RachelDawes Tagged Articles at Cinematical

The pop-culture appetite for Batman seems inexhaustible; thousands of comic books, several movies, endless animated iterations, some of which are quite good and some of which are rather bad. Is there any real need to return to the character beyond the profit motive, though? After the financial and critical success of Batman Begins, the powers-that-be behind The Dark Knight could have made a safe bet of a sequel; a little more action, a few more actors, more of the same and a few extra explosions.

What's telling about The Dark Knight, though, is how risky it is -- how it's bold and brave and truly exciting, full of rich and strong performances and some real ideas along the way. Why return to Batman? It turns out that for Christopher Nolan, the reason to come back is that there's something to say about, and with, the character even after decades of stories and multiple reinventions. I was hoping The Dark Knight would be good; I had no idea that director and co-writer Christopher Nolan was going to make a film that not only addressed the philosophical and political conflict between the rule of force and the rule of law but also takes on the timeless clash between order and chaos ... and, along the way, evokes everything from Michael Mann's Heat to John Ford's The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance. ...

The most persistent rumor in Hollywood -- that Maggie Gyllenhaal has sewn up a substantial role in The Dark Knight, either as Rachel Dawes, Selena Kyle, or Harley Quinn, has gotten some new heat thrown on it, courtesy of the tipsters at Latino Review. There's no question that Warner Bros. is their sweetspot, and they are now re-upping their original Gyllenhaal tip with the following assertion: "Now it looks like Maggie Gyllenhaal will be the new Rachel Dawes! Confirmed by two of my strongest on the money sources." That's a little short of saying 'we have the news in advance -- an official announcement is coming soon,' but it does appear, based on everything we know, that Gyllenhaal is close to putting pen to paper, if she hasn't done it already.

The bigger question is why Christopher Nolan feels compelled to re-introduce the Rachel Dawes character that was created for Batman Begins, one of the more bland and uninteresting love-interest stock characters to come down the pike in a long time. Does he really feel that Dawes has a crucial role to play in the series going forward? Is there some kind of 'transformation' in her character's future that isn't common knowledge? Shouldn't this character be sent back to the junk pile and a new love-interest dreamed up? Of course, it's still possible that all of this is smoke-screen, and Gyllenhaal is as in the dark as we are about these rumblings.