The Dark Knight Rachel Dawes Solution

[DV8]

In the midst of all the questions surrounding whether Katie Holmes will reprise her role as Rachel Dawes, we have been bombarded with continuity issues, and opinion on how past female characters have inexplicably disappeared from the franchise.

Being a stickler for continuity, if Katie Holmes doesn't return, I would not vote for a recast, just cuz it bugs me. But I don't want her character 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's it! Have Harvey Dent step in when it's apparent that Rachel is gone, and then after we've forgotten about her, a big piece to the finally is her body being discovered in the river or something . . . a victim of The Joker! We wouldn't ever need to see Holmes, and if we did, they could possibly use archive footage from the first film re-cut (if that's legal).

Anyone else feel me on this one?

 

[Ronny Shade]

They don't even need to say anything. I wouldn't even care if they didnt mention her.

 

[DV8]

but that's the same thing they did w/ vicki vale! I think that when Batman compromises his identity, we should at least get an explanation as to why they left!!

Maybe Joker knows that Dawes can identify Batman, and that's why he captures/kills her . . .

that really doesn't bug you, hey? And you're supposed to be setting an example for me!!

 

[Ronny Shade]

It bugged me then. This wouldn't bug me because they broke up and the end.

 

[Super_Ludacris]

You had to post it in 2 threads? I mean the EXACT same post? lol

 

[GoldGoblin]

Just have it say that the Joker has killed her,and show the body with the brown hair covering her face.

 

[lujho]

Vicki Vale not there was different, becuase Batman ended with them as a happy couple.

Begins ended with Bruce and Rachel *breaking up* a "relationship" that wasn't really active in the first place. You don't NEED to explain her not being in the sequel... AT ALL... because the end of the last movie did it.

She doesn't actually need to be dead to not be in the films anymore. She doesn't need to even be mentioned again.

 

[The-Night]

Vicki Vale not there was different, becuase Batman ended with them as a happy couple.

Begins ended with Bruce and Rachel *breaking up* a "relationship" that wasn't really active in the first place. You don't NEED to explain her not being in the sequel... AT ALL... because the end of the last movie did it.

She doesn't actually need to be dead to not be in the films anymore. She doesn't need to even be mentioned again.

of course she has to be mentioned. Sure she ended the realtionship, but by no means did she quit her job in the DA. I mean Bruce Wayne shows up to meet this new Dent fellow and oh, where the flop is rachel?

 

[DV8]

You had to post it in 2 threads? I mean the EXACT same post? lol

hahahaha; I know, I know; I made this thread, and then thought it would better fit in the existing thread . . . my bad!

 

[DV8]

Vicki Vale not there was different, becuase Batman ended with them as a happy couple.

Begins ended with Bruce and Rachel *breaking up* a "relationship" that wasn't really active in the first place. You don't NEED to explain her not being in the sequel... AT ALL... because the end of the last movie did it.

She doesn't actually need to be dead to not be in the films anymore. She doesn't need to even be mentioned again.

That's a really good point, actually . . . but still, I think they should explain why she's not the DA anymore . . . even then, I guess she doesn't need to be in it . . .

 

[Ronny Shade]

I think most casual viewers (people who saw the movie once on TV or something) wont even remember her name

 

[Two-Face]

Exactly it's some fans of hers might complain and Jett is getting mails supporting Holmes to return but to me I care less if she returns or not.

 

[mcflytrap]

but that's the same thing they did w/ vicki vale! I think that when Batman compromises his identity, we should at least get an explanation as to why they left!!

Maybe Joker knows that Dawes can identify Batman, and that's why he captures/kills her . . .

that really doesn't bug you, hey? And you're supposed to be setting an example for me!!

Actually, Wayne did mention Vicki to Selina in BR.

 

[lujho]

That's a really good point, actually . . . but still, I think they should explain why she's not the DA anymore . . . even then, I guess she doesn't need to be in it . . .

She wasn't the DA, she was an assistant DA. There's no reason to say she quit that job - she could still have it and we just never see her, or she could just not have it (got a different job, moved somewhere else).

Neither of the above possibilities is in desparate need of being explained on-screen. Sure, they could be, a line of dialogue wouldn't hurt, but they don't need it, and you *definitely* don't need to go as far as killing her off to explain her absence.

 

[Mr. Socko]

Jesus! How many Rachel Dawes threads do we need!?!?!

 

[elorenishii386]

I think Rachel Dawes should return. Alot of people are suggesting that she disappear from the franchise and just have a short little mention. That's the thing thats always bothered me about the other batman films. The love interest always "disappears" out of no where and thats it...we forget about her? It's like in the Bond films where he gets a new love interest in every different film.
Rachel Dawes is the assistent DA. She is passionate about cleaning the corruption from Gotham and is one of the few allies Batman has at this point in the franchise. It would make no sense that she disappears, especially when Gotham is at it's most difficult. This is the after math of the ra's reaking havoc on Gotham. People are recovering from the effects of the fear gas. There are still inmates from arkam that need to be captured and brought back. Harvey Dent becomes the new DA. Most importantly, there is some dude running around, killing people and calling himself the Joker. This is a transistional period. I hardly think that Rachel Dawes herself would be absent from this.
yes some people might say that nolan could kill her off...1...2...3. but this dissatisfies me. I think it would be better not to kill her off.

 

[DroolingforGwen]

The movies are about Batman... not Rachel Dawes.... she is probably working behind the scenes doing her job... the film won't portray it however... and there is no reason to...it's not essential to have her... bring in a Talia instead to spice things up... no one will miss her... as far as continuity... the core cast is already there... and I see no reason to explain why she left or quit...cutting five minutes of screentime for an explanation is a waste (Ya Ya she was so important in Begins but this is Hollywood and they don't have time to explain everyone's life story in a two hour movie)... ITS OKAY TO ASSUME THINGS IN Trilogies... writers don't have to be so blatantly obvious and explain every damn event that transpired between to two films (they leave it for audiences to interpret... go figure)... maybe she'll have a cameo later on like the chick from Jurassic Park 1 had in 3... i thought that was kind of cool... maybe in the third movie (barring if Katie doesn't get fat and ugly after bearing Tom's children)... ... but the explanation has already been given for her absence... As far as allies... Batman has Gordon and Alfred and they nailed those two down nicely in Begins...

 

[GoldGoblin]

The good thing about her being gone will be a new female love interest who could be a future villain.(Talia,Catwoman,Poison Ivy)

 

[Super_Ludacris]

I think Rachel Dawes should return. Alot of people are suggesting that she disappear from the franchise and just have a short little mention. That's the thing thats always bothered me about the other batman films. The love interest always "disappears" out of no where and thats it...we forget about her? It's like in the Bond films where he gets a new love interest in every different film.
Rachel Dawes is the assistent DA. She is passionate about cleaning the corruption from Gotham and is one of the few allies Batman has at this point in the franchise. It would make no sense that she disappears, especially when Gotham is at it's most difficult. This is the after math of the ra's reaking havoc on Gotham. People are recovering from the effects of the fear gas. There are still inmates from arkam that need to be captured and brought back. Harvey Dent becomes the new DA. Most importantly, there is some dude running around, killing people and calling himself the Joker. This is a transistional period. I hardly think that Rachel Dawes herself would be absent from this.
yes some people might say that nolan could kill her off...1...2...3. but this dissatisfies me. I think it would be better not to kill her off.

co-sign

 

[neemer5]

Hire her for a cameo, let them argue or something, and let her leave. That's it.

 

[raybia]

In the midst of all the questions surrounding whether Katie Holmes will reprise her role as Rachel Dawes, we have been bombarded with continuity issues, and opinion on how past female characters have inexplicably disappeared from the franchise.

Being a stickler for continuity, if Katie Holmes doesn't return, I would not vote for a recast, just cuz it bugs me. But I don't want her character 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's it! Have Harvey Dent step in when it's apparent that Rachel is gone, and then after we've forgotten about her, a big piece to the finally is her body being discovered in the river or something . . . a victim of The Joker! We wouldn't ever need to see Holmes, and if we did, they could possibly use archive footage from the first film re-cut (if that's legal).

Anyone else feel me on this one?

This wouldn't be a bad idea.

 

[Super_Ludacris]

Here-Here

 

[COMPO]

I think rachael should stay but something happens to her in the film. But, instead of the joker killing her like sarah essen. Instead have him kidnap her and drive her insane some how. So by the end of the film it's pretty dark. Gordon is grieving over Essen and feels guilty for being tempted to cheat on his wife. Batman is guilty for both parties and feels like he's causing more damage then he is helping the city. Dent is exhibiting the evil inside him. What do you think?

 

[Ronny Shade]

I think rachael should stay but something happens to her in the film. But, instead of the joker killing her like sarah essen. Instead have him kidnap her and drive her insane some how. So by the end of the film it's pretty dark. Gordon is grieving over Essen and feels guilty for being tempted to cheat on his wife. Batman is guilty for both parties and feels like he's causing more damage then he is helping the city. Dent is exhibiting the evil inside him. What do you think?

I think having Essen in this movie will be too much.

We've already got all Dent and Joker for sure, +this rachel storyline +maybe a new love interest for bruce +Mobster subplot +whatever's going on with Earle or Black Mask.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

I say either re-cast her.....or kill her. One or the other, do not go the BOND GIRL route.