Idea: a Dark Knight: IMAX Cut fan edit?

In the special edition of the Dark Knight DVD, the second disc has the set of larger resolution IMAX scenes.

Could these be integrated into a cut of the movie (Revenge of the Fallen “Big Screen Edition” Style) as a single fan edit?

Seems like the sort of thing somebody would try which is why I’m surprised nobody has yet!

Speaking of IMAX cuts, I think it would be cool if somebody edited Episode II: Attack of the Clones to reflect the cut that was shown in IMAX theaters (superior to the official dvd cut).

Blu-Ray release of TDK already have those (and more) Imax sequences incorporated, so it is officially released, therefore, there is no need for such fanedit.

False.

The Blu-Ray crops the IMAX 1.44:1 scenes to 1.78:1.

The DVD features use the full 1.44:1, but pillarboxed in a 1.78:1 frame.  Also, they don't include every IMAX shot, just the six main "sequences."

I know that the 1.33:1 version shown on HBO (and possibly the fullscreen DVD) uses more picture information on the top and bottom than the Blu-Ray cut does, so my assumption is that they're 1.44:1 cropped to 1.33:1, which is much closer to the original version.

A proper DVD IMAX cut would have to convert the DVD from 16:9 anamorphic to 4:3 letterbox, and the IMAX shots would be replaced with 1.33:1 fullscreen shots from the fullscreen DVD using the Blu-Ray version as a guide (assuming the fullscreen DVD does what the HBO version did).

The DVD special features could be used to add the rest of the 1.44:1 information to the sides of the 1.33:1 version.  This would mean that the major IMAX sequences would be at proper 1.44:1 (with very thin bars on top and bottom), while the random IMAX shots not included in the special features would be 1.33:1.

Doing it in 4:3 letterbox would recreate the IMAX experience more closely than the DVD features format that switches from letterbox to pillarbox.  I would say the Blu-Ray should be the definitive IMAX cut for 16:9 TVs, while this theoretical version would be the definitive IMAX cut for 4:3 TVs.

false

No. He said:

Could these be integrated into a cut of the movie (Revenge of the Fallen "Big Screen Edition" Style) as a single fan edit?

I have answered to that question and ROTF Big Screen Edition style is exactly the same as TDK on BR (1.78 for IMAX sequences).

and possibly the fullscreen DVD) uses more picture information on the top and bottom than the Blu-Ray cut does,

I really doubt it.

 I think that fullscreen DVD is just cropped from widescreen, or in best case it is open matte which means that it may have more information on top & bottom than widescreen (but not more than BR), but still less on both sides.

But I have not seen fullscreen DVD (really, who would want to watch it? ;) ).

while this theoretical version would be the definitive IMAX cut for 4:3 TVs.

Right, but dont you think that creating version especially for 4:3 TVs is rather pointless?

The standard-def HBO showing definitely uses much more picture information on top and bottom than the Blu-Ray does.  They just cropped the little bit off the sides from the 1.44:1 to get it to 1.33:1, so it shows more than the Blu-Ray's 1.78:1.  I don't know if the fullscreen DVD is the same, but I don't see why they would make a completely separate version from the HBO version.  It makes no sense.

And no, I don't think creating a version for 4:3 TVs is pointless, especially if you want to recreate the IMAX experience of a shift from 2.39:1 to 1.44:1 as closely as possible.  No matter how big your screen, a shift from 2.39:1 to 1.78:1 is nowhere near as dramatic a shift as the original IMAX version was.  And switching from letterbox to pillarbox doesn't give the same feeling as a sheer "opening up" of the aspect ratio to fill the screen entirely.

And Transformers 2 is a different beast entirely, since the IMAX cut actually featured differences in footage (extended fight sequences, I believe), while The Dark Knight's 35mm and IMAX cuts are exactly the same with the exception of aspect ratio.

There are other things to consider, like how the footage that would be restored in a 2.39:1/1.33:1 version would mostly be excess headroom that was cropped for the Blu-Ray.  As awesome as the dramatic aspect ratio shift originally was, the headroom was fine in an IMAX theater where you didn't look much at the top third of the screen anyway.  The Blu-Ray version is better framed, and thus is probably a better home viewing experience than a full-IMAX-ratio version would be.

My point is, it could easily be done, but whether it needs to be or not is up for debate.

And Transformers 2 is a different beast entirely, since the IMAX cut actually featured differences in footage (extended fight sequences, I believe), while The Dark Knight's 35mm and IMAX cuts are exactly the same with the exception of aspect ratio.

transformers 2 IMAX sequences are presented in exactly the same way as TDK is. The fact that there is also 30 seconds of additional footage have nothing to do with it.

And no, I don't think creating a version for 4:3 TVs is pointless, especially if you want to recreate the IMAX experience of a shift from 2.39:1 to 1.44:1 as closely as possible. 

If someone wants to watch non-anamorphic movie on 4:3 TV or even anamorphic on 16x9 TV with black bars on both sides during IMAX sequences, yes, in that case it makes sense.

My point is, it could easily be done, but whether it needs to be or not is up for debate.

That is right.

I think that BR version handles aspect ratio switch the best possible way for home viewing.

What about people who aren't outfitted for BR but want to see the rest of the visual information?

ChainsawAsh said:

The DVD [special] features use the full 1.44:1, but pillarboxed in a 1.78:1 frame.  Also, they don't include every IMAX shot, just the six main "sequences."

Ziz said:

The IMAX scenes are on the two-disc standard DVD as extras, just not integrated into the film.

That's what I mean. If people bother to integrate "deleted scenes" into standard cuts of DVD movies that are already out there (so-called "extended edits") then this seems like a natural enough thing to do. They would just be replacing existing footage of those scenes in the standard ratio to the higher image resolution ("taller") ones.

Do you want to watch it fullscreen? I mean - 4:3 version switching from letterboxed 2.35:1 to 4:3 and back again? Such version would be rather useless for widescreen TVs users, cause non-anamorphic image looks like crap. Or maybe you want anamorphic with black bars from top & bottom disappearing and appearing on both sides?

If not, If you want it exactly the way TF:ROTF is, then it is identical to Blu-Ray release just in standard definition, so why anyone should bother to editing it?  There's no difference if you have such an edit or BRrip.

What about people who aren't outfitted for BR but want to see the rest of the visual information?

1. Buy The Dark Knight on BR disc

2. download mkv BRrip and convert it to DVD to watch it on DVD player.

Buy BR player in the future.

Well by that logic, we shouldn't do laserdisc to DVD conversions, because LD's are cheap now (cheaper than BD)... people can go buy those!

One person completes the edit and the whole world benefits. Download time + the cost of the disc < acquire and configure HD capable system + BD + player

Well, you don't *need* an HD capable system.  I have a PS3 with a 20" Toshiba analog SDTV, and I've already stopped buying DVDs in favor of Blu-Rays.  (Though to be fair, I've more or less stopped buying movies altogether in favor of converting my library-borrowed or Netflix-borrowed discs into MKVs that I can play with my Seagate FreeAgent Theater+ Media Player ... )

Point being, now that Blu-Ray players are at a decent price range, it's smarter now to buy a Blu-Ray player (which can still play SD DVD's) even if you don't have an HDTV, if only to future-proof yourself.

Besides, I'm sure you could download a BR-rip of TDK that has the shifting aspect ratio intact (some people crop it all to 2.39:1, though I don't know why) and convert that to DVD format.

From my point of view it would not be a fanedit. Cause what kind of fanedit it is, when it's identical to 480p Blu-Ray rip? From what I know fanedits are not about recreating officially released and available versions of the movies, right?

I guess it would be a preservation then (since the scenes aren't "new" just higher resolution), of the IMAX cut. Sorry for my technical inaccuracy there.

ChainsawAsh said:

Well, you don't *need* an HD capable system. I have a PS3 with a 20" Toshiba analog SDTV, and I've already stopped buying DVDs in favor of Blu-Rays. (Though to be fair, I've more or less stopped buying movies altogether in favor of converting my library-borrowed or Netflix-borrowed discs into MKVs that I can play with my Seagate FreeAgent Theater+ Media Player ... )

Point being, now that Blu-Ray players are at a decent price range, it's smarter now to buy a Blu-Ray player (which can still play SD DVD's) even if you don't have an HDTV, if only to future-proof yourself.

Sure, I guess, and if they show it on TV, somebody could DVR it and burn an unofficial copy and put it on a DVD and watch it on a PS3, right?

I don't see the point if you're going to the extra expense and not be equipped to actually tell the difference between the higher quality format and DVD. I can watch HD content now on my SD tvs. It doesn't look (or sound) any better than DVD. So yes, let's all buy the least popular gaming console so we can watch full frame BD on our regular TV's... :P

I hear what you're saying, but there's no such thing as "Future proof" in today's media world. BD is only 14% of the home market, but they're already planning to phase it out in favor of paid downloads (which frankly is one of the stupidest things ever, since people will just burn it to disc anyway, and that's after you've gotten everyone outfitted with fast enough internet service, plus large enough storage and burning equipment). The players are getting cheaper (cheaper than the PS3), but the discs are still way more expensive than they need to be (nevermind the blanks). The library is still limited to mostly new releases and a few major movies. DVD is still the standard and will be for some time to come, unless it's artifically forced out. The best way to do that would be to cut the prices. If they cost the same, people may trade up, even if they look the same (since most people still don't have optimum equipment).

Anyway, before this turns into an impassioned argument about why we should dream in HD, I'm going to just say I thought it would be cool to see the IMAX cut preserved on DVD.

Besides, I'm sure you could download a BR-rip of TDK that has the shifting aspect ratio intact (some people crop it all to 2.39:1, though I don't know why) and convert that to DVD format.

In any case, all I'm saying, it only takes one person to release it. That vs. everyone doing their own "do it yourself" work around (the original argument that it's easier to spend the cash on the equipment for the new system). The point is just to have the extra impact of the IMAX shot scenes integrated into a DVD cut of the movie.

I'm going to just say I thought it would be cool to see the IMAX cut preserved on DVD.

Yeah, cool, then download BR rip, convert it to DVD and burn it. Voila, you have it preserved on DVD.

What's the point in editing it? Its like inventing a wheel again.  I just dont get it.

In any case, all I'm saying, it only takes one person to release it.

Releasing fanedits is questionable, but something like this?  It would be definitely illegal.

It's no more legal than a fan edit, that's for sure. But it'd be a preservation of the IMAX cut of the movie, which, according to the conversation had here, sounds to be somewhat different than the BD cut or the full frame presentation anyway.

Me, I'm not trying to pirate anything. I own TDK already. I just wanted to watch the IMAX scenes integrated into the rest of the movie.

But it'd be a preservation of the IMAX cut of the movie, which, according to the conversation had here, sounds to be somewhat different than the BD cut or the full frame presentation anyway

Any version which would be different from BR would be either non-anamorphic in 4:3 or with black bars on both sides in IMAX scenes. It also won't have all of the IMAX shots which are present on BR cause some of them are not present on DVD. 

If you REALLY want something like this, it looks like you will have to do it by yourself :P

Alright.  Here's the run-down:

- There are NO DIFFERENCES in the edit of the IMAX, 35mm, DVD, or Blu-Ray cuts of the film.  The differences are entirely in the aspect ratio.

- The only official preservation of the taller framing of all the IMAX shots is the Blu-Ray, which crops the top third or so of the shot to 1.78:1 to fill a 16:9 television.

- The DVD contains the six main IMAX sequences in 1.44:1, pillarboxed inside a 1.78:1 frame, but it's missing many individual shots (like when the seaplane lands next to the sailboat, for instance) that were filmed in IMAX.

- The HBO fullscreen broadcast - and, presumably, the fullscreen DVD - contains all the IMAX shots with the sides cropped off to fill a 1.33:1 frame.  Less of the image is cropped in this case than on the Blu-Ray.

- The IMAX shots were framed in such a way that the top third or so of the frame is basically empty, because in a true IMAX theater, you most likely wouldn't be able to see that part of the frame anyway.  So, one could argue that the Blu-Ray's 1.78:1 preserves the intended framing more than the IMAX-theatrical 1.44:1, or the fullscreen DVD's 1.33:1.