Why Didn t Katie Holmes Play Rachel Dawes Again

Joined:

April 16, 2003

Messages:

48,170

Likes Received:

iii
Joined:

Dec ii, 2005

Letters:

12,692

Likes Received:

five

Nope. If Katie Holmes can't render (although she's contracted to), then I'd rather they move onto another female character. I hate recasts.
I still call up that, in his early days as Batman, there would be a lot of press interest in the legend, and that Vicki Vale would be perfect as a side character. I know a lot of people don't want her in any sequel because she's already been in a film, merely this is a seperate series, and I think nosotros could easily encounter that if she is reintroduced again.
Joined:

October 1, 2003

Messages:

19,379

Likes Received:

7
to be honest..katie should return..only to exist murderd past Harvey in a fit of rage.
Joined:

Sep 30, 2005

Messages:

189

Likes Received:

0

If Rachel was to render i say requite the function to Jennifer Connelly, but if her part isn't that big i'd rather run into her not exist in the movie an possibly take more screentime for other characters.
Joined:

Apr seven, 2005

Messages:

1,480

Likes Received:

0

Unless WB thinks we're stupid, no recast.
Joined:

Jun twenty, 2005

Letters:

494

Likes Received:

0

No, just don't put the characters in the film and practice like BR tells at another person that his ex-wife just get away cause Batman was too much for her
I personally wouldn't want her dorsum. I hated Holmes.
Now if someone like Rachel McAdams or Jennifer Connolly got the role, and then I'd be all for her returning.
Joined:

Oct 21, 2004

Messages:

iv,432

Likes Received:

0

Thats pretty much Vicky Vale's role in the Batman was. Nolan wants to utilise fresh characters, and aside from Joker and Two-face, thats what he should stick with. i want Rachel Dawes/Katie Holmes back because 1) i hate recasts (even though i thought Jennifer Connelly would have been perfect from the beginning) and 2) i detest when characters are just dropped and i think shes also of import to bruce to only drop (Ive made tons of arguments on the discipline so you can read my other posts to see them).
now if they were to bring in a new daughter, they can do a lot more with either Talia al Ghul- reveal some evil revenge plot in the 3rd picture show- or Vesper Fairchild- have her murder in the third and take Two-Face prosecuting a captured Batman....something like that.
Ronny Shade back for a express time

Joined:

Sep 8, 2004

Messages:

18,767

Likes Received:

0
Joined:

Jun 10, 2005

Letters:

15,262

Likes Received:

iii

If the character is going to be back, recast that unwatchable Holmes daughter.
Joined:

Aug 8, 2005

Letters:

715

Likes Received:

0
Joined:

May two, 2003

Messages:

864

Likes Received:

0

Hopefully if they practise bring her back they'll have her killed off. However if she is in the sequel a recast would be moronic. We've had plenty of that in the terminal francise. Let's not beginning again.
Joined:

Jan 6, 2003

Messages:

xix,927

Likes Received:

0
Ronny Shade back for a limited time

Joined:

Sep 8, 2004

Messages:

eighteen,767

Likes Received:

0

Your sig is way more than interesting than your post.
Joined:

Mar 3, 2006

Letters:

10,197

Likes Received:

0

I guess it was impaired of me to make a whole new thread about Rachel Dawes, then I'll but postal service my thoughts here:
In the midst of all the questions surrounding whether Katie Holmes volition reprise her role as Rachel Dawes, we accept been bombarded with continuity problems, and stance on how past female characters have inexplicably disappeared from the franchise.
Beingness a stickler for continuity, if Katie Holmes doesn't return, I would not vote for a recast, simply cuz it bugs me. But I don't desire her graphic symbol to not even be referenced if she doesn't return, either!

Here is my solution:

Reference that Rachel Dawes has been away on a trip or something; she never returns!

That'south it! Have Harvey Paring step in when it's apparent that Rachel is gone, and so after we've forgotten most her, a big slice to the finally is her body existence discovered in the river or something . . . a victim of The Joker! We wouldn't ever demand to see Holmes, and if we did, they could perhaps use archive footage from the first picture re-cut (if that's legal).

Anyone else feel me on this one?

Distressing for me 'noob-idity'
Joined:

Oct 1, 2003

Letters:

19,379

Likes Received:

7

Really, I was thinking possibly she could exist transferred out of Gotham past her however-corrupted peers. Maybe fifty-fifty a place similar Urban center, Or Hub City. Like she was forced out of Gotham, because I really tin't see a adult female who's defended as much of her life, if non more, to saving Gotham than Batman has to merely go out on her ain terms.
That way, We don't have to have Holmes or Rachel reappear, we can constitute other DC Cities, and establish that Gotham is still corrupt, despite Falcone being out of action.
Joined:

Jan 6, 2003

Messages:

19,927

Likes Received:

0

To exist honest I would not mind her in the sequel. Some might not like the Stigma of Tomkat or any merely she did a decent run at the character so let'south meet. But if she doesnt come back, she doesnt come back.
Joined:

Jan 17, 2004

Messages:

i,398

Likes Received:

0

I say No to a recast. Even if Katie Holmes wants to come up back I call back they should forget the character and move on to Selina Kyle or someone else.
The finish of Begins is like a goodbye scene anyhow.
The only thing I could accept would exist if she came back then promptly gets killed by the Joker, but I doubt they'll become for that.
Joined:

Dec two, 2005

Messages:

12,692

Likes Received:

5

I personally didn't see anything wrong with Rachel. People were clearly going to hate her because she was
1. a completely new grapheme
ii. a Dawson'due south Creek star
3. Tom Cruise's Girl
Simply I thought she did ok, standing up alongside an established cast, like Freeman, Oldman and Neeson.
The character was essential in giving Bruce a moral side, she also sets up the Harvey Dent plot by being a DA.

However, I don't encounter her graphic symbol lasting that much longer. Her leaving; either from dying or moving abroad, would give Batman more than of a purpose.

I would like her to return in the sequel, simply I don't expect her to get in to the end.

(The fact that she is similar in character to Andrea Beaumont, and shares the same start name with the original Andrea- Rachel Caspian- simply makes me wonder whether the writers had more planned for her in after films, but that's irrelevant)
Joined:

Oct 21, 2004

Letters:

4,432

Likes Received:

0

well information technology wasnt actually goodbye. it was more like "this cant work until your chore is finished and you lot're you lot again". they tin can motility on to a new love interest ( i want Talia), and nonetheless accept rachel in that location because her job isnt finished and she can still play as another "conscience" for bruce like alfred.
Joined:

Jan six, 2003

Messages:

19,927

Likes Received:

0

Real Talk and as a matter of fact when word got out that Holmes was playing a daughter by the name of Racheal there was speculation on this very lath of whether or non it was Caspain
Joined:

December 2, 2005

Messages:

12,692

Likes Received:

5

Really? And so did people think she could finish upwards as a Reaper/Phantasm type character so?
Joined:

Feb 21, 2001

Letters:

15,490

Likes Received:

0

No re-casting of Rachel...information technology would crusade too much of a distraction. Either Holmes comes back to play Rachel and be killed by Joker.....or she shouldn't exist in the motion-picture show at all. Bruce and Alfred can ever throw a mention of her leaving for Chicago to become the DA there or something.....
bdsproductions Forever guarding Gotham

Joined:

April 1, 2006

Letters:

512

Likes Received:

0

she shoudl render with a bit office so die i don't recall bats should accept love intrests in every flick.