The Dark Knight LR: Has some news for us

[FlawlessVictory]

Sure, we can agree to disagree. Its not that serious to argue over. In fact, it great that info is starting to come out so can talk again.

I'm not an insider but I willing to guarantee that the character of Rachel, if she indeeds appears in TDK, will be involved in a crucial scene involving the theme of the film.

If fact, I believe the creation of the character was intended for what will happen in TDK.

Then, if her character is so crucial, why wasn't Holmes locked under contract for future films like Bale and Caine was?

 

[Nepenthes]

because the actress that plays the character is slightly more replaceable than Bale or Caine

 

[FlawlessVictory]

^Then if that is what they think when they are hiring an actor, they shouldn't hire that person to begin with. Keep in mind Oldman and Freeman are not under contract either which I don't understand.

 

[Dark Knight]

Then, if her character is so crucial, why wasn't Holmes locked under contract for future films like Bale and Caine was?

thats what i'm wondering also. I'm also wondering why Holmes didn't let Nolan and the producers know she wasn't happy about returning 5 months ago..at least! It just smells like Cruise and Holmes let their egos and cult following get in the way. We should all boycott any movies Cruise and Holmes are in from here on out!

 

[Dark Knight]

^Then if that is what they think when they are hiring an actor, they shouldn't hire that person to begin with. Keep in mind Oldman and Freeman are not under contract either which I don't understand.

Exactly. It just goes to show that Nolan and producers should have never cast her weird a$$ in the first place.

 

[ultimatefan]

^Then if that is what they think when they are hiring an actor, they shouldn't hire that person to begin with. Keep in mind Oldman and Freeman are not under contract either which I don't understand.

Because that´s not how it works. The studio won´t make three-picture deals for everybody. The problem with Holmes is not so much that she was bad in BB, but the studio was probably angry with the whole hoopla around the whole Tomkat deal, which they couldn´t predict when she was hired.

 

[mad-sci]

Apparently, this from another forum by a poster 'in the know'. Got it from Bluetights forum (don't know where they got it from).

Spoiler

SPOILER TAGS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


SPOILER TAGS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


DON'T CONTINUE READING IF YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


I WARNED YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Originally Posted by JekzStar
Okay folks hold up a second, lets first get to the Rachel character first.

Yes her character is in the movie, the screen time isn't much but the character herself plays a huge role in the movie for the Dark Knight that is where the title comes from, hence Chris Nolan said as well, the title of the movie actually has a point of reference.

Her character infact in the script gets killed by the Joker a very (Killing Joke) scene, Dent also pays the price, this is were Batman goes a little crazy.

So i think Katie Holmes knew this is what will happen to her character she pulled the plug, Probably after Tom Cruise told her to look and see the screen time, cause all the sudden Mr.Cruise wants her name as a Top Billing Actress.

Also i can understand the problem alot of fans really didn't like Katies performance and i was one of them, and to be honest she isn't that bad of an actress some of her performances in some movies are really good but in BATMAN BEGINS she was really really weak, anyway fans express there disappointment in that no-one really wanted her to come back and if she did that wanted her in a small cameo appearance or something in that terms is what i heard. So what did the Nolans do they used the famous Killing Joke scene to give the fans all that geek moment and get rid of a terrible character they created. (BUT'S IT HAS BACK FIRED ON THEM BIG TIME)

Now there isn't much they can do now the script is final well there could be daily re-writes but not for a scene so important that it set up the final act of the film and bascially act two builds to that scene.

So all in all Mr Cruise and Katie Holmes have pulled a fast one on Warner Bros and Chris Nolan and they are really pissed dont think you'll see there names appear on a Warner Bros pay check anytime in the future.

So a re-cast is what has to happen, Personally i dont know why they couldn't just film all of Katie scenes last since she is only doing a small Indie film which would wrap in 2 months after filming start while DARK KNIGHT will film for roughly the same filming period as BATMAN BEGINS probably longer.

Just people power and Katie doesn't want to die, but why not CGI her????

Anyway that the info i've been told.

The problem i think the Chris Nolan is in now who would want to fill that role it wont be Rachel McAdams trust me on that one she would want to read that script and once she does hell no will be her answer

My take:- Absolute rubbish. The fact is that if Rachel is SO important to the story that Goyer and Nolan wrote, Nolan would have fought AND won to keep her there (even if it was a 10 minute cameo). Something doesn't add up here.

 

[Nepenthes]

the guy already posted that here. he's wasting his time

 

[raybia]

Apparently, this from another forum by a poster 'in the know'. Got it from Bluetights forum (don't know where they got it from).

Spoiler

SPOILER TAGS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


SPOILER TAGS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


DON'T CONTINUE READING IF YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


I WARNED YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Originally Posted by JekzStar
Okay folks hold up a second, lets first get to the Rachel character first.

Yes her character is in the movie, the screen time isn't much but the character herself plays a huge role in the movie for the Dark Knight that is where the title comes from, hence Chris Nolan said as well, the title of the movie actually has a point of reference.

Her character infact in the script gets killed by the Joker a very (Killing Joke) scene, Dent also pays the price, this is were Batman goes a little crazy.

So i think Katie Holmes knew this is what will happen to her character she pulled the plug, Probably after Tom Cruise told her to look and see the screen time, cause all the sudden Mr.Cruise wants her name as a Top Billing Actress.

Also i can understand the problem alot of fans really didn't like Katies performance and i was one of them, and to be honest she isn't that bad of an actress some of her performances in some movies are really good but in BATMAN BEGINS she was really really weak, anyway fans express there disappointment in that no-one really wanted her to come back and if she did that wanted her in a small cameo appearance or something in that terms is what i heard. So what did the Nolans do they used the famous Killing Joke scene to give the fans all that geek moment and get rid of a terrible character they created. (BUT'S IT HAS BACK FIRED ON THEM BIG TIME)

Now there isn't much they can do now the script is final well there could be daily re-writes but not for a scene so important that it set up the final act of the film and bascially act two builds to that scene.

So all in all Mr Cruise and Katie Holmes have pulled a fast one on Warner Bros and Chris Nolan and they are really pissed dont think you'll see there names appear on a Warner Bros pay check anytime in the future.

So a re-cast is what has to happen, Personally i dont know why they couldn't just film all of Katie scenes last since she is only doing a small Indie film which would wrap in 2 months after filming start while DARK KNIGHT will film for roughly the same filming period as BATMAN BEGINS probably longer.

Just people power and Katie doesn't want to die, but why not CGI her????

Anyway that the info i've been told.

The problem i think the Chris Nolan is in now who would want to fill that role it wont be Rachel McAdams trust me on that one she would want to read that script and once she does hell no will be her answer

My take:- Absolute rubbish. The fact is that if Rachel is SO important to the story that Goyer and Nolan wrote, Nolan would have fought AND won to keep her there (even if it was a 10 minute cameo). Something doesn't add up here.

Something doesn't add up but I still think the character of Rachel is important to a plot point in TDK.

Maybe Nolan did fight to get her to come back. We may never know, but I will say this, this will hurt her more so than hurt TDK and may be a blessing in disquise.

 

[NinjaTurtleFan]

LOL. Just honest. OHMSS is one of the best Bond movies ever. Lazenby was a fine Bond; his only crime was being the guy who came after Sean Connery. Which would have killed ANYbody.

I actually say Roger Moore is the worst Bond of all time.

Dalton I think was the worst Bond. He was more cut out for a Bond villain than anything, but when I saw "Rocketeer" I got my wish seeing him as a villain who'd work in the Bond-universe.

Pierce Brosnan after "Tomorrow Never Dies" grew off of me. "World is Not Enough" and "Die Another Day" are just child's play; they're just insulting to the mind and the viewer's intelligence.

"Goldeneye" and "Casino Royale" have got to be the best Bond films nowadays, but nobody could beat Connery, Lazenby, and Moore back than.

 

[Miranda Fox]

Something doesn't add up but I still think the character of Rachel is important to a plot point in TDK.

Maybe Nolan did fight to get her to come back. We may never know, but I will say this, this will hurt her more so than hurt TDK and may be a blessing in disquise.

I'm with Raybia. I know recasting doesn't have a great track record but that's because, nine times out of ten, it wasn't done for the right reasons. Bond and HP are the exceptions and I can easily see TDK joing the ranks of the exceptions because really...Katie wasn't right for the role.

As to the Dawes character - the only way her character would be necessary to bring back is to be a way to a) further interaction with Harvey Dent and b) be a friend to Bruce, whose going to need them. Killing her off makes no sense in that, why would they need to recast? Why would they offer Katie Holmes $2 for 10 minutes of screentime?

Anyone? Bueller?

 

[L0ngsh0t]

I think they should just write it into the story that Rachel took herself elsewhere or something, cause it doesn't appear at the end of BB, that the two are going to get close any time soon does it? they could just write it in, she is gone, and the district attorneys office which had been in such shambles is getting a full make over starting at the top with Harvey Dent

 

[Avernus]

If they only planned on giving the rachel dawes character 10 minutes of screen time in TDK....why didn't they just film those parts in the 1st movie in front of a blue screen so they can edit in the Joker...?...

it would have saved alot of trouble...

I really hope that they did this and the Rachel McAdams is really going to be Selina Kyle...

she's too big a name right now to play a 10 minute part IMO....

something is up ...

 

[Dark Knight]

If they only planned on giving the rachel dawes character 10 minutes of screen time in TDK....why didn't they just film those parts in the 1st movie in front of a blue screen so they can edit in the Joker...?...

it would have saved alot of trouble...

I really hope that they did this and the Rachel McAdams is really going to be Selina Kyle...

she's too big a name right now to play a 10 minute part IMO....

something is up ...

I'm wondering the same thing practically.....Having McAdams for only 10 minutes of screen time ESPECIALLY as Dawes is a waste of her talent IMO.

 

[Dark Knight]

Sure, we can agree to disagree. Its not that serious to argue over. In fact, it great that info is starting to come out so can talk again.

I'm not an insider but I willing to guarantee that the character of Rachel, if she indeeds appears in TDK, will be involved in a crucial scene involving the theme of the film.

If fact, I believe the creation of the character was intended for what will happen in TDK.

By the way...your avatar is a classic! I need to make time to find find an avy like that!

 

[raybia]

By the way...your avatar is a classic! I need to make time to find find an avy like that!

Thanks but I cannot take credit for it. It belongs to Phaser, who doesn't post much anymore. I'll use it until he comes back or says otherwise.

 

[The Only Woj]

recasting a role that will only be in the film a short time, it's going to be difficult to get a name actress. the only way I see a name actress jumping into the part would be by dishing out some cash. the whole scheduling thing has to be BS, because there is no way a reduced role would take much committment. and it's not like she even has this other role yet. she may very well end up with nothing at all.

It'll be interesting to see how the Nolans make this work.

 

[Castlewood]

The way I see it... they HAVE to postpone the production at this point.

1.) If Dawes is really THAT important, they have to postpone the movie so they can find an actress.

2.) If Dawes ISN'T important, they have to postpone the movie to rewrite some of the script so she's out of it.

The fact that Nolan WANTED Holmes tells me that Dawes was NEEDED for TDK.

So, I reckon they have to rewrite A LOT. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if we end up seeing this movie in December 2008 instead.







EDIT - If Dawes's only purpose in TDK is to get killed by the Joker... don't worry about it. Write it out. It was too obvious to us anyway.

 

[The Only Woj]

http://www.eonline.com/news/article/index.jsp?uuid=be84d9e6-cbb9-4c8d-8424-e356fa8d2f1f

The last time Katie Holmes shot a movie, she was single and childless.

What a difference a couple of years can make.

After taking a break from her acting career to be a full-time mom to Suri and wife to Tom Cruise, the erstwhile Joey Potter is ready to get back to work.

However, in her eagerness to resume filming, it seems Holmes may have overbooked her calendar.

Claiming "scheduling conflicts," the 28-year-old actor has confirmed she will not reprise her Batman Begins role in the upcoming sequel The Dark Knight, despite the fact that her character, Rachel Dawes, remains in the script.

Rumors that Holmes would no longer be a part of the Batman franchise have been floating around since Batman Begins opened in June 2005, when the New York Post's Page Six reported as much. In October, the fansite Batman on Film quoted a "reliable source" saying "Holmes will not be back for The Dark Knight."

But sources close to the production told the Wall Street Journal Holmes pulled out of the project earlier this month, turning down a salary estimated at between $1 million and $2 million—an increase over the roughly $1 million she was believed to have earned for Batman Begins.

"We never got to the negotiating stage," Holmes' spokeswoman, Julie Polkes, told the Wall Street Journal. "Katie was offered [Dark Knight], but was unable to accept the role because of scheduling conflicts. She was in the process of negotiating for another project. In addition, when she returns to work, she would like to tackle a new character."

With The Dark Knight officially a no-go, Holmes is reportedly leaning toward starring in the low-budget crime caper Mad Money, opposite Queen Latifah.

The film centers on three female Federal Reserve workers who devise a plot to make off with old currency before it is destroyed. It is slated to begin shooting in Shreveport, Louisiana, within the next couple of months.

The film's production budget is reportedly set at a thrifty $12 million, meaning Holmes would have to reduce her usual fee to about $250,000 in order to keep costs within range, the Wall Street Journal reports. No deals have been finalized.

Holmes' decision to eschew the Batman blockbuster in favor of a low-budget film might seem like an odd choice for an actor best known for such oeuvres as Dawson's Creek and First Daughter.

However, since hooking up with Cruise in the spring of 2005, Holmes has seemed content to focus on her high-profile relationship, while placing her professional concerns on the back burner.

Which is to say, she's made questionable decisions in the past.

 

[Castlewood]

After the Box Office numbers come in, does Katie really think that she'll make more money in a Queen Latifah movie as opposed to a BATMAN movie??

LOL.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

The way I see it... they HAVE to postpone the production at this point.

1.) If Dawes is really THAT important, they have to postpone the movie so they can find an actress.

2.) If Dawes ISN'T important, they have to postpone the movie to rewrite some of the script so she's out of it.

The fact that Nolan WANTED Holmes tells me that Dawes was NEEDED for TDK.

So, I reckon they have to rewrite A LOT. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if we end up seeing this movie in December 2008 instead.







EDIT - If Dawes's only purpose in TDK is to get killed by the Joker... don't worry about it. Write it out. It was too obvious to us anyway.

I'll keep going back to this until we hear something new that is concrete. In November it was reported on Moviehole that Christopher Nolan was seen chatting with Katie Holmes. It is possible this discussion could have covered Holmes not returning for TDK for whatever the reason. It is possible that at this point Nolan could have started to adjust the script accordingly barring Dawes not being a major character. This concides with the report on "film ick" of Rachel McAdams being cast in TDK not as Dawes but in practically the same role. Of course, some of the above is just speculation on my part but it is something to consider.

 

[Avernus]

I'll keep going back to this until we hear something new that is concrete. In November it was reported on Moviehole that Christopher Nolan was seen chatting with Katie Holmes. It is possible this discussion could have covered Holmes not returning for TDK for whatever the reason. It is possible that at this point Nolan could have started to adjust the script accordingly barring Dawes not being a major character. This concides with the report on "film ick" of Rachel McAdams being cast in TDK not as Dawes but in practically the same role. Of course, some of the above is just speculation on my part but it is something to consider.

I would assume they already cast the part for dawes....if they are in-fact re-casting her...

 

[Castlewood]

I'll keep going back to this until we hear something new that is concrete. In November it was reported on Moviehole that Christopher Nolan was seen chatting with Katie Holmes. It is possible this discussion could have covered Holmes not returning for TDK for whatever the reason. It is possible that at this point Nolan could have started to adjust the script accordingly barring Dawes not being a major character. This concides with the report on "film ick" of Rachel McAdams being cast in TDK not as Dawes but in practically the same role. Of course, some of the above is just speculation on my part but it is something to consider.

When "The Dark Knight" comes to DVD, there better be a special feature that explains how this all went down. I'd REALLY like to know how Nolan is handling this right now. The movie is already IN PRODUCTION... they should be FILMING right now, technically.

Talk about pressure. Hang in there, Nolan!

 

[Paste Pot Pete]

 

[StorminNorman]

Anyone else feel like the cast is already more or less done - they just havn't released squat. I mean come on - filming starts next month.