MovieChat Forums > General Discussion > Why did IMDB shut down its forums?

Why did IMDB shut down its forums?


I think they said the boards had devolved to a point where
they were more harmful than productive. There were always
a lot of useless, silly, irrelevant, hateful, etc ... ie negative
comments on IMDB. So did IMDB just get tired of paying
for it? Were they losing money it?

Is it possible that the movie industry influenced IMDB to shut
down its boards because movie attendance and interest was
going down due to the poor real reviews from real people who
had seen the movies and gave them bad reviews and low
ratings?

There were a lot of comments in IMDB that I felt fairly
sure were people involved in moviemaking or marketing that
were there to make the movies look better, and some to just
jam up the boards to turn people off reading them. Did IMDB
just get an ultimatum that they should shut down the boards
or faceless trolls would descend on it and render then useless?

Can or could the same thing happen here?

reply

Whatever the reason, I am one of the many who hated the decision...... that's why I'm now signed up to this site. I didn't ever sign up to IMDB. never commented on anything, but used it as a really helpful - and entertaining - resource to compliment my movie loving. It was a good read, and a really good way of looking up random information, seek out specific actors that were recognised or new to me and observe observations others had had too.
This site, although fulfilling my needs to some ways akin to IMDB, as well as in other new ways, is not the same, but it will have to do.
I said I'd never use IMDB again following the closure of their boards....but it just looks nice, and has more information. So, I flit between the two when needed - IMDB is for visuals, Movie Chat for communications. It seems to work.
:-)

reply

Because of 2 reasons:

1. IMDb is owned by Amazon. Business is what matters the most

2. Hollywood hates criticism. I guess "Freedom of Speech" will be "banned" from the forums in the future. That's ridiculous

reply