I’ve noticed that when people link movies here, they usually use www.imdb.com. To me, www.allmovie.com has always seemed better in its overall look and feel. It seems more technically current; while IMDB has the feel of something from the days of Webcrawler.
What gives? Is IMDB better in the quality of the descriptions and criticism?
IMDB is more widely known.
I’ve used IMDB forever, it does what I want, and it invariably comes up when you do a Google search. Good enough for me.
Another issue: Allmusic (and presumably Allmovies too) used to not allow deep-linking. If you cut-and-pasted the link from the page you were on, it wouldn’t work for anyone else. This seems to be fixed now, but people don’t change quickly.
Some imdb features, like “trivia” and “goofs,” aren’t available on “allmovies.com” AFAICT, and they’re one of the reasons I use imbd. I’m not even sure if I can access as wide an array of reviews or user comments as easily.
I have a writing credit on IMDB, but not at allmovie. So fuck 'em.
Number of film credits for filmmaker Norman McLaren at IMDB: 69
Number of film credits listed at AMG: 8
Number of film credits for filmmaker Stan Brakhage at IMDB: 371
Number of film credits listed at AMG: 36
Number of film credits for filmmaker Len Lye at IMDB: 18
Number of film credits listed at AMG: 1
No comparison.
IMDb.com is great - very detailed, intuitive, usefully cross-referenced. I check it about once or twice a week, on average, and almost always find what I’m looking for. It’s almost addictive for true movie buffs.
I probably hit imdb three times a day on average. Never heard of allmovie.com until now (or likely heard of it and forgot it).