The Dark Knight 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?

 

[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.t:

 

[Mr. Superhero]

Ms. Dawson...

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 --->

 

[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

 

[Isildur´s Heir]

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

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

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

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 < 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!

 

[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

 

[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!

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...