North:

No, deejay made the right comment relative to Original title. That has NOTHING to do with what the title of the DVD is, we have what the Rules say to do and that is the end of it. Now using Original title is perfectly reasonable and I won't argue that point at all. But anything other than what the Rules say relative to the DVD title is unacceptable and in violation of the Rules.

Skip

Wow - you guys are really going to be in trouble when the release the 3rd installment (Yes James - it's a sequel - ahthough I agree with you there is nothing on the front cover that tells you that )

So, how will this title be shown in DVDP?

Quote:

Quote:
According to Variety, Disney is moving forward with a third installment of its hit dance franchise "Step Up," tentatively titled Step Up 3-D

Obviously it will have to be Step Up 3: -D 

Quoting lyonsden5:

Quote:
According to Variety, Disney is moving forward with a third installment of its hit dance franchise "Step Up," tentatively titled Step Up 3-D

Oh that's just bad news. It's not even a good film! 

Quoting northbloke:

Quote:
Quoting lyonsden5:

Quote:
According to Variety, Disney is moving forward with a third installment of its hit dance franchise "Step Up," tentatively titled Step Up 3-D

Does that mean we're going to have 3-D booty shoved in our faces? Sounds like a virtual lapdance! 

Well that's just good news! That's the one area where #2 excelled

Quoting northbloke:

Quote:
Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
ROFDLMAO, north but not surprised. Even the example given is not good enough for you. The only possible way you or Nadja could believe is that is by putting yourt personal bias above the Rules, which is something I would expect of BOTH of you.

Skip

What a surprise - you get caught out posting a falsity, so instead of debating like a civil human being you start flinging insults. 
However I don't know I'm still surprised by this behaviour - you have behaved like a spoilt toddler for as long as I've visited these forums.
And to someone who values these rules so dearly I have only two more things to say: slip covers and Ida Flammenbaum.

Sorry north, I have not posted ANY kind of falsity. Ands in point of fact I started out with a civil post stating my opinion and you jumped into it with your usual uncivil style and now you want to point fingers at me because I will not put up with your , Nadja's or anyone elses BS. All you have to do is FOLLOW THE RULES and stop trying to twist them for personal biases. You two are hysterically funny, were it not so pathetic.

Skip

Quoting goodguy:

Quote:
Quoting Nadja:

Quote:
Oh that's just bad news. It's not even a good film! 

Thas't yourr prosenal refeprence and has NOTTHING to do withe online!!111

ROFLMAO Matthias, you don't make the rules, i wont' put up with your combative nature!!1!1 

Looking at the title objectively, it seems clear that the filmmakers wanted to be indicate that this was a sequel by including "2" in the title, but at the same time they used "2" as a  substitute for the word "to" so that when you say the title, you say "Step Up to the Street"; you don't say "Step Up 2.......pause......The Street"; therefore "The Street" is not an episode descriptor.

Therefore, I have to agree with James and Nadja that the title should be "Step Up 2 the Street".

We have other titles with numbers in them and we do not interpret them as numbers but as letters (or words in this case). 

"S1MØNE" is not "S-ONE-M-ZERO-NE" nor is "Se7en" read as "Se-seven-en".  We translate the number into what the film-maker intended it to represent.

In this case, the "2" was intended to represent the word "to" when reading the title.

EDITED to correct title.

Quoting hal9g:

Quote:
the title should be "Stepping Up 2 the Street".

The title is Step Up 2 not Stepping Up 2. Look at the cover on the first page and you will see.