler" stage. 4. Why reward prolonged, excessive wordiness when succinctness of thought is the desired trait. (We're not 19th century Russian writers with nothing else to do with our lives. Outside of Vodka, of course.) 5. Most importantly many movies are simply not worth the words (i.e. time). 6. More is the desired goal? Sounds a lot like American consumerism. You're not a true American contributor unless you buy more & bigger. A true indicator of value is more? 7. To sum up (Am I at 600 yet?) I'm very disappointed. Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation originally titled Minimum Number of Characters for a Review

Hi, Michelle. Thanks for the response. But that many characters to not define quality. There are dozens of big reviews that tell me so little about what really matters on the movie having lots of personal experiences or writing the film's plot, which is not the idea of a review. And short ones that tell me just what I need to know to build an opinion and watch the movie. I personally find long reviews so boring and a shame to be making people write them.

@Michelle​ Hi, Michelle. Thanks for the response. But that many characters to not define quality. There are dozens of big reviews that tell me so little about what really matters on the movie having lots of personal experiences or writing the film's plot, which is not the idea of a review. And short ones that tell me just what I need to know to build an opinion and watch the movie. I personally find long reviews so boring and a shame to be making people write them.

Hello there @teachersuw, My name is Vic from IMDb Support, thanks for your feedback. We've changed the minimum character limit for user reviews to raise the quality bar for reviews we get from customers. The intention is to make user reviews as helpful as possible for all our customers. Reviews which are padded with junk text will be discarded. Our detailed guidance is available here: https://help.imdb.com/article/contribution/contribution-information/user-review-guidelines/GABTWSNLDNFLPRRH Thanks for your support.

Interestingly, ballpark, half the movies produced themselves do not even contain the 600 character equivalent number of words that most of us would define as intelligent or worthy of remembering.

@Michelle​ Interestingly, ballpark, half the movies produced themselves do not even contain the 600 character equivalent number of words that most of us would define as intelligent or worthy of remembering.

@snoots​ Interestingly, ballpark, half the movies produced themselves do not even contain the 600 character equivalent number of words that most of us would define as intelligent or worthy of remembering.

After over 330 reviews, on 27-Aug-2022, I stopped contributing my reviews to iMDb because you have now imposed a 600-character minimum on reviews. FYI, the intention of my reviews were for family, friends, and the general iMDb community to be able to quickly read my review, and if they relate to it (especially after seeing my taste from other reviews), make a decision on viewing content. As such, up until now, my reviews have averaged only 36 words per review (or 209 characters per review) and average about a 50% helpful rate from over 6,000 user critiques. Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation originally titled Disappointed that you no longer accept concise reviews like mine :-(

@Michelle​ @Vic Imdb support staff Why are yall deleting people's responses to this post? I've noticed that my comments and other users have been deleted, and my account blocked. Your response is disappointing. These actions and the decision to change the character minimum makes it seem as though you are trying to silence users. If people disagree, you delete and block them from commenting? Please address the people who have taken the time out to voice their concerns with no less than 600 characters. Give us a qualitative response.

Well, @Vic, I am not sure exactly which types of unhelpful reviews you are attempting to weed out with this new requirement, but for the 50% of people that found my concise reviews to be helpful, you will not hear from me any longer :-(​

Users comments on this post are being deleted! Users are also being blocked from the community! Comments that werent offesive. That were considerately written. Why?

@Michelle​ 😀 Add the Date here when changed to 600 characters ?? https://help.imdb.com/article/contribution/contribution-information/user-review-guidelines/GABTWSNLDNFLPRRH# User review guidelines The minimum length for reviews is 600 characters to ensure the most value to our users. Reviews which are padded with junk text will be discarded. - - - Marco Sat, Jan 27, 2018 Make sure reviews are reviews again (minimum of 50 words instead of 50 characters) https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/data-issues-policy-discussions/make-sure-reviews-are-reviews-again-minimum-of-50-words-instead-of-50-characters/5f4a7b3e8815453dbacfe95a Current situation: Recently, IMDb has decided that a user review should at least have 50 characters.... Reviewers: Quality and Quantity. https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/data-issues-policy-discussions/make-sure-reviews-are-reviews-again-minimum-of-50-words-instead-of-50-characters/5f4a7b3e8815453dbacfe95a?commentId=5f4a7cb48815453dba1004b8. .

Shakespeare: "Brevity is the soul of wit." Orwell: "If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out." Nietzsche: "It is my ambition to say in ten sentences what others say in a whole book.” Potter: "The shorter and the plainer the better." Twain: “A successful book is not made of what is in it, but what is left out of it.” Kerouac: “One day I will find the right words, and they will be simple.” T. Jefferson: “The most valuable of all talents is that of never using two words when one will do.” Hemingway: “My aim is to put down on paper what I see and what I feel in the best and simplest way.” The Elements of Style: “When a sentence is made stronger, it usually becomes shorter. Thus, brevity is a by-product of vigor.” Thoreau: “Our life is frittered away by detail. Simplify, simplify.”

I was wondering why I want to make a review, it h as to be about 600 characters or more. Yet I see other reviews from others that are barely 100. Is there something I am doing wrong? I would like not to have to make 600 character reviews due to the fact some times there isn't that much review to post. Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation originally titled User Review

I am not a certified review artist. I just made a review out of 400 characters and you now need 600 characters. I understand the point but the people coming here and reviewing a movie or series are not professionals. It defeats the purpose. It just took all the fun out of it. Every review needs to be approved. What’s the point in making it more difficult? Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation originally titled The 600 characters reviews why?

@Valentinasf​ probably because the comments made valid points. There was nothing offensive, no bad language, it was just opinions that opposed their decision. My old account was blocked and all my comments erased.

@Michelle​ Then what's the point of those "Helpful" thumbs up buttons below the comments?

Come on guys, 150 is enough for an objective and consistent review. Is there any employee or moderator that could come down to discuss with us like adults instead of deleting comments and blocking people from the community without any explanation not even an email to notify why?? As we can see so far it's clearly unanimity among users that this new rule is unreasonable. And what is this community's purpose? Where is the healthy debate spirit?

@teachersuw​ Is there any argument after this?? Does anyone want to refute those guys about writing?

I'm still trying to understand what is the reason for this community to exist..

@Valentinasf​ It's so frustrating to try to dialogue and be simply canceled!

@sbondi​ I totally agree with you my friend, I just want to help people especially my friends to make good decisions about how to spend their time.. this habit was providing very nice talks and interactions from simple, objective and interesting reviews we wrote.

@Valentinasf​ Large critics are often full of spoilers!!

@snoots​ It's so radical to demand 4 times what is was!! Why not start with 300 what would be hard enough..

@Vic​ Thanks for our feedback and what???

It’s honestly so stupid how IMDb is now FORCING you to write terrible reviews not everything I review needs at least 600 characters. That is absolutely ridiculous writing longer reviews doesn’t “make the review more in-depth or impactful” it just forces users to write junk reviews to even get the review accepted. This is absolutely ridiculous and the character minimum needs to be lowered back to 100 or less. Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation originally titled IMDb’s new character minimum

@Michelle​ longer reviews do not = better 😆😆😆

@Michelle​ longer reviews do not = better 😆😆😆

So when I see a movie that may interest me & I go online for a bit more information does this mean that when IMDb writes a summary synopsis (i.e. review) introducing a movie that they must also comply with the 600 rule?

Things are getting more than weird here..

IMDB employees may be very busy writing 600 characters reviews, that's why none of them can respectfully talk with some dedicated users here.

God, 600 characters? This genuinely makes reviewing difficult. I'm not trying to be a Herald Sun writer, I just want to leave my thoughts for others.

It’s honestly so stupid how IMDb is now FORCING you to write terrible reviews not everything I review needs at least 600 characters. That is absolutely ridiculous writing longer reviews doesn’t “make the review more in-depth or impactful” it just forces users to write junk reviews to even get the review accepted. This is absolutely ridiculous and the character minimum needs to be lowered back to 100 or less. Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation originally titled IMDb’s stupid new character minimum

Yes, it's like reviews everywhere. Why must we write high school essays to say what we think? Being concise is better.

@laduqesa​ It's so funny you CAN'T even write 2 different short sentences without repeating yourself my friend...

No, really the idea is to stop you from writing a negative review over a positive review. People who enjoy a movie or tv show are going to be inclined to write a lot more than a person who didn't enjoy it and is going to see the new limit and just not bother since they didn't like it.. Like many things this site is now doing, it is to cultivate positive and highe reviews for tv shows and movies, even then they do not deserve it. But it is their site and their rules, so all you can do is post with filler in your reviews, good or bad. Odd sare the good one will still get through, though there seems to be a concerted effort to now allow bad ones.

This appears to be the case, because a site that only allows positive reviews is one you know you can't trust.

This appears to be the case, because a site that only allows positive reviews is one you know you can't trust.

I'm not sure what we are disagreeing about? I believe the 600 character limit is to dissuade people from writing reviews. I prefer short reviews too, to get to the point. Very rarely do I want a long review - though I can certainly write them if required. and I'd never really look for a professional critic, paid by the word and paid for certain reviews. That being said, lots of crazy fan reviewers out there too. I always take it all with a grain of salt when it comes to reviews.

Actually I got what you said and it's an intelligent way of seeing what's happening, truly the crazy fans will probably be inclined to write bigger texts than the ones who didn't like a media and will give up to try to develop a longer review. But still it's totally frustrating, I mean I can get really valuable informations in a negative review, the IMDB staff should worry only with offensive stuff, and opinions should be judge by helpful or not buttons! It's very upsetting, writing reviews is a great hobby for many. 4 times what it was is unacceptable!! Why not 300 to see how it works?? I hope to see this site wither due to such disrespect for those who dedicate themselves to feed this platform. IMDB stay with your long and big pieces of garbage! I'm gonna write for my own social circle, you go to hell!! You can shove this huge chunks up to yourselves!

I agree, I think they over did it, I think a situation of "by degrees" might have worked better. But one thing you can often count on is over-reaction. I only hope things go downhill for as long as they are dishonest and deceptive with regards to reviews and rating. Not every bad review is "review bombing" and not every good review is legitimate. There are bots on both sides of the issue.

Why does the contribution rule state that a minimum mandatory 600-word count is required? I've read plenty of shorter reviews; many are brief paragraphs or a few words - including the newest ones. It's as though we're asked to spend an hour or two writing an essay. Readers look for general impressions, not a life story. If people want in-depth, they can read the 100s of online reviews in every type of web publication. Very discouraging and time-consuming. Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation originally titled Contribution Word Count

@Peter_pbn​ I meant to write characters. Thanks for the correction. My observation remains the same.

My review is not accepted, because it is too short. The problem is that the remark "Sorry, your review is too short. It needs to contain at least 600 characters" is there before I begin to write!! The film I want to review is this and here is the review I want to post: _________________________________________________________________________________ Rather an adventure than a crime film I have seen other crime series, like [link=tt0094525] and I found them more interesting than this film. Poirot as well as [link=tt1734537] had to solve really complicated cases, the were true detective stories. This film is dedicated more to action/adventure than to the solution of an unpredictable crime, by using a detective's capabilities. I am rather disappointed because I like Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's Holmes, especially when portrayed by Jeremy Brett. My vote 6/10. ________________________________________________________________________________________________ Please note that I have seen reviews already posted containing some ten words. What's going on? It's not the first time I am posting a review, but is the first time that I see it a priori found as too short! Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation originally titled Review length question

@Vic​ "Reviews which are padded with junk text will be discarded" - that's exactly what you're making us do - Pad things out - "Am I up to 500 yet? oh no, still 100 characters to go." Have you ever heard of the expression Less Is More? Whenever I refer to community reviews, I want it in a nutshell, not a bloated exposition. For that, we have the 100s of websites and review writers WHO GET PAID for what is often nonsense.

@Michelle​ @Vic​ About that 600-character count. I wrote a review for The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power the other day (3rd September). It was less than complimentary about the script, plot, acting, faithfulness to Tolkien and so on. But it was well written. And it was considerably over the now mandatory 600. To be precise: 852 (no spaces) - 1,035 (with spaces). Six days later and counting, my contribution is still 'pending'. I later read that IMDb is owned by Amazon - and that Amazon blocked reviews on its own site. So my question is: 600 minimum characters pass the test but only for reviews that you agree with and/or benefit Amazon? Or...

Unfortunately trying to argue here seems useless, imdb empolyees totally belittle and ignore the users.

@FilmCritic10​ What happens is they have to parrot company lines. Usually though, when there's much negative feedback on a specific topic, they'll pass it on. I know because I was Help Desk for a global social media company.

@FilmCritic10​ What happens is they have to parrot company lines. Usually though, when there's much negative feedback on a specific topic, they'll pass it on. I know because I was Help Desk for a global social media company.

People mostly don't even know about this discussion's community I feel, misteriously another login is required to take part here. Most users are gonna probably just give up, and we are gonna be forced to read inflated reviews what is disgusting.

What do you mean? you can't write 3 lines, I just don't care about what you think, as I said I don't give a sight about long reviews or what you are gonna do.

You just can't see that this platform is defrauding because you are brainless. https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/data-issues-policy-discussions/ring-of-power-review-question/6313d5a172837f15dbc02d35 https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/i-need-to-know/censorship/6313c6f6c5eeb86e2c3ca973

? ? ItsJustSlater - 23 Reviews IMDb member since July 2013 Rubber (2010) 28 August 2022 https://www.imdb.com/review/rw8493084/ Sorry, your review is too short. It needs to contain at least 600 characters. Sorry, your review is too short. It needs to contain at least 600 characters. Sorry, your review is too short. It needs to contain at least 600 characters. .

This new requirement surprised me. I just wrote a review, but I think I wrote more than needed, just to get the minimum character amount. I don't see where it says if they include spaces in the character count. I hope they are, as that is the usual way of counting character totals. There are online character counters which I will have to use from now on. I don't write many reviews. Just wrote my 36th, but I've been a member for 16 years, so that's not a lot. :/

It isn't just about the writer, but consideration for the reader as well. I have special needs/disabled (e.g. attention deficit disorder) ss who have a difficult time reading/processing lengthy expositions. Those who wish to write lengthy descriptions can still do so, but don't exclude those who wish or need to read less.

@Michelle​ With all due respect, that’s ridiculous. I don’t have the attention span to even write a review with 600 characters, and I doubt most of your readers have the attention span to read a 600 character review. I love reading reviews of the movies and television shows that I watch, and specifically I like giving reasons why I like what I like. There’s no world that exists where I can write a review with 600 characters. I’m sure 99% of your audience feels that way, they just haven’t spoken up. How about a compromise? How about 300 characters?

Recently, I am asked for a minimum of 600 characters for a review, whereas there are published reviews with far less characters than that. In addition to this, I have sent reviews with less than 600 characters, have been accepted and published. Is it a new regulation please, or what. One more thing. Before finishing my review, I see written "your review cannot be accepted because it does not contain 600 characters", or something like that. What's going on please? Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation originally titled Reviews

Recently, I am asked for a minimum of 600 characters for a review, whereas there are published reviews with far less characters than that. In addition to this, I have sent reviews with less than 600 characters, have been accepted and published. Is it a new regulation please, or what. One more thing. Before finishing my review, I see written "your review cannot be accepted because it does not contain 600 characters", or something like that. What's going on please? Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation originally titled Reviews

Hello, as a regular movie reviewer, I have been struggling with 600 character limit that was put one or two weeks ago. But today, I realized that I am not the only one dealing with that. I was reading recent reviews from some other users and found these: https://www.imdb.com/review/rw8538333/?ref_=tt_urv https://www.imdb.com/review/rw8527636/?ref_=rw_urv I am not reporting them. Please don't remove their reviews. It will be very discouraging. On the other hand, this one is from someone with over 4000 reviews. It is slightly over 300 characters. Check the Likes he received. It is listed #1 in "Featured" ranking. https://www.imdb.com/review/rw7647233/?ref_=rw_urv I just want to tell that sometimes there is not much to say about a movie or you can express all your opinions in less than 600 characters. Don't you think it is a bit too high? Why not reduce it to 300 characters for example? Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation originally titled The problem with 600 character limit in User Reviews. Have you noticed these?

@stimpy_tr​ A review must be helpful, mustn't it? Too long reviews usually are not. 600 characters mean a very long review, which I seldomly read.

@rlwieneke​ Congrats on being someone who gets to decide what normal people do and don't. Can I send you a list of my interests so you can decide whether I'm normal or not? I've always wondered whether I'm normal or not, but you might actually be able to help me out with this.

@Marco Of course, I am against it. Haven't you read the third one I gave? The guy received 1494 Likes with a 300 character review.

@stimpy_tr​ I have read the third one you gave. I personally don't consider it a good review. The reason is because I feel a review should not just tell me IF someone liked a movie or not but also WHY. And some information about the movie would be nice to have as well. This review just tells me a bunch of people liked this film very much. I'm happy they liked it, but it doesn't tell me if I'd like this film or not because the writer hardly gives us any concrete information about the film or about the good or not so good elements of it and why they are good or not so good elements. Why do you consider it a good review? I fail to see why the fact that quite some people have given this review a thumb's up should matter one way or the other. I assume that a lot of these people simply liked this film and were voting up because this person is also very positive about this film. If that's the case, they haven't really voted for the review itself I feel.

@rlwieneke​ Well, that escalated quickly :) You do know that you don't know me right? I might be Jewish for all you know. (Obviously, this post'll be the last time I respond to you.)

This feels wrong in my opinion. There shouldn't be a limit on how many characters are needed for a review. Some people give elaborate reviews, some give short precise reviews, but they all have some value. I don't know if I will make reviews in the future, given how restrictive things are becoming.

Well, I think it's about time to know what IMDb have to tell on the subject. Do they reply here, or not?

@nessun​ No, they don't. There are one-off answers from IMDb employees stating company policy - that is it.

Thank you for your reply. In this case there is no use to discuss further.

Thank you for your reply. In this case there is no use to discuss further.

@Michelle , @Vic , @Marco , Just let me know when IMDb reconsiders this draconian, authoritarian, arbitraty, repressive, tyrannical, totally partial and not democratic measure.

I have to agree with the consensus here. Quantity does not equate to quality. In fact, since this rule has been implemented, I've seen a decline in quality reviews. Many people "stretch out" their reviews, and the result is terribly written reviews. No more short, witty and concise reviews that help me form an opinion about a TV series or movie. Please take a look at what people have been writing to meet the minimum character requirement and reconsider this policy, pronto!

Recently I wanted to post a review of the new Dahmer series and I could not post unless the post contained at least 600 characters. I see several posts containing far less than 600 though. I've only posted a few times before but none of my reviews had as many as 600. Why and has anyone else run across this? Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation originally titled 600 Characters Required ?

@laduqesa​ You're sweet. This new rule will cut the number of reviews way down. They should just do away with User Reviews and stick to the paid ones.

@ejimie​ This new rule will cut the number of reviews way down. As you can see upthread, this new rule has been around since the end of August. The new series about LotR has premiered September 1st. It currently has 3,765 reviews: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7631058/reviews Dahmer premiered September 21st and currently has 343 reviews: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt13207736/reviews Even if the new rule does cut the number of reviews way down, how many reviews do you need for a particular title? How many do you read before deciding whether or not you wanna see a certain title?

@Marco​ Well, I rarely read a review containing spoilers. I tend to look at a reviews rating and title first and then the text. If I don't like a program I don't write a review and I won't take the time for 600 characters explaining why I don't care for a program. This rule should reduce negative reviews. A good to great program is easier to write about. I'm not easily impressed by linguistic prowess.

@Marco​ Well, I rarely read a review containing spoilers. I tend to look at a reviews rating and title first and then the text. If I don't like a program I don't write a review and I won't take the time for 600 characters explaining why I don't care for a program. This rule should reduce negative reviews. A good to great program is easier to write about. I'm not easily impressed by linguistic prowess.

@ejimie​ A good to great program is easier to write about I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. Note that I don't write reviews but I feel it's always very easy to say/write something I feel strongly about, whether it be positive or negative. I find it the hardest to say something about films that are very middle of the road and therefore of no real interest to me. But perhaps that's just me of course.

@Marco​ Agreed indeed. You might as well write reviews if you're taking an interest in these matters. Writing details about something I don't like reminds me of the Bob Dylan lyric.. "and he went of sniffing drainpipes and reciting the alphabet"

If 150 was too short, surely you could have gone to 300. I have written reviews that I thought were fair that were like 350 characters, and I have read reviews I appreciated of that length. For some short videos there isn't much to say. On the whole this doesn't make much sense because of course people can just pop on to a show they don't like and leave a drive-by 1 star rating without writing a review. By definition writing a review is always more thoughtful than just leaving a rating. But what do I know, this comment is probably under 600 characters.

@Marco​ , @Michelle , @Vic , Dear imdb users (Marco) and employees, if you want to rethink it can be healthy. Let’s see, everyone knows that it’s possible to choose what kind of text you want to read just by glancing at the rate, title and even first sentences to define which are the most valueable, interesting, intelligent, well written and TRUSTABLE for your personal criteria. I’m gonna repeat myself here in case it’s not clear yet: No one here wants to ban or prohibit the big reviews, people probably don’t care about that, there was never a discussion about that, the only thing most people here want is a simple thing, to be allowed to read and write objective, concise, medium or short reviews something around 150 - 450 characteres. But some people are so selfish that can’t comprehend and accept diversity, and prefer only their singular taste to be satisfied with large, detailed, emotive, boring, tiresome, spoiling, very intimate point of view. Again you can have them but look around there are more than 20 people complaining for short reviews here while only 2 are defending the absurd prohibition. It’s a fact that this measure is drastically reducing the number of reviews and the sample mentioned by @Marco is kind of 10 times less, this logically reduces substantially the information’s integrity or consistency. Of course people will not read all 3000 reviews but for sure there will be less variety of all kinds of reviews short, large or medium ones. What is very hard and unpleasant to try to understand is why some people would waste time arguing to diminish others interesting and valuable content production just because it doesn't fit their particular preferences.

@laduqesa​ @Marco​ , @Michelle , @Vic , Dear imdb users and employees, if you want to rethink it can be healthy. Let’s see, everyone knows that it’s possible to choose what kind of text you want to read just by glancing at the rate, title and even first sentences to define which are the most valueable, interesting, intelligent, well written and TRUSTABLE for your personal criteria. I’m gonna repeat myself here in case it’s not clear yet: No one here wants to ban or prohibit the big reviews, people probably don’t care about that, there was never a discussion about that, the only thing most people here want is a simple thing, to be allowed to read and write objective, concise, medium or short reviews something around 150 - 450 characteres. But some people are so selfish that can’t comprehend and accept diversity, and prefer only their singular taste to be satisfied with large, detailed, emotive, boring, tiresome, spoiling, very intimate point of view. Again you can have them but look around there are more than 20 people complaining for short reviews here while only 2 are defending the absurd prohibition. It’s a fact that this measure is drastically reducing the number of reviews and the sample mentioned by @Marco is kind of 10 times less, this logically reduces substantially the information’s integrity or consistency. Of course people will not read all 3000 reviews but for sure there will be less variety of all kinds of reviews short, large or medium ones. What is very hard and unpleasant to try to understand is why some people would waste time arguing to diminish others interesting and valuable content production just because it doesn't fit their particular preferences and exclusionary way of being.

​@Marco​ I never said you work for IMDb, but you and @laduqesa are the only ones with that exclusionary, sectarian, sad attitude to be advocating for the extermination of approximately 90% reviewers contributions. As you can see upthread, this new rule has been around since the end of August. The new series about LotR has premiered September 1st. It currently has 3,765 reviews: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7631058/reviews Dahmer premiered September 21st and currently has 343 reviews: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt13207736/reviews Even if the new rule does cut the number of reviews way down, how many reviews do you need for a particular title? How many do you read before deciding whether or not you wanna see a certain title?

Why is it so costly for any employee to answer or discuss properly at least for fun and respect for some devoted members here?

Why is it so costly for any employee to answer or discuss properly at least for fun and respect for some devoted members here?

@Michelle​ Why don't you guys answer the conversation about Minimum Characters? What's this community about? You just totally belittle us users giving a derisive response... It's sad that IMDB, a platform fed by it's users, just ignores their opinion. It should be a prolific discussion, but you guys may be very busy. Do you get paid for this mediocre job?? No offense, thanks! https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/data-issues-policy-discussions/minimum-number-of-characters-to-write-a-review/630a78bac5eeb86e2c3b056b

And what about the new minimum number of characters?? From 150 to 600 overnight.. It's just a disaster, long reviews are mostly full of spoilers and small talk. IMDB please reconsider that!!! https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/data-issues-policy-discussions/minimum-number-of-characters-to-write-a-review/630a78bac5eeb86e2c3b056b Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation originally titled Minimum number of characters

So are reviews no longer welcomed? is this the message that IMDB wants to give? 600 characters is crazy long and makes no sense! there are thumbs up/down votes to highlight quality comments.

@Michelle​ This is not a valid reason. 600 characters is crazy long and helps nobody. does IMDB want to discourage user reviews? after so many active years, it’s outragous to add such limitations.

@sbondi​ What other sites do you recommend? Let’s move on with reviews on better platforms!

@carmendiana, I suppose in terms of popularity, there is Rotten Tomatoes and Yahoo! Movie Reviews, but they have their own issues. So I gave up reviewing for the general community, and just point my friends and family to my personal reviews spreadsheet on Dropbox: https://www.dropbox.com/s/tu7xnsjo1jnb63b/Video%20Reviews.xlsx?dl=0

@carmendiana​ I'm not too familiar with rating sites, but Amazon, Metacritic, and Rotten Tomatoes are possibilities. Although, some people have suggested that IMDb's character restriction at 600 was put into play by someone with ties to Amazon thus a supposed financial explanation for that change. I hope that's not true.

@sbondi​ thanks, I’ll check your link. I actually like the idea of making your own list very much!

@teachersuw​ then I’ll check rotten tomatoes as well.

@Marco​ I just deluded myself that you were an active member trying to help some way. But it seems I was wrong.

Hi @Michelle​, how are you doing? It seems that less than 10% of the interested members approved the change that should ensure the most value for US, in addition, the number of reviews is drastically reducing, many people are cheating and polluting the review session with double pasting or filling with crap to achieve the minimum. I'm gonna ask did the platafform reached the alleged goal? Is there a reason why nobody answer a lot of participants here? This topic is not really ANSWERED.

@bizzyziggy​ , it's hard to get any word here friend.

There is no option for people like me who want to write/read a short review. I think 200 characters will be sufficient. Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation originally titled Why review 600 character limit is set too high?

@Bethanny​ https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/data-issues-policy-discussions/minimum-number-of-characters-to-write-a-review/630a78bac5eeb86e2c3b056b ???

@FilmCritic10​ the extermination of approximately 90% reviewers contributions. We both don't have the (exact) stats, but I really don't think it's as high as about 90%. I just deluded myself that you were an active member trying to help some way. I'm not on this board daily and recently was on a 1,5 week holiday, so perhaps I'm not as active as you might have thought. That being said, I think we have to agree to disagree on this particular issue. Most short reviews I see on IMDb I consider to be bad or even very bad, so I think it's a good idea IMDb has raised the number of characters needed for a review.

@FilmCritic10​ Sorry for the late response. the big reviews, people probably don’t care about that Well, some people do: https://www.imdb.com/review/rw1132475/ + https://www.imdb.com/review/rw3115164/. But some people are so selfish that can’t comprehend and accept diversity, and prefer only their singular taste That's not the issue. The issue is the lack of quality that perhaps not always, but very often goes hand in hand with reviews that are short. Again you can have them but look around there are more than 20 people complaining for short reviews here while only 2 are defending the absurd prohibition. IMDb has literally millions of customers and they get their input on what their customers want via several ways, so I'm afraid the 20+ people complaining here are not a big percentage of IMDb customers. Apart from that, when a change is made, it's logical for people who are unhappy with the change to speak up and let others know about it. People who don't care one way or the other are much more likely not to speak up, because why should they? After all, they don't really care. And people who are happy with the change have (finally) got what they want, so why would they say anything? So the fact there are much more people in this thread complaining than people agreeing with the change seems completely logical to me. It doesn't mean most customers of IMDb (millions and millions of them) hate this change. the sample mentioned by @Marco is kind of 10 times less I mentioned the number of reviews for the new LotR series and the Dahmer series. First of all, their numbers have risen quite a bit: 25 days ago they had respectively 3,765 and 343 reviews. Now they have 4,622 and 612. I wouldn't be surprised if LotR has 5,000 reviews within a few weeks. Secondly, you talk about this sample being 10 times less. How do you know these shows would have had about 46,220 and 6,120 reviews if IMDb hadn't changed its policy? Actually, I happen to know the answer: they simply wouldn't have. I just checked and Game of Thrones, one of the biggest and famous series of this century currently has 'only' 5,579 reviews: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0944947/reviews . And that is a series that has been around since 2011 so a lot of short reviews have been added to it. And yet, the number of reviews for both GoT and LotR are about the same, if you take into account that LotR is very new and GoT has had 10+ years to accumulate its reviews. Breaking Bad, the current number 2 on the Top 250 for TV shows has been around since 2008 currently has 4,554 reviews (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0903747/reviews), which is even less than LotR (!). To me, this suggests that this new policy of IMDb doesn't have a big influence on the number of reviews. What is very hard and unpleasant to try to understand is why some people would waste time arguing to diminish others interesting and valuable content production The reason I'm happy with this new policy is that, IMHO, the number of interesting and valuable reviews will increase, something I feel all customers of IMDb will benefit from.

This is completely ridiculous and wrong. Reviews will be useless water instead of what people want to write and want to read. that was 125 characters to express precisely what we think, by the way

Why quadruple the lower bound instead of maybe doubling it?

At the very least, it does seem that more reviewers will be under pressure to compete with the few reviewers who write detailed reviews, lest the give up entirely. I do recall being one of the people to suggest that the minimum number of characters (or alternatively minimum number of words) be increased, but I never expected it to be quadrupled. I never mentioned there being anything inherently wrong with short reviews, but I certainly did complain about allowing reviews to be submitted through the IMDb App, since the feature would appeal to the types of moviegoers who are too impatient to wait to boot up an actual Web browser (even a mobile one) before submitting a review, in that basically they were eager to be able to write reviews before even leaving the auditoriums of the cinema buildings.

I guess at below 600 characters its more of a comment / opinion than a review ? Thought IMDb was there for film lovers who could easily write the equivalent of the shortest newspaper review about a movie they've seen !

@Marco​ Like you, I am also happy with the new policy. Thank you for speaking out in support of it. I have been reading your comments in this thread and I feel the time has come to publicly express my wholehearted agreement with everything you have said. The new 600-character minimum is helping eliminate the frivolous, unnecessary so-called "reviews" that were proliferating on IMDb and that did little more than simply say whether the person likes or doesn't like the film or show in question. If that is all someone has to say, they shouldn't be posting it in the form of a so-called "review." Instead, they can post their Internet comments (because let's be honest, that is what they are--comments, not reviews) at places like Reddit or moviechat.org (which as I'm sure you already know is one of the websites that was created to discuss movies in the wake of IMDb closing its own forums). Some of the comments in this very thread prove, in an ironic fashion, why some of these folks are apparently not qualified to "review" titles in the first place. Sloppy and unclear wording, grammatical errors, and misstatements abound in these comments. I, for one, am thankful for IMDb's new policy. Any policy change or action that will help weed out so-called "reviews" devoid of any meaningful content is welcome in my book. And by the way, 600 characters is still pretty short. I find it amusing that anyone would complain about this as a minimum limit.

I hate this 600 count limit. Small new movies are getting rating votes but no comment reviews because nobody wants to type 600 characters out for 5/10 movie. So I end up having to search Reddit. I also don't want to read a huge review for a lame movie. The only words I really need to read in a review are like "Good if you like slashers" or "Slow and boring" or "Stupid but fun". The vast majority of movies out there are junk. Stop asking me to read/writer an awesome review for junk.

It's sad that imdb which was once a community based site, is requiring users to generate content considered relevant to their business model. This is how the internet has gone. All of it is corporate ruled to make the most money, and collect as much metadata as possible. Big brother is watching.

@laduqesa​ are you familiar with the term, 'grammar nazi'?

@Vic​ your bosses are using the community which made the imdb, by discarding user experience for a nice, clean platform from which they can sell their products and services, and listen to this Vic, it's bullsheet.

To make matters worse, the minimum limit doesn't even account for the running time of the movie, show, episode, special program, music video or public service announcement. How will anybody be able to submit a review for a picture that is only four minutes long? You'd think that the limits should only increase as the total running time increase.

@jeorj_euler​ if they want users to propagate content for them, they should pay them to do it. We are literally part of their business model. I am angry because this kind of behavior has become normal and widespread on the internet. I can imagine that in a board room somewhere the conversation we are having here has already been played out and once the decision was made, it was a done deal.

@narce​ they probably average out at about 200 characters - and even that can seem a little wordy. Thanks for bringing some much needed humor to this thread.

@Marco​, @narce, @laduqesa I totally understand your points of view guys. Some can think the same about me and I respect their existence, but people who can't admit that 150 characters can explain or expose something better and in a more enlightning way than 600 are mental helpless. In my opinion it's worse, this kind of people who want only their personal standards to be guaranteed are flagrantly, stingy, selfish, sectarian that don't stand diversity. A mere film review for communal platform users should not necessarily need to be a full analysis or a professional article, but possibly be helpful content filters, indicators, or suggestions. Again, there's a lot of stupidity and time wasting in most of large reviews that are almost always filled of plot, characters and scenes, spoilers. Apart from, lots of particular interpretation, biased views, implicit messages revelations, history or theories behind. Maybe I want to study about a movie after I watch it and get these data but I absolutely don't want them before and probably at all. And for sure I know IMDB is not the place to get the most trustable fact informations. Even though I insist, I simply don't care about all this wordy garbage I just find the reviews that serve me, and I wish more people be like this, collectively tolerant and supportive, but you see how the word is f. up and try to realize why... grasping few individuals is the answer.

@Laura_B​ most movies don't deserve 600 characters 300 maybe. like, if you don't want to copy the plot that is already written in wikipedia, try to describe any biopic in more than 600 characters without padding every biopic is exactly the same movie every underdog film is exactly the same movie every talking animal film is exactly the same movie not also take into consideration that a movie can have absolutely stale cinematography not bad not good utterly unnoticeable and similar invisible soundtrack what there is left to write about when the movie had less effort put into it than 600 characters

@DrProfessor​ all forums and friends and discussions were removed

600 is waaaaaaaaaaaaaay to much 300 is understandable. most of everything is mediocre and most of the movies are the same movie that can be described in a couple of words. if a movie is not a 20 hours essay worthy terrible there is not much to talk about besides describing it as it actually is and noting all the noteworthy parts

@keyword_expert​ please accept this challenge: write a "spoiler"-free review about The Incredibly Strange Creatures Who Stopped Living and Became Mixed-Up Zombies that is longer than 600 characters not all movies have anything to say about them without reciting wikipedia plot or going wildy off-topic. especially all the by the numbers biopics, like what is there to say about the star is born remake or queen biopic

Did you see my remark about short movies, keyword expert? The fact that there is no scaling of the limit is a shame.

Did you see my remark about short movies, keyword expert? The fact that there is no scaling of the limit is a shame.

@keyword_expert​ the other problem is that google has killed the internet. IMDB is the only place where you can see the negative reviews for popular things and positive reviews for unpopular things. not even in the first 10 pages of google will you find a review for some less known movies, it all will be ads and aggregators that steal content from imdb there is no such thing as "reddit" it's all separate unrelated fan css feeds of bad fanart where no one cares about what you think and where you can never see the non mainstream opinions. people love to talk about confirmation bias, but everyone forgets about sanity check. you know like in the dick's the hanging stranger sometimes you just really need to see if other people also noticed the hanging stranger

@agof​ @keyword_expert​ please accept this challenge: write a "spoiler"-free review about The Incredibly Strange Creatures Who Stopped Living and Became Mixed-Up Zombies that is longer than 600 characters Why are you asking me to do this, when there are already a bunch of reviews posted on IMDb that meet your criteria? https://imdb.com/title/tt0057181/reviews

@jeorj_euler​ That's true about shorter movies. But 600 characters is still very short. Perhaps the mandatory minimum should be 600 characters for shorts, video games, music videos, episodes, etc. and 1,200 characters for feature films.

@keyword_expert​ because you claim that you can do it and because you linked reviews that talk about anything but movie, or retell the plot that's is exactly why 600 is too much, it mostly means there will be padding and offtopic and nothing about the film itself. your link shows people talking about the director, about their life stories, about other directors, about other shows or other movies. some people can be actually passionate about that movie. but not everyone who wants to write a review. 600 limit is a negative selection for off-topic. here's my review: There's about 15 minutes of an actual generic "hypnotized killer" movie. The rest of the short runtime is a pure filler made of some questionably diegetic carnival numbers, that only remind you that the past was the worst. It's just some people singing, some people dancing, non-nude non-acrobatic striptease and shaky videos of the rides. The nearest things to monsters in this movie are several abused and tortured victims of a kidnapping ring. And i can't post it because it's 155 characters short, and there are already some inside jokes that should be cut out before posting to IMDB. Did you watch the movie do you really think there's anything more to add that won't be offtopic, wikipedia plot or padding?

@keyword_expert​ 600 characters for shorts? https://www.imdb.com/title/tt21222702/ which 600 would you chose? where can i see your 1200 characters long reviews? your imdb profile is not linked

@Col_Needham​ well this doesn't address the cookie cutter movies. it's easy to write about some big movies, innovative or broken and weird. the movies that already have thousands of written reviews but the things that have no reviews at all will all be left with no reviews. for example thousands chinese streaming movies are released per day, they pay great artists to create great posters. but almost all of them are ironically a live action kungfu panda. all of them are the same, what more is there to write in a spoiler free review? if there is a barrier that allows only for passionate essays or graphomania hundreds thousands of movies will never get nay reviews usefully explaining the contents behind the posters. and imdb already has a policy of not explaining which paragraph you need to delete from your review so the mods will allow it to be published instead of declining. and there is no discernable pattern anywhere the same things can be allowed the next time if there was any way to check what IMDB users actually read and what they don't it would be very interesting data of how all the likes-dislikes are assigned without even ever reading anything

Hi, agof. You wrote, "but the things that have no reviews at all will all be left with no reviews." That is exactly what I'm worried about. Maybe folks will find a way to simply write cookie cutter reviews and disguise the fluff with big words, spelled out numbers, compound adjectives and with every sentence being its own paragraph, rattling off the designations of every crew department and assigning an arbitrary score to each one, as if to mock the IMDb guidelines.

@Col_Needham​ 😀 Back in the Old Days... The A-Team (1983-1987) (97 episodes) 1 hour Action, Adventure TV Series https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0084967/reference/ bevo-13678 https://www.imdb.com/user/ur76062573/ 30 March 2020 The best ever Nobody does cars flipping over as well as this show. Bravo 4 out of 4 found this helpful. https://www.imdb.com/review/rw5590074/ - - - The A-Team (TV Series) Mexican Slayride (1983) Season 1 Episode 1 bevo-13678 29 March 2020 Awesome One of my all time favourite episodes. I like the bit where the car flips over. 7 out of 10 found this helpful. https://www.imdb.com/review/rw5589752/ - - - The A-Team (TV Series) Children of Jamestown (1983) Season 1 Episode 2 bevo-13678 29 March 2020 The best One of my all time favourite episodes. I like the bit where the car flips over. 4 out of 7 found this helpful. https://www.imdb.com/review/rw5589754/ - - - The A-Team (TV Series) Pros and Cons (1983) Season 1 Episode 3 bevo-13678 29 March 2020 Good One of my all time favourite episodes. I like the bit where the car flips over. 2 out of 4 found this helpful https://www.imdb.com/review/rw5589757/ - - - The A-Team (TV Series) A Small and Deadly War (1983) Season 1 Episode 4 bevo-13678 29 March 2020 Two thumbs up One of my all time favourite episodes. I like the bit where the car flips over. 2 out of 3 found this helpful https://www.imdb.com/review/rw5589761/ - - - The A-Team (TV Series) Black Day at Bad Rock (1983) Season 1 Episode 5 bevo-13678 29 March 2020 Action One of my all time favourite episodes. I like the bit where the car flips over. 4 out of 8 found this helpful. https://www.imdb.com/review/rw5589763/ - - - The A-Team (TV Series) The Rabbit Who Ate Las Vegas (1983) Season 1 Episode 6 bevo-13678 29 March 2020 Glitzy One of my all time favourite episodes. I like the bit where the car flips over. 2 out of 3 found this helpful https://www.imdb.com/review/rw5589768/ - - - The A-Team (TV Series) The Out-of-Towners (1983) Season 1 Episode 7 bevo-13678 29 March 2020 Mobsters I like the way they dish out justice in a way they can only do 4 out of 4 found this helpful. https://www.imdb.com/review/rw5589772/ - - - The A-Team (TV Series) Holiday in the Hills (1983) Season 1 Episode 8 bevo-13678 29 March 2020 Better than Magiver I like how they built a plane. Long before magiver ever did stuff like that 3 out of 4 found this helpful https://www.imdb.com/review/rw5589774/ - - - The A-Team (TV Series) West Coast Turnaround (1983) Season 1 Episode 9 bevo-13678 29 March 2020 Woohoo This episode contains trucks and water melons. I won't spoil the ending 2 out of 4 found this helpful https://www.imdb.com/review/rw5589776/ - - - The A-Team (TV Series) One More Time (1983) Season 1 Episode 10 bevo-13678 29 March 2020 Monster Not the best episode but it had a really good car chase 2 out of 4 found this helpful. https://www.imdb.com/review/rw5589781/ - - - The A-Team (TV Series) Till Death Do Us Part (1983) Season 1 Episode 11 bevo-13678 29 March 2020 Boom boom One of my all time favourite episodes. I like the bit where the car flips over 2 out of 3 found this helpful. https://www.imdb.com/review/rw5589786/ - - - The A-Team (TV Series) The Beast from the Belly of a Boeing (1983) Season 1 Episode 12 bevo-13678 29 March 2020 BA what are you like??? Ha ha. I ain't getting on no airplane. We'll see about that 2 out of 5 found this helpful. https://www.imdb.com/review/rw5589788/ and many more... .

@ACT_1​ these reviews you posted aren't 150 characters long though. I think many users would agree that these are not "reviews". 600 characters can be excessive for a 30 minute TV show especially when trying to avoid spoilers.

Well, any viable alternative would necessitate the involvement of machine learning algorithms.

Hi, nessun. I don't know if you noticed, but the founder of IMDb did finally post on this thread, and his take away is that the people complaining about this increase of limit believe that numbers of characters mean numbers of words. I find such a response to be akin to gaslighting.

FilmCritic10 wrote, "I'm still trying to understand what is the reason for this community to exist." I suspect a lot of newcomers to this forum feel that way, and perhaps if they stick around long enough, they'll notice that multiple boards are present on here, each having its own mission, orientation, customs and habits.

The situation is that of policy change, mechanism change too, so the older reviews are grandfathered within reason.

In all the time that I've been observing this forum, the "healthy debate spirit" has rarely ever been present. Outside of the IMDb Poll board, most of the threads are about answering questions, solving mysteries, reporting glitches, uncovering contradictions or sleuthing, rather than trying to figure out the best recommendations for policy/functionality adjustments. We also see reports of fraud/predation/harassment, from time to time.

@jeorj_euler​ And mass merging duplicate keywords!

Indeed there is also a minimum character limit for plot synopsis items, whereas there is a maximum character limit for plot outline items. For a very special reason, I already complained about limit being placed upon plot synopsis items, owing to how grandfathered items cannot be tweaked slightly (such as making grammatical corrections) without knowledge enough of plot to write a full item. Unsurprisingly, nobody was particularly helpful in mitigating such a problem. This why a lot of contributors believe (whether correctly or incorrectly) that the IMDb site authorities do not listen, contrary to what is stated in the IMDb Contributors' Charter. Many of the times, they are monitoring, but silently disagreeing, but once in a while, they (without even realizing the need to seek clarification) actually misunderstand specific problems being presented. Another interesting thing is that, often there are problems that only one contributor even notices, so other contributors don't really know how to react to those concerns.

Indeed there is merit is announcing certain submissions on forum, so that it is possible for the left hand and the right hand to know what each other is doing. Without a group communication venue of some kind, such a thing would be impossible. Sometimes debates (but more often brainstorm and error recognition) are had in that regard in order to arrive at consensus if possible.

I see so many of the reviews in 1 line or 2 lines. It definitely is not 600 characters. Why would imdb ask me to write reviews in 600 chars but not others? How to post a review less than 600 characters? Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation originally titled How to post a review less than 600 characters

600 characters is fine for a movie or a TV series. That requirement needs to be lower, however, for individual series episodes. 600 characters leads to a lot of useless padding for a description of a TV episode. Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation originally titled 600 Character review minimum

@KarthikKrtk​ Those are older reviews submitted before the new limit was imposed.

Right, but it seems that the IMDb site authorities aren't bothered at all by people being discouraged from writing reviews for material that is shorter than thirty minutes of running time, and in the case of material that is not even five minutes long, such a minimum bound could be dire, unless the content is so spectacular that its demands a lot to be said, without boiling down to a frame-by-frame analysis.

Absurd imposed so many words . Sometimes it is justified. Unfortunately others don't.