Agree, absolutely. Also needed, a genre like "Intrigue", or something like that, to cover aspects of wars off-battlefields which can also occur in peace-times - spying, saboutage, e.g. - and maybe even "Military" for other stories still not having to do with open conflict and combat. I need to get together a list of possible "missing genres" I've found ("Religion" is another big one) for which no really good substitute exists yet at TMDb (some which even IMDb has continued to ignore). I wonder how easy it is for genres and other "drop-down menu" itmes to be added to existing TMDb menus - anyone care to advise on that?

I don't think Intrigue or Military/Police is necessary really, you can cover that with keywords! :D

There used to be LOTS of genres, but it was cut down to the core genres.

But agree with original poster!

Yes, and Action & Adventure. I think they all should be split XD

At the risk of arousing the IMDb haters, I'll point out that IMDb's system seems pretty good. They have major genres, and then also sub-genres under these. This allows them to keep the major genres individualized/separate. Maybe TMDb just doesn't want to deal with so many categories, and I can understand that. But some of their combo genres do seem a bit odd.

In any case, just for informational purposes, the IMDb genres and sub-genres are:

Action » Comedy | Crime | Thriller

Adventure » Biography | Thriller | War

Animation » Adventure | Comedy | Family | Fantasy

Biography » Crime | Mystery | Sport

Comedy » Action | Horror | Romance

Crime » Drama | Mystery | Romance

Documentary » Biography | Comedy | Crime | History

Drama » Romance | Film-Noir | Musical | War

Family » Adventure | Comedy | Fantasy | Romance

Fantasy » Adventure | Comedy | Drama | Romance

Film-Noir » Crime | Mystery | Romance | Thriller

History » Adventure | Biography | Drama | War

Horror » Comedy | Drama | Sci-Fi

Music » Biography | Documentary | Drama

Musical » Comedy | History | Romance

Mystery » Adventure | Comedy | Thriller

Romance » Comedy | Crime | History | Thriller

Sci-Fi » Animation | Comedy | Family | Horror

Sport » Biography | Comedy | Documentary

Thriller » Comedy | Crime | Horror | Mystery

War » Action | Biography | Comedy | Documentary

Western » Action | Adventure | Comedy

@Hobnobber said:

Hasn’t Sci-Fi & Fantasy also been conjoined?

For TV shows, yes; not for movies. Don't know why.

@Rich Wannen said:

@Hobnobber said:

Hasn’t Sci-Fi & Fantasy also been conjoined?

For TV shows, yes; not for movies. Don't know why.

Maybe they're still sort of feeling their way along. But I think it makes more sense to have only single-category genres, and then just allow something to be in more than one genre (e.g., in TV, Twilight Zone can be both sci-fi and fantasy, depending on the particular episode; in film, Catch-22 can be both war and comedy).

As for politics, I don't think it makes sense to have that as an entertainment genre per se. All the movies that have politics in them tend to fit into one or more major genres (e.g., drama, comedy, etc.), and they just have politics as part of the subject matter/plot--but it's not really an entertainment genre unto itself.

I agree with you, Zurich, that, overall, Politics doesn't seem like a necessary (or much of an actual) genre category. Politics seems better suited as a Keyword option.

@genplant29 said:

I agree with you, Zurich, that, overall, Politics doesn't seem like a necessary (or much of an actual) genre category. Politics seems better suited as a Keyword option.

It's perhaps worth noting that no standard classifier of film genres (e.g., IMDb or Wikipedia, etc.) lists politics as a genre. I think TMDb has confused genre with subject matter.

@pt100 said:

It's perhaps worth noting that no standard classifier of film genres (e.g., IMDb or Wikipedia, etc.) lists politics as a genre.

IMDb and Wikipedia as "standard classifiers" - of anything? How about the Library of Congress or American Film Institute - both of which do recognize it (as "Political", but I like the noun form better), albeit as a relatively small genre: but films like ADVISE AND CONSENT or MR. SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON are prime examples. What else could they better be called? The only objection I see in those classifiers' definitions/usage is that they seem to think it should only apply to fiction. But what about factual things, like TV shows like "Meet the Press", many if not all episodes of which are solidly about politics and politicians.

I think TMDb has confused genre with subject matter.

But a lot of genres are statements of subject matter - War, Sci-fi, Romance, Crime - and not just at TMDb or even just for films and TV. How do you define genre? That's evidently still an academic argument, developing a fixed defintion, but catalogs and databases still use genres, need them, for classification and organization and description purposes, and all seem to include some genres which are nothing else but subject-statements.

For myself, I wouldn't propose a genre like Politics, if it wasn't already here, because the qualifying works are relatively few, and in the couple of discussions I've seen/participated in about genres so far, there seems to be a resistance to adding anything to the site list, no matter how many examples there are crying out for something more informative than "Drama". Especially, resistance from staff. I gather that, in fact, some genres have been removed, whether dealing with subject (Historical Fiction) or style (Film Noir). But what's the problem, why get rid of something that's useful.

Sigh - it was the same problem at IMDb, although they did eventually permit a few suggested genres beyond what Collie came up with at the beginning. But for the most part, IMDb simply dismissed clear and clean genre-name suggestions as "sub-genres" (never mind they had no field for sub-genres), and that was the end of that. Here, it looks like it's "keywords". Sigh...

The point is that to call almost anything a genre, even when there are so few examples, makes little practical sense. The Library of Congress and American Film Institute get far more inclusive because they feel that is partly their job as highly inclusive curators. But such granularity is both unnecessary and inappropriate for sites such as IMDb and TMDb. An exhaustive set of genres makes no sense for these film/TV sites.

The IMDb list furnished by Sixties Holdout above seems like an excellent one at an appropriate level of conceptual detail. We have to stop somewhere; otherwise we might as well include as "genres" things like knitting, bicycling and daydreaming. There is much discussion on the Web of films that include knitting, bicycling and daydreaming; but that doesn't mean we need to give them their own genres. And as you yourself said:

For myself, I wouldn't propose a genre like Politics, if it wasn't already here . . . .

As for your other comment:

. . . but films like ADVISE AND [sic] CONSENT or MR. SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON are prime examples. What else could they better be called?

IMDb quite appropriately calls the former a drama and thriller, and the latter a drama and comedy. That's good enough for me and, I suspect, for most other folks. If you want to find movies about politics, just Google "movies about politics" and then visit a movie site, just as you would for "movies about dogs" or anything else that isn't a true genre.

If TMDb had simply defined genres individually instead of trying to "condense" by combining categories into a double category, we wouldn't be having this discussion. It just makes more sense to allow a movie to be in more than one genre than to try to make judgment calls by combining genres in questionable/debatable ways--especially when one of the combined genres probably isn't even worth calling a genre.

@pt100 said:

The point is that to call almost anything a genre, even when there are so few examples, makes little practical sense. The Library of Congress and American Film Institute get far more inclusive because they feel that is partly their job as highly inclusive curators. But such granularity is both unnecessary and inappropriate for sites such as IMDb and TMDb. An exhaustive set of genres makes no sense for these film/TV sites.

I never said it did.

The IMDb list furnished by Sixties Holdout above seems like an excellent one at an appropriate level of conceptual detail.

Why? Why IMDb; who appointed them the final word on movie/TV genres?

We have to stop somewhere; otherwise we might as well include as "genres" things like knitting, bicycling and daydreaming.

Unlikely. But a genre of "Hobby", for instance, might not be out of line for all 3.

There is much discussion on the Web of films that include knitting, bicycling and daydreaming; but that doesn't mean we need to give them their own genres.

The AFI and Library of Congress appear to agree. So do I.

As for your other comment:

. . . but films like ADVISE AND [sic] CONSENT or MR. SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON are prime examples. What else could they better be called?

IMDb quite appropriately calls the former a drama and thriller, and the latter a drama and comedy. That's good enough for me and, I suspect, for most other folks.

Ah, the old "Everybody's doing it but you" argument. Well, let's see if that holds up if others chime in.

BTW, how is it "good enough" for anybody to call MR. SMITH a Comedy?? It does have its melodramatic moments, and that might set some of the MST3K types to giggling, but it was hardly made as a comedy or seen as such in its time. And Drama is so generic - it's the opposite of Comedy, you know - that if either one is truly useful as a genre (apart from being dumping grounds for otherwise-unclassifiable titles), why not just stop with those two?

If you want to find movies about politics, just Google "movies about politics" and then visit a movie site, just as you would for "movies about dogs" or anything else that isn't a true genre.

I don't want to find "movies about politics". I want to find genre names that adequately classify movies on a film-by-film basis with as few having to be relegated to "Miscellaneous", or something equally as vague, as possible. The list at IMDb is incomplete, and the list here is incomplete, and I'd like to work on reducing that incompleteness for the benefit of "me and, I suspect, most other folks" who are involving themselves in contributing here.

This thread has wandered far off topic and has become unproductive, like asking how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. I think the original observation was a good one. Why should anyone combine disparate genres into a single combo genre? Just keep them unitary, and allow a movie to fall into more than one genre.

As for IMDb, Their list is a reasonable one, balancing breadth with manageability--even though you may disagree with it. It was built over many years, based on a lot of research, analysis and discussion.

@pt100 said:

As for IMDb, Their list ... was built over many years, based on a lot of research, analysis and discussion.

I know that. I was one of the participants. However, the list was never completed to the satisfaction of most of us, and several key genres remain missing still. Collie just dropped the ball and went off on another one of his whims, like he did with his Pet Boards.

@Rich Wannen said:

. . . a genre of "Hobby", for instance, might not be out of line . . . .

Seriously? So I guess maybe you'd include The Secret Life of Walter Mitty in a "genre" of "hobby" because of his daydreaming, rather than the theatrical genres of, say, comedy, fantasy and romance?

As for your other comment:

. . . but films like ADVISE AND [sic] CONSENT or MR. SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON are prime examples. What else could they better be called?

IMDb quite appropriately calls the former a drama and thriller, and the latter a drama and comedy. That's good enough for me and, I suspect, for most other folks.

Ah, the old "Everybody's doing it but you" argument. Well, let's see if that holds up if others chime in.

Well, I'm chiming in. Not everyone is going to agree all the time, but I think there is broad agreement, among film critics, historians and the public, that Mr. Smith Goes to Washington has both comedic and dramatic aspects to it.

BTW, how is it "good enough" for anybody to call MR. SMITH a Comedy?? It does have its melodramatic moments, and that might set some of the MST3K types to giggling, but it was hardly made as a comedy or seen as such in its time.

Even in its time it was seen as both a drama and a comedy (although initially it was seen by some as too dark), and certainly that impression endures the passage of time. The whole premise of how Stewart's character got into office has a lot of comedic elements to it, as do Smith's bumbling interactions with Susan (Astrid Allwyn) and other scenes, including the ending. In fact, perhaps one of the few good arguments for a possible hybrid genre is the blending of drama and comedy, which has in recent years entered the lexicon (literally) as "dramedy."

If you want to find movies about politics, just Google "movies about politics" and then visit a movie site, just as you would for "movies about dogs" or anything else that isn't a true genre.

I don't want to find "movies about politics". I want to find genre names that adequately classify movies on a film-by-film basis with as few having to be relegated to "Miscellaneous", or something equally as vague, as possible.

I think the IMDB list is adequate, particularly if one includes the sub-genres they use. It's possible that you just have a low tolerance for ambiguity, as your scheme to add "hobby" would seemingly then logically open the door to adding dozens, if not hundreds, of genres to the list, just to "clear things up." But the point of such a list is to limit things to a manageable number while still covering a broad range of exemplars. I believe IMDb's list does that well.

And Drama is so generic - it's the opposite of Comedy, you know - that if either one is truly useful as a genre (apart from being dumping grounds for otherwise-unclassifiable titles), why not just stop with those two?

I won't even bother to educate you about the classical hierarchy of theatrical genres, of which the comedy-vs.-drama dichotomy sits at the top. I will simply say that comedy and drama are quintessentially useful as the basis for further genre creation; which is why the happy/sad paired masks are referred to as the comedy/tragedy masks or as Greek theater masks. They represent the theater and refer to the range of emotions presented by stage actors. Of these, the diametrically opposed comedy and tragedy masks survived to become a symbol of the theater. Sometimes it is sufficient to label something as a comedy or a drama; sometimes one can usefully add modifiers/sub-genres to add specificity (e.g., romantic comedy, etc.).

The list at IMDb is incomplete, and the list here is incomplete, and I'd like to work on reducing that incompleteness for the benefit of "me and, I suspect, most other folks" who are involving themselves in contributing here.

God luck with that. Let us know how it turns out--although I think I already know it will not end satisfactorily for you, as I doubt TMDb or anyone else will follow you down that rabbit hole. And your noble quest will probably continue for the rest of your life. At least it will give you something to strive for.

Don't forget about keuwords guys