Goodbye Ms. Dawson?

[BRUTAL]

I think that the Joker will kill Rachel Dawson (sp?) in the next film. I think it would give Bats a nice little push over that edge he seems to be teetering on in the first film. Then, upon apprehending Joker, we would get to see Batman try to rationalize not killing Joker right there. Seems like a good idea to me.

[Cinemaman]

Oh RLY? :rolleyes:

[weezerspider]

I have thought Joker would kill her since I walked out of the movie theater after seeing BB. Mostly because I hated her character.:woot:

[Mr. Superhero]

Ms. Dawson...:D

Classic.

[BRUTAL]

I expect that all the Holmes-Haters would be the first on board for this...

[Isildur´s Heir]

Rachel Dawson will not die in the movie.
It would be a cheat trick by Nolan, which i don´t believe he will fall into, but, then again, Goyer is there....

Like the character or not, Rachel is the light at the end of the tunnel for Bruce, she is his "prize" when Gotham doesn´t need Batman anymore.
So, to kill her would just be an empty efford for the dramatic.
She might not appear in this movie, that i believe...

[I Am The Knight]

I hope they don't kill her just for the sake of it. Besides I don't really see Nolan doing that, I mean damn.....Well, who knows what will happen. Hopefully a script review will come soon with hints regarding her character....

[Shoemeister]

Ms. Dawson ---> http://z.about.com/d/teentvmovies/1/0/I/F/dawson.jpg

[BRUTAL]

Rachel Dawson will not die in the movie.
It would be a cheat trick by Nolan, which i don´t believe he will fall into, but, then again, Goyer is there....

Like the character or not, Rachel is the light at the end of the tunnel for Bruce, she is his "prize" when Gotham doesn´t need Batman anymore.
So, to kill her would just be an empty efford for the dramatic.
She might not appear in this movie, that i believe...

How is it a chea(p?) trick? To off your so-called "light" would be a good idea IMO. Isn't one of the defining characteristics of the Batman character his somewhat overwhelming personally responsibility? Granted he has taken it upon himself to right all these wrongs, but the wrongs are neverending, and he continues to fight. I think the idea behind his character is to assume that he will continue to fight and as this fight is neverending, Gotham will always need Batman. Also, more often times than not, Batman creates new problems by solving the others; so isn't it the viciousness of this cycle is what makes the story intriguing(sp?)?

[Two-Face]

Another Rachel thread:rolleyes:

[Isildur´s Heir]

I´m sorry dude, but i didn´t understood half you wrote :o

I only said that it would be a cheap trick to kill her, JUST for Bruce never to think about giving up the mantle.
Besides, with the knowledge that Nolan´s Batman is going to be a trilogy, and with the last scene,when Rachel say, someday, when Gotham doesn´t need Batman anymore....i just bet that, in the end of the third movie, Bruce will "retire" the Batman´s live.

[Rexi]

the racheal character receives a lot of unwarranted criticism IMO, people seem to generally hate her because of here relationship with cruise and the fact that she was on dawsons creek. killing her off might work but i dont think she will appear.

[Cinemaman]

Oh she will, she must :D

But anyway, I'd like Joker to kill her like he did it in TKJ with Barbara G.

[BRUTAL]

I´m sorry dude, but i didn´t understood half you wrote :o

I only said that it would be a cheap trick to kill her, JUST for Bruce never to think about giving up the mantle.
Besides, with the knowledge that Nolan´s Batman is going to be a trilogy, and with the last scene,when Rachel say, someday, when Gotham doesn´t need Batman anymore....i just bet that, in the end of the third movie, Bruce will "retire" the Batman´s live.

I'm sorry you didn't understood half I wrote :o < and I'm assuming that this means "I'm incredibly intelligent".

Regardless of whether or not this film series would be a trilogy or not. This character has been around historically for nearly 70 years and more modernly for about 20 years, to think that a legacy of that size could be absolutley concluded in 3 films is a little nieve. I also think that you're a bit confused about the term "cheap trick". The fact of the matter is that Bruce never does want to give up the mantle. He considers himself Batman first, not Bruce Wayne. He considers Wayne to be the "alter-ego". I believe the line about "Gotham not needing Batman anymore" was more of wishful thinking on the part of Dawes. She knows that there will always be crime and hence there will always be a need to stop it. I think that particular line is more meant to be a "in a perfect world" kind of line, and as everyone knows the world is not, nor will it ever be, "perfect". The Batman mantle will continue to fight for as long as Gotham is around and I don't think Nolan plans to sum up Batman's entire career in three films.

But anyway, I'd like Joker to kill her like he did it in TKJ with Barbara G.

Finally a supporter who's opinion isn't fueled by hatred for the old-school WB. Oh, but I don't think Barb died in TKJ.

[Comic Book Boy]

I think that the Joker will kill Rachel Dawson (sp?) in the next film. I think it would give Bats a nice little push over that edge he seems to be teetering on in the first film. Then, upon apprehending Joker, we would get to see Batman try to rationalize not killing Joker right there. Seems like a good idea to me.
Yeah perfect. It has the same effect of Joker killing his parents in B89...I'd like to see Bruce struggling not to kill Joker. Really intense, they could even copy that scene in HUSH where Gordon stops him from killing, and further the Gordon/Batman relationship. DO IT NOLAN! :batman::up:

[Cinemaman]

Finally a supporter who's opinion isn't fueled by hatred for the old-school WB. Oh, but I don't think Barb died in TKJ.

Yeah, she didn't, but her back was damaged. Besides this time new victim of Joker will die :D :joker: :up:

[BRUTAL]

Yeah perfect. It has the same effect of Joker killing his parents in B89...I'd like to see Bruce struggling not to kill Joker. Really intense, they could even copy that scene in HUSH where Gordon stops him from killing, and further the Gordon/Batman relationship. DO IT NOLAN! :batman::up:

There is also a great bit of writing in the Knightfall novel about after Bane frees most of Arkham and Batman finds Joker and it goes into great detail about Batman thinking about every reason he has to kill Joker, he totally rationalizes it it his head and it's actually Tim Drake that talks him down, but it's a fantastic scene that I think Nolan could do great things with.

[The Batman]

Rachel Dawson will not die in the movie.
It would be a cheat trick by Nolan, which i don´t believe he will fall into, but, then again, Goyer is there....

Like the character or not, Rachel is the light at the end of the tunnel for Bruce, she is his "prize" when Gotham doesn´t need Batman anymore.
So, to kill her would just be an empty efford for the dramatic.
She might not appear in this movie, that i believe...

exactly. killing rachel would be cheap drama

[BRUTAL]

exactly. killing rachel would be cheap drama


Ok this "cheap" word keeps getting thrown around but nobody has yet to actually validate it. I have no problem with other people's opinions but throwing out the same WORD over and over is hardly proving anything. So I ask, yet again, how is it "cheap"?

[The Batman]

Because its nothing more than a shallow idea to get Batman super angry at the joker. Because fanboys only want it to happen because they hate katie holmes. There really is no reason to kill off a character as important as rachel.

[Two-Face]

Agree with The Batman, only reason would be cos some Bat-fans hate Holmes so they want character dead.

[XCharlieX]

Keep Ms Dawes. No more blonde hottie of the week.

[LastSunrise1981]

Because its nothing more than a shallow idea to get Batman super angry at the joker. Because fanboys only want it to happen because they hate katie holmes. There really is no reason to kill off a character as important as rachel.

Because killing her wouldn't ruin the Batman story. There's Selina and Talia that could be brought forth to add some interesting drama/suspense to the story.

I don't hate Katie Holmes at all really, but I feel she didn't really help Batman Begins either.

I definitely think they should have Joker kill her off.

Katie Holmes really didn't seem that interested in doing Batman anyways. Since all she ever talked about in her interviews as Cruise and his upcoming movies.

So Joker killing Rachel the way John Doe killed his subjects in Se7en would definitely make me a happy fanboy.

[BRUTAL]

Because its nothing more than a shallow idea to get Batman super angry at the joker. Because fanboys only want it to happen because they hate katie holmes. There really is no reason to kill off a character as important as rachel.

As "IMPORTANT"? What purpose does she serve in the film other than as eye candy during the all "important" wet t-shirt scene. Please... she's a two-dimensional excuse for an unnecessary love interest. I have nothing against Katie Holmes personally, but she was so forgetable in a part that was not needed in a great film. Frankly I feel that the only "important" role for her to serve is as a catalyst for Batman dwell on a little-bit darker side after her death. I think that by havig the Joker kill her will bring the Joker character well ABOVE the likes of the Scarecrow in Batman's mind and place him amongst the TOP villains as he should rightfully be. Plus having the Dawes character get killed would be the first PERSONAL attack to Batman thus adding a whole new level to the "Lone Wolf" persona that has been the pathos of Batman for the last 20 years. Like I said before I have absolutley nothing against Holmes, but to say her character in the last film was "important" is kind of a joke. I feel that the only reason that even half of these want her in the next film so they might get a glimse at a topless Holmes in some stupid love scene.

[The Batman]

if you didnt think rachel was important to BB, then i think you need to watch the movie again...

[BRUTAL]

if you didnt think rachel was important to BB, then i think you need to watch the movie again...

I've seen it more than enough times to know that a pretty much useless half-damsel-in-distress who is only used as something pretty to look at and a very small part of exposition was really not needed. A little more time spent on the script and I bet the film would have been exactly the same. The only reason she's in the cast is becasue I'm sure the studio would be a little apprehensive to release a film with an entirely MALE cast in a genre thats demographic is prodominantly male. Maybe if more people payed attention to the story throughout the entire film instead of glazing over until a pretty face came on the screen they would understand that she was really irrelevant to anykind of plot development.

[BRUTAL]

double post

[BRUTAL]

triple post

[BRUTAL]

quadruple post

[BRUTAL]

quituple post

[BRUTAL]

sorry about all that, computer malfunction... or maybe operator malfunction

debate on...

[Action ACE]

So, is Rachael Daws in the next film???

I never considered this. Is their any conformation?

[BRUTAL]

Nope, no conformation ALL speculation at this point

[CConn]

Rachel Dawson will not die in the movie.
It would be a cheat trick by Nolan, which i don´t believe he will fall into, but, then again, Goyer is there....

Like the character or not, Rachel is the light at the end of the tunnel for Bruce, she is his "prize" when Gotham doesn´t need Batman anymore.
So, to kill her would just be an empty efford for the dramatic.
She might not appear in this movie, that i believe...Exactly. And having her killed would show there is no light at the end of the tunnel.

It may be cold hearted of me, but I want Batman - and the audience - to realize that.

[BRUTAL]

And a LARGE sigh of relief escapes me as I see more RATIONALITY

[batman11]

Ms. Dawson? HAHAHAHAH! I cried when I saw a post with "Ms. Dawson" in it. Did you even watch Batman Begins? Aside from those select few with a acapable intellect (you know who you are) the rest of you posters are probably oblivious to the fact that this Ms. Dawson does not exist. I challenge each and every one of you to watch Batman Begins and point it out to me where there is a Ms. Dawson character. If you find her, I will give you $1000. Ms. Dawson....pfff.

[BRUTAL]

Did the point of the joke hit you when it flew directly over your head?

[CConn]

I´m sorry dude, but i didn´t understood half you wrote :o

I only said that it would be a cheap trick to kill her, JUST for Bruce never to think about giving up the mantle.
Besides, with the knowledge that Nolan´s Batman is going to be a trilogy, and with the last scene,when Rachel say, someday, when Gotham doesn´t need Batman anymore....i just bet that, in the end of the third movie, Bruce will "retire" the Batman´s live.Wow...that's an utterly horrible idea.

[E-Mack]

Exactly. And having her killed would show there is no light at the end of the tunnel.

It may be cold hearted of me, but I want Batman - and the audience - to realize that.
I'd rather that special someone be a character that's relevant in the mythos, thank you. :o

[CConn]

I'd rather that special someone be a character that's relevant in the mythos, thank you. :oSo what do you want to do? Kill Alfred? Lucious Fox? Characters we all like and want to see in as many movies as possible? Or do you want to get rid of a character that's quite expendable to us fans, yet is extremely important to the chracter, to Batman, in the movie? Rachel's the perfect fit for that. We fans don't have to lose anyone we care for, but Batman does.

[batman11]

What? This was a joke? Nice cover-up buddy but it won't work. You even put "Dawson (sp.)" in your original post. Don't humour me....again.

[E-Mack]

So what do you want to do? Kill Alfred? Lucious Fox? Characters we all like and want to see in as many movies as possible? Or do you want to get rid of a character that's quite expendable to us fans, yet is extremely important to the chracter, to Batman, in the movie? Rachel's the perfect fit for that. We fans don't have to lose anyone we care for, but Batman does.
You misunderstood, I have no problem with Rachel being killed off. If she's even brought back I hope that's what they do. But at the same time, I don't want Nolan to make her THE prized gift that Bruce lost to his war on crime. It can still have a very powerful impact on his character though.

I just prefer his "true love" to be either Selina or Talia. And they don't need to die for the audience to realize that Bruce will never be happy. The stories of those 2 by themselves are enough to suggest it.

[The Batman]

exactly. rachel dying isnt necessary

[BRUTAL]

exactly. rachel dying isnt necessary

Take out the word "dying" and I agree with you

[CConn]

You misunderstood, I have no problem with Rachel being killed off. If she's even brought back I hope that's what they do. But at the same time, I don't want Nolan to make her THE prized gift that Bruce lost to his war on crime. It can still have a very powerful impact on his character though.

I just prefer his "true love" to be either Selina or Talia. And they don't need to die for the audience to realize that Bruce will never be happy. The stories of those 2 by themselves are enough to suggest it.You're misunderstanding me a bit as well. I'm not trying to turn Rachel into a Gwen Stacy-like true love character. Simply that with her background as Bruce's childhood friend, and the dialogue in the closing scenes of BB, that she is in the perfect position to be the character who's death really hurts Bruce - as a friend more than a true love, even.

Hell, look at Jason Todd - just because a character's sucks and is totally pointless, doesn't mean their death can't be affective. :o

[CConn]

exactly. rachel dying isnt necessaryNo, it isn't necessary. But can it be done well? Can it improve the character, while at the same time being the better alternative to her just disappearing? I believe it is, personally.

[xanberkeley]

Some rumors say Rachel might get a job offer from Washington D.C.
so to me this sets up her tiny role but maybe will be recurring again on part 3. I like continuity for a change not ala James Bond adventure because some folks and critics always compare Bond with Batman.
I dont care for Selina or Talia anymore. I like Rachel better and Katie was solid in this film.
Some claim Harvey is married but when Ryan Phillip casting rumor came about I immediately thought of a love triangle. Ryan is just as young as Holmes. Its always the angst for our hero.

Makes me think Nolan and Goyer will not go by the easy way out that's too obvious. Joker killing Rachel is too cliche and predictable and even Talia and Catwoman is not a different Batman TPTB are aiming for.
I even think there's more emotional and dramatic ooomph if Harvey Dent kills Rachel and this is no turning back for him transforming into Two-Face.
It really shakes the D.A. family and the big fallout between Bruce and Harvey. Brings more guilt and pain for Bruce losing his love Rachel and losing his best friend and ally Harvey Dent. Im with the Batman's POV.

[Capt Throbberson]

I personally wouldn't mind seeing the "Batman will save us!" kid getting offed too.

[I Am The Knight]

What happened to the kid anyway.

[Comic Book Boy]

Because its nothing more than a shallow idea to get Batman super angry at the joker. Because fanboys only want it to happen because they hate katie holmes. There really is no reason to kill off a character as important as rachel.
Is there any other reason to kill off any character other than to make the series more interesting? Your point is meaningless.

[Comic Book Boy]

You're misunderstanding me a bit as well. I'm not trying to turn Rachel into a Gwen Stacy-like true love character. Simply that with her background as Bruce's childhood friend, and the dialogue in the closing scenes of BB, that she is in the perfect position to be the character who's death really hurts Bruce - as a friend more than a true love, even.

Hell, look at Jason Todd - just because a character's sucks and is totally pointless, doesn't mean their death can't be affective. :o
Exactly. I'd like it.

[Dark Knight]

I think that the Joker will kill Rachel Dawson (sp?) in the next film. I think it would give Bats a nice little push over that edge he seems to be teetering on in the first film. Then, upon apprehending Joker, we would get to see Batman try to rationalize not killing Joker right there. Seems like a good idea to me.


I have been saying the samething for awhile now....:up:

[NHawk19]

Joker killing Rachel seems too much like the Gwen Stacy storyline.

[E-Mack]

I see no similarities besides the villain killing the girl.

We don't even know if Joker is going to kill her, much less how he does it.

[Christopher Nolan]

Joker should kill Rachel.