Quoting FUBAR:

Quote:
What the "H" has a movie poster got to do with anything?  The people who put out the DVD decided to use the entire thing as the title.  Isn't that logical?  Certainly most, if not all websites list the DVD with the title completion of "The Year We Make Contact"

as an example:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010:_The_Year_We_Make_Contact

Look at the back cover.  The DVD manufacturer/distributor uses the entire thing when they say: Discover a new dimension of sci-fi excitement with 2010: The Year We Make Contact on DVD

It is the DVD title.  No question.

I don;t know what version of the DVD you have, but the original snapper release in question does not have "Discover a new dimension of sci-fi excitement with 2010: The Year We Make Contact" on the cover at all. And that is not relevant to the rules anyway.

And for every source that lists the tagline as part of the title, you will find one that does not I am sure - including IMDb. Also the Wikipedia article you quote is not specific to the DVD, it is regarding the film - as such it is irrelevant to the DVD release title that you want to use. It is clearly wrong in it's title as the film credits show only "2010" as the films title, so any title refernces thoughout are useless as any kin of reference.

Do you also plan to change other titles to "Modified Titles" if they include a tagline on the front cover? How about 3 that were easily to hand:
Tristan & Isolde: Honor is the Greatest Sacrafice of All
Sideways: In search of wine. In search of women. In search of themselves!
Into the Blue: Treasure has it's Price
How do you define when a tagline becomes part of a modified title in your rules?

Quoting tarantino:

Quote:
Then, if The Year We Make Contact is in fact only a tag line on the dvd, then your contribution should be:
Title : 2010
Original Title : blank

Because the original movie title is clearly 2010 and the dvd title is the same.

Agreed, the contribution remains incorrect per the rules.

Interesting Yes vote you have made there Skip!
Not only is it wrong to have the tagline title there at all, but it also has the (unacceptable to you) colon-less formatting that was the reason for this whole thread.     

Quoting Lopek:

Quote:
"The Year We Made Contact" is not part of the title, so the whole : or not is irrelevant.

The Title Screen in the credits shows only "2010", with cast on the pages on either side. Nowhere in the opening credits is is "The Year We Made Contact" listed.

So per the rules, the title should be "2010".

The modified titles rule does not apply, as "The Year We Made Contact" was on the original poster.

I would suggest it is nothing more than a tagline, and so has no place in the database.

Bull.  The cover of the hardbound book I have of that says "2010: The Year We Made Contact".

Quoting Rifter:

Quote:
Quoting Lopek:

Quote:
"The Year We Made Contact" is not part of the title, so the whole : or not is irrelevant.

The Title Screen in the credits shows only "2010", with cast on the pages on either side. Nowhere in the opening credits is is "The Year We Made Contact" listed.

So per the rules, the title should be "2010".

The modified titles rule does not apply, as "The Year We Made Contact" was on the original poster.

I would suggest it is nothing more than a tagline, and so has no place in the database.

Bull.  The cover of the hardbound book I have of that says "2010: The Year We Made Contact".

And this is relevant how?????

Here are some others that may or may not be right:

D-Day: The Sixth of June
The Desert Fox: the Story of Rommel
Dominion: Prequel to the Exorcist
Exorcist: The Beginning
Hellraiser: Hellseeker
The Homecoming: A Christmas Story
The Lost World: Jurassic Park
K-19: The Widowmaker
Lara Croft: Tomb Raider
Lara Croft: Tomb Raider: Cradle of Life (first colon only)
Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World
The Movies Begin - A Treasury of Early Cinema 1894-1913 (a dash)
Santa Claus: The Movie
Smokey and the Bandit: Pursuit Pack
Titanic: The Mystery and the Legacy
Total Recall 2070: Machine Dreams

None of these use colons in the actual film credits and they are not "episodes". 

                   

I hope you have you your tongue in your cheek.

Skip

Quoting FUBAR:

Quote:
Why can't this thing be considered a modified title?  Who says it isn't?

It is not always easy to detemine what part of the text on the cover is the title and what part is not. Usually there is much more on the cover than just the title. For example there are some actors listed, a edition description, a DVD logo, a studio name, and some times a tag line. All of those are not part of the title. We could come to the conclusion that "The Year We Made Contact" is part of the title (and if it where a German DVD I would suggest that) and then we could apply the modified title rule. We could also come to the conclusion that it's "only" a tag line. The the modified title rule would not apply because we don't list tag lines as part of the title. As stated before, other parts of the (back) cover or second sources (like posters) may help to decide whether it's a tag line or part of the title. In this case I would support the tag line position.

Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
If your tongue in cheek reference is about the list of Titles above, then the answer is no.

These Titles technically do not follow the Rules.  Colons have been arbitrarily inserted where none exist in the actual film credits.  There is no reference to ""subtitles" in the Rules , I don't think.

Agreed

Quote:
I personally prefer for them to stay the way they are, but it means a tweak to the Rules to make them legit.

I prefer them with the colon also, and would support a rules revision to "allow" what we are already doing.