The Dark Knight Is Rachel Dawes a woman in a refrigerator? (possible spoilers)

TMC1982

Sidekick
Joined
Mar 22, 2008
Messages
1,403
Reaction score
0
Points
31
http://www.womenonscreen.com/rachel-dawes-woman-in-refrigerator/

If you're a blockbuster movie lover, and/or a Batman/comic book fan like me, you've probably seen the latest trailer for The Dark Knight. I've watched it quite a few times since Sunday--yes, I am a geek--and something about it keeps bugging me. Namely, it is the brief shot of the Joker throwing Rachel Dawes off a rooftop:

At first, I thought, 'Well, Batman will just swoop down and catch her.' But then I read the interview with Aaron Eckhart in the L.A. Times. I noticed that Eckhart says something a little worrisome: "...Harvey Dent has an extremely strong sense of justice. His fiancée is killed. He's horribly injured. But he is still true to himself."

It's possible that he's talking about a fiancée who existed before the current Dark Knight time frame. (The movie's not following established continuity, so I doubt that he's talking about Gilda Dent either.) The way Eckhart phrases it all in present tense makes me think that he's talking about Rachel. In addition, Chris Nolan movies, in my opinion, suffer from a paucity of good female characters, as well as a few questionable casting choices in women's roles. When I consider all this, it wouldn't surprise me if Rachel really will be killed off.

Does this mean that Rachel might be about to join all the other women in comicdom who've been afflicted by Women in Refrigerators syndrome? The phrase "women in refrigerators", coined by Gail Simone, refers to the trend of women in comics--usually superheroes or love interests--dying to further and develop male-centric plots.

In the trailer, Rachel tells Bruce to not make her "the only hope for a normal life". If that is indeed what Bruce does, Rachel dying might make Batman and Two-Face's crimefighting more personal than it already is/would be. But it's hardly necessary, especially in the case of Batman--he has more than enough motivation. It might help emphasise the parallels between the men, and more significantly, also provide a reason to turn Two-Face against Batman, but is it worth making the only major female character in the reboot thus far into street splatter?

It would have been interesting if Bruce Wayne and Harvey Dent were already friends or acquaintances (the way they are sometimes depicted in other media, such as some comics and the animated series) by the beginning of The Dark Knight. Unfortunately, I'm hard-pressed to think of many mainstream superhero movies where male friendship drives the narrative or provides an impetus the way that dead or imperilled love interests do. Let's hope that Rachel survives. A series this promising deserves a good female character (or two, or three...).
 
when we start having female heroes as the lead in movies, then well have more "men in refrigerators"

its not anti-feminism (which is always brought up) its common sense, of course the love interest is going to be threatened

so we either get more gay superheroes or finally make give some more women heroes the spotlight
 
Technically she was a woman in a warehouse.


















A warehouse that exploded. Thus killing her.
 
I'll actually say yes. Her character was annoying (ironic since she's a movie created one) and not really that three dimensional, and she is set up to be Bruce's "one hope for a normal life". Then she dies. Seems like a case of WiR to me, a main female character dies a most significant death to serve as a plot point for the male characters.

Would I have it any other way? No. But I sure as hell hope they don't do it next year, as it is a fairly lousy mark of writing that was just handled well here.
 
She kind of was a woman in a refrigerator in TDK, but I like to think of her as a stand-in for Jason Todd or Barbara Gordon. The Joker has always been able to hurt and kill those closest to Batman and Gordon and that person was Rachel in the movie.

I don't think killing her made Batman's mission more personal; it just guaranteed that he can't go back to a normal life ever. Her death also reinforces the tragedy that lies at the heart of Batman (I like the idea of something terrible happening to him in every movie). Rachel didn't have much of a future in the Nolan series anyway since Bruce can't end up with her. I guess she could've been made DA after Harvey's accident, but killing her off was more interesting and useful for the plot.

In regards to the author's complaint that Rachel was the only female character in the series: I think that's why we're getting Catwoman in the next one.
 
It would have been interesting if Bruce Wayne and Harvey Dent were already friends or acquaintances (the way they are sometimes depicted in other media, such as some comics and the animated series) by the beginning of The Dark Knight. Unfortunately, I'm hard-pressed to think of many mainstream superhero movies where male friendship drives the narrative or provides an impetus the way that dead or imperilled love interests do. Let's hope that Rachel survives. A series this promising deserves a good female character (or two, or three...).

I see the "parenthesis effect" is bleeding out from forum posts into editorials. So annoying...

I think there's two issues here. Is she a glorified damsel in distress, aka a woman in a refrigerator? Yeah. Do I care? No.
 
Unfortunately YES she is just a 'woman in a fridge'. Her charecter could have been interesting...this is a love interest that is actually FIGHTING corruption in Gotham, she was suppose to be tough, smart, and very likable...but instead in both movies we get a pretty bland charecter (and imho, Katie Holmes's Rachel was even better).
Also I never understood why people say "This is a superhero movie that had the GUTS to kill off the main love interest"....no, not really. It was actually a very easy choice and pretty obvious as the article states...her death only helped advanced the plot and charecter arcs for Harvey and Bruce.
 
Her death was pretty obvious, people were spectculating about almost as soon as they had finished watching Batman Begins for the first time.

Her purpose in the first movie was to be the link between Batman and person he was before, not just before he donned the mantel of the bat, but before any craziness entered his life. By the end of The Dark Knight he fully accepts his mission and for that to happen she needed to die. Because even if she rejected him, even if she married someone else, even if she moved as far from Gotham as possible, the possiblity, even if tiny, would still be there for them to find each other again and then he would not have been capable of surrendering as fully to his mission as he did.

On another note, the author of the article claims that she[I assume] is hard pressed to find a superhero films that are not driven by dead or imperial love interests. Well, Spider-Man 3[which is driven by male friendship], the FF movies, the X-Men triology, Batman Returns, Batman and Robin, Iron Man, Daredevil,Superman: The Movie, Superman II, Superman III, Superman Returns, Batman Begins, Batman The Movie. I think an argument could even be made in regards to Spider-Man 1 and 2, because there is a difference between a plot point and what drives a narrative.
 
In fairness I don't think Rachel is any less 3 dimensional than any of the other mainstream superheroes' love interests. MJ, Louis and Pepper Potts' recent incarnations are not intriguing in the slightest, in fact the first 2 are bloody annoying.
 
On another note, the author of the article claims that she[I assume] is hard pressed to find a superhero films that are not driven by dead or imperial love interests. Well, Spider-Man 3[which is driven by male friendship], the FF movies, the X-Men triology, Batman Returns, Batman and Robin, Iron Man, Daredevil,Superman: The Movie, Superman II, Superman III, Superman Returns, Batman Begins, Batman The Movie. I think an argument could even be made in regards to Spider-Man 1 and 2, because there is a difference between a plot point and what drives a narrative.

The problem is these feminists aren't looking for anything logical. They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned or negotiated with. They just want to watch men burn......

*cue Batpod ejection music*
 
The problem is these feminists aren't looking for anything logical. They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned or negotiated with. They just want to watch men burn......

*cue Batpod ejection music*

:csad:

I read: *cue Batpod ejaculation music*

:csad:
 
Unfortunately YES she is just a 'woman in a fridge'. Her charecter could have been interesting...this is a love interest that is actually FIGHTING corruption in Gotham, she was suppose to be tough, smart, and very likable...but instead in both movies we get a pretty bland charecter (and imho, Katie Holmes's Rachel was even better).
Also I never understood why people say "This is a superhero movie that had the GUTS to kill off the main love interest"....no, not really. It was actually a very easy choice and pretty obvious as the article states...her death only helped advanced the plot and charecter arcs for Harvey and Bruce.
At least the Rachel character had a reason to be in the storyline other than happening to be a love interest. :oldrazz:

In fairness I don't think Rachel is any less 3 dimensional than any of the other mainstream superheroes' love interests. MJ, Louis and Pepper Potts' recent incarnations are not intriguing in the slightest, in fact the first 2 are bloody annoying.
I actually liked Pepper. She had some spunk to her. MJ is effin' useless.
 
I suppose Rachel Dawes fits the description of "woman in a refrigerator" - hero's love interest, gets killed, her death helps solidify the hatred the hero feels towards the villain.
 
Rachel's boss was stuffed into a cargo container in the last movie

/end thread

dont just blame feminists. this seriously is the most disgusting part of society, everyone *****es and moans about stuff they think harms "their" group and screw everyone else. alan dershowitz is civil liberties this and free speech when it comes to criticizing WASPS, Southerners, Big Business but the moment anyone mentions the Wall in the West Bank suddenly everyone is an anti-semite and there's only 1 opinion that's acceptable

what's ironic is that the "woman in a refrigerator" is directly related to the same elements that engendered the woman's lib movement and general loosing of gender roles in society. go back to the 50s before woman's lib, there were plenty of damsels in distress but none of them were being killed. there were strict rules how you treated women in comics and death/rape/violence in general. when the traditional gender roles started loosing up in the 60s and 70s with anything goes and women are equal you started having writers stretch the boundries of what could actually happen to the girlfriend. They could get beat, slapped, killed like regular comic book characters. and Gwen Stacy, Batgirl, etc start to eat it.

another thing is the chick who thought this up is intellectually dishonest (or at minimum intellectually ignorant) about the history of comic books. you cant separate a thing from where it came from and look at it in isolation. comics going back to its pulp/adventure antecedents in the 1920s as a primary story device had damsels in distress as the macguffin that drove the story (and represent everything the hero was fighting for). for example Dale being taken by Ming in Flash Gordan, King Kong taking Ann Darrow, zorro, John Carter's Princess, Tarzan and Jane etc. this in turn goes back to the archetypal adventure stories of Robin Hood/Maid Marion, Tristan/Iseult etc etc. over time the role of women in these stories have changed from damsel to partner etc etc but the hero/girlfriend dynamic remains a key and important one in modern comics as an outgrowth of the history of the comics. That's why Lois Lane while she's changed from basically a dumbass who gets into trouble to this supposedly award winning/borderline super agent reporter who's the equal to superman or w/e (she's still lame and annoying) will ALWAYS be an important part of the mythos. Every incarnation of Superman that has Clark (as representative of his human side) will have Lois.

That's why Nolan included Rachel in these movies (although dumbasses complain about her and have no clue why she's there). It's not as some throwaway sacrifice or misogynistic statment, its both appreciative and reflective of that which grounds and focuses the hero. It's important that she dies if you at all understand the movie.
 
At least the Rachel character had a reason to be in the storyline other than happening to be a love interest. :oldrazz:


I actually liked Pepper. She had some spunk to her. MJ is effin' useless.
True, Mary Jane in the Spider-man movies is even WORSE!!! She is such a cliched and boring charecter in those movies with no depth at all and she is the very definition of a "woman in the refridgerator" since the only thing she is good for is being kidnapped at the end of the movie,creating spontaneous love triangles, and touching Peter's face in awkward ways.
I just want her to disappear or to fall into a coma....forever.

The love-interests that I have liked in comic book movies are Pepper Potts, Selina Kyle, and Betty Ross (Jennifer Connely)....those are the only love interest that I've found interesting as charecters.

The rest have been pretty bland imo, Rachael is actually better than most love interests (comparing her to Mary Jane is like comparing Hamlet to pee wee.) but in the Batman films she just not good enough (the rest of the cast does great and she has been the weakest link despite having 2 different actresses).
 
The dead girlfriend thing may be overused in comics, but it hadn´t been done in a superhero movie yet, not for real anyway. Catwoman showed up alive in the end of BR. It was insinuated that Elektra was alive in the end of DD and she came back for her - terrilble - spin-off. This is the first time nothing indicates the girl didn´t die for real. She may be basically still "the girlfriend", but was a far more active character to the story than say Lois Lane, Vicki Vale, or Mary Jane.
 
jack was gonna get post of the year... until wootbaby.... excellent post!! ;)
 
I'm not sure if Rachel was a "Woman in a Refrigerator," but I'm sure glad that she blew up.

What a b****. I hated her character. I love Christopher Nolan and everything, but I would love to ask him if he genuinely wanted Rachel to be a likable character. If it was his goal to make her likable, then I think he failed. Miserably.
 
when i saw the headline, i thought of "indiana jones and the temple of the crystal skull" :D
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"