@zmcghee wrote:

I can add to this that the movie I saw in a U.S. IMAX theater and that I saw streamed on HBO Max here in the U.S. were both called "Dune: Part One" on screen.

And this should definitely mean according to our current rules that the original title should be "Dune: Part One." At least that's how I interpret our current rules in the bible.

This goes both ways -> show me your source that proves it was released as "Dune" in US theatres! I'm not sure how to prove this -> maybe someone can find an illegal cam version of the movie played in a theatre with a screenshot of the title? I don't have time today, but that would be an idea...

I think you are misunderstanding what I said. The movie was clearly released as Dune everywhere. The on-screen title is no doubt Dune: Part One but it's not in play since it's not a "close call" like Mother! (our title mother!), Ever After (our title EverAfter) or the 12 Monkeys main example.

If we want to change the rules to always use the original on-screen title it means fixing tens of thousands of titles that must be changed to ALL CAPS and similar variations. Is that really a good outcome? Here is the part where a big rule change to the Contribution Bible means a huge change for the database and weeks if not months of extra work for moderators.

Just to give one example from my collection. The original title Room for One More from 1952 should be changed to "ROOM FOR ONE MORE" (yes, including the quotation marks).

A modern, recent example is needed as well. The movie Passing should be changed to PASSING based on the proposed rule change.

At least that's how I interpret our current rules in the bible.

If you can show where in the Contribution Bible it says that we should always go with the original on-screen title in all cases it would be helpful. The rules were put in place to make it as easy as possible to decide a large number of cases, and with extra rules for the very few special cases. So maybe it comes down to whether this is is a special case. Are the two titles we have discussed in this topic almost the same? I don't think so.

With due respect, @lineker, I don't think the examples you cite apply or would be called into question were we to adopt the title "Dune: Part One." Your examples are all stylistic, where as "Dune" vs. "Dune: Part One" is about the content that appears on screen, not how it is stylized. (In fact, on screen the title is stylized in all caps.) Your examples, if spoken aloud, would all sound the same, whereas that's not the case here. The Contribution Bible has a whole section on capitalization, which says to me that's understood to be a separate issue from the title itself.

To answer your call for where the Bible says "we should always go with the original on-screen title," it's here:

The original title should always be the title used in the original version of the film.

Note that it says "in" the film itself, not in promoting the film.

Furthermore, the Bible specifically acknowledges that the title may change upon release:

The original title is subject to change until a movie is officially released theatrically, physically or digitally, or until it airs on television.

The original title should be the title used for the first official release, not a title only used as a working title before the release or a title only used for festival screenings.

For example, the correct original title for most big-budget American movies is the title used during their initial run in U.S. theaters. When there is an official title change before the theatrical release, the festival or working titles are added to the alternative titles field.

@zmcghee said:

To answer your call for where the Bible says "we should always go with the original on-screen title," it's here:

The original title should always be the title used in the original version of the film.

Note that it says "in" the film itself, not in promoting the film.

This sentence doesn't mean that it should be the on-screen title. Only that it should be the title used at the time of the original version of the film.

The only sentence in the Bible which talk of the on-screen title is this one a little below:

When the promotional material use slightly different titles (e.g. Twelve Monkeys vs 12 Monkeys), we try to use the title as it is written in the original on-screen opening credits.

@superboy97 said: This sentence doesn't mean that it should be the on-screen title. Only that it should be the title used at the time of the original version of the film.

If that's the case, the Bible should not say "in the original version of the film." If we are to favor the promotional title over what appears in the film itself, the rules should say so.

The sentence as written is not ambiguous. The "title used in the original version of the film" is "Dune: Part One."

@zmcghee said:

@superboy97 said: This sentence doesn't mean that it should be the on-screen title. Only that it should be the title used at the time of the original version of the film.

If that's the case, the Bible should not say "in the original version of the film." If we are to favor the promotional title over what appears in the film itself, the rules should say so.

The sentence as written is not ambiguous. The "title used in the original version of the film" is "Dune: Part One."

"in" apply to "the original version" not to the film itself.

@superboy97 said:

@zmcghee said:

@superboy97 said: This sentence doesn't mean that it should be the on-screen title. Only that it should be the title used at the time of the original version of the film.

If that's the case, the Bible should not say "in the original version of the film." If we are to favor the promotional title over what appears in the film itself, the rules should say so.

The sentence as written is not ambiguous. The "title used in the original version of the film" is "Dune: Part One."

"in" apply to "the original version" not to the film itself.

The sentence says “original version of the film.” Again, this is not ambiguous.

I stand by my interpretation of the rules that it is not stated anywhere that we should use the original on-screen title of the original version of the movie (like it is on IMDb).

I also think it's clear that the movie was released as Dune all over the world (likely because a second part had not yet been greenlighted).

I also think it's beyond any doubt that Dune: Part One is the chapter title used for part one of this two part epic movie. It's also fair to say it's the on-screen title for this movie based on how it was released.

@zmcghee is correct that there are style rules that determine most titles, but it would still mean that a moderator would have to decide in each case that the on-screen title used in a movie is not a deliberate style choice. And to my eyes "Room for One More" is very different compared to Room for One More even with capitalization removed. But again, if we want correct on-screen titles all the time there will be some ugly changes here and there.

Finally I think it's clear - based on previous discussions over the years and the way many moderators embrace the use of on-screen titles - that a majority of moderators would go against my opinion here. It no longer matters to them what the title of a movie is when it is released, but rather what text is used on-screen when the movie is released. That is unfortunate, but understandable. I will remove myself from this discussion and trust that the remaining mods will make a sensible decision in the end. No hard feelings, I promise.

Extra note: I think Letterboxd would support the change as well if I remember correctly a message I received from one of their crew members some weeks back.

Google has now made this change to update their movie listing’s title to Dune: Part One.

Can we address this title again? The on screen title has Part One. Denis Villeneuve says that is the title. A movie is not its marketing.