But Aziz Ansari, one of the stars in the NBC comedy “Parks and Recreation,” has unleashed a firestorm against the company for diluting the IMAX brand and robbing him of dollars that were unnecessarily spent. And I have to agree with him…

Last Thursday night, I went to Star Trek at the Pacific Science Center IMAX in Seattle. This is real IMAX. I waited in line and I got seated in front of a kickass, six-story-tall screen that went from floor to ceiling. The screen is huge, and the seating, which runs much steeper than the traditional movie theater, guarantees you won’t glancing around someone’s fat head to see everything. In other words, it’s a unique experience that provides great sound, crystal clear display and an overall different perspective than a typical theater does. Even though Star Trek was not filmed in IMAX format as were parts of The Dark Knight last year, it was still a cool, in-your-face experience.

Having grown up in Seattle, this is what I come to expect of IMAX. As far as I know, IMAX screens are big, the seating steep and the sound engulfing in every part of the country. At least they used to be.

On Sunday, I went to Star Trek for a second time, this time by visiting Lincoln Square Cinemas in Bellevue, WA. Lincoln Square is an awesome theater with comfortable seats and large screens, but they had just upgraded by installing an IMAX theater. Awesome. So Lincoln Square tore out one of its theaters, installed vertical seating and a large screen, and now has the right to charge extra for that particular theater, right? Wrong!

To my disappointment, the screen was a little bigger – vertically at least – but the seating was just normal, old stadium-riser seating. I could clearly see IMAX projectors up in the booth, and the movie did look great… but it still felt like a normal movie for the most part. The IMAX experience was not to be found, but I did manage to spend a lot more money on my tickets.

From the sounds of it, Aziz went to an “IMAX” theater that was much smaller than the normal IMAX screen. If that’s the case, and from what I hear, it is, that really, really sucks. I felt a bit shafted, but not enough to ask for my money back. If I went into an alleged IMAX screen that ended up being a quarter of the size of a regular screen, I would be pissed. Either way, I’m not going to shell out money for marginally better picture and sound at Lincoln Square’s IMAX screen again.

So, all of this is very troubling. Sure, IMAX is making great profits right now (actually, the company itself is not profitable due to debt payments, but its revenue grew 43% in the first quarter of 2009 so it’s well on its way), but this expansion could destroy it in a long run. IMAX has always represented uber-quality and superior experience, but without distinguishing its fake IMAX screens from its real ones, it is going to dilute its brand strength quickly. It’s funny that Aziz brought this up, as the thought had been nagging at me all week; it wasn’t until he pointed it out and his rant made headlines that I realized how horrible of a strategy this was.

Regal, AMC, IMAX and other chains should think long and hard about how they want to position these new digital screens in the future. Call them IMAX Digital, or “with IMAX technology,” but for God’s sake, don’t fool moviegoers into spending their hard-earned cash by not distinguishing between the two.

I’ve actually never seen a “real” movie at the IMAX, i.e. a Hollywood production; the only IMAX movies I remember are the ones from my childhood, like Beavers and Everest. Those are all fine and good, but after missing movie after movie after movie on the big IMAX screen, I decided it was time to finally to make my move and hit up The Dark Knight on the lauded format.

The nearest IMAX is in downtown Seattle, about 25-30 minutes from where I live. Take parking and walking to the theater into account, it’s probably a 45-minute trip one-way. That being said, it doesn’t make much sense for me to spend my time and money to drive to the IMAX, buy my tickets at the box office, and return home. So, I did what I presume most people do when they decide to buy tickets to the IMAX – they go to the website.

Now, I hate ticket surcharges. It’s not necessarily the cost (though it is in this situation), but the principal of the matter. I understand perhaps a $1 fee here and there, as most ticket-sellers are essentially middle men and deserve to profit from being such. With Fandango, though, the per-ticket fee is not cheap, making it much more worthwhile to drive to the local theater and pick up the tickets myself. Actually, I just checked, and it’s only $1.25, but that’s per ticket, which means things add up quickly. Don’t even get me started on TicketMaster, which should be sued by the government a thousand times over.

Anyway, back to IMAX.

So I decide to go see The Dark Knight with a couple of friends. Two of whom I’m buying tickets for. I go to the site, select three tickets, which, understandably, are slightly more pricy at $10.75 a pop. That’s fine. But wait, what the fuck is this? A $3/ticket charge? Three fucking dollars per ticket? Are you fucking kidding me?

Now let me digress. Let’s say a company such as IMAX decides to build their own e-commerce system. I bet it could be made for $1,000, but for doubt’s sake, let’s say a system costs $100,000 to make, maintain and keep secure.  At $3 per ticket, that means it would take 33,333 tickets sold before breaking even. The Seattle theater alone seats 405 people, which means 82 sold out showing. The Dark Knight has four showings a day, which means that it would take them 21 days of showing Batman to break even. We’re on day 18 of the film’s release, and almost all of the showings have been selling out.

In other words, assuming the ridiculously overpriced cost of $100,000, a one-time fee, it would take the IMAX just over three weeks of convenience charges to pay for their entire system. Even if they had to pay that every year – which they don’t – they would be immensely profitable. Of course, IMAX outsources their e-commerce, which means they pay a small fee for each ticket sold, but it’s probably like 25 cents, which means $2.75 extra profit per ticket.

Oh, and there’s also a $2 order charge to top everything off.

And IMAX is saving money because their “convenience” charge is not for us but for them, as they don’t have to pay people to manually sell tickets to us moviegoers.

Bottom line: I paid nearly $15 per ticket, and IMAX is making nearly $5 of pure profit off my transaction. Fucking scam if you ask me.