Author Topic: Why haven't you BB fanboys posted this? (Read 2650 times)

Solo · « **on:** March 09, 2007, 09:04:28 AM »

Maggie Gyllenhaal is taking over for Katie Holmes:

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117960782.html?categoryid=13&cs=1

"Maggie Gyllenhaal is in final talks to star opposite Christian Bale in Christopher Nolan's "The Dark Knight," the next installment in the revitalized Batman franchise. She'll play the role of Rachel Dawes, played by Katie Holmes in "Batman Begins." Holmes dropped out of the project earlier in the year.
Nolan is set to begin lensing in the late spring or early summer. Pic is eying a summer 2008 release.

Producers are Emma Thomas, Charles Roven and Nolan.

Legendary Pictures and Warner are co-financing partners on the project.

Gyllenhaal, a new mother, was most recently in theaters with "Stranger Than Fiction" and "World Trade Center."

The Miles Trahan Burger Experiment · « **Reply #1 on:** March 09, 2007, 09:05:12 AM »

Because its a shit part that doesn't matter.

Solo · « **Reply #2 on:** March 09, 2007, 09:05:48 AM »

Funny, that shit part will probably garner her more screen time and lines than either The Joker or Dent.

The Miles Trahan Burger Experiment · « **Reply #3 on:** March 09, 2007, 09:06:36 AM »

Quote from: Solo on March 09, 2007, 09:05:48 AM

Funny, that shit part will probably garner her more screen time and lines than either The Joker or Dent.

There are plenty of movies in which shit characters get more screen time than good characters. What's the big deal?

FlameOfCallandor · « **Reply #4 on:** March 09, 2007, 09:07:23 AM »

I approve of this. She was hot in Secretary.

Cheebs · « **Reply #5 on:** March 09, 2007, 09:07:28 AM »

I approve fully of this.

Solo · « **Reply #6 on:** March 09, 2007, 09:07:47 AM »

That its a major bit of casting? What else would be the point. Its not like they just cast Thug #5.

Cheebs · « **Reply #7 on:** March 09, 2007, 09:08:40 AM »

It IS a big part. She is the major romantic interest of the whole trilogy and is a important factor in the origin of Batman in the Nolan-Universe.

The Miles Trahan Burger Experiment · « **Reply #8 on:** March 09, 2007, 09:09:49 AM »

It's a "big part" that was totally unecessary in Begins.

Cheebs · « **Reply #9 on:** March 09, 2007, 09:10:27 AM »

Quote from: The Dark Shake on March 09, 2007, 09:09:49 AM

It's a "big part" that was totally unecessary in Begins.

it isn't "needed" but the character is a major character regardless

Solo · « **Reply #10 on:** March 09, 2007, 09:10:43 AM »

So....

Bale - Batman
Ledger - Joker
Eckhart - Two-Face
Gyllenhaal - Dawes
Caine - Alfred
Oldman - Gordon

Am I forgetting anyone? Has Freeman ever been confirmed? Is Flass back?

Solo · « **Reply #11 on:** March 09, 2007, 09:11:37 AM »

Quote from: The Dark Shake on March 09, 2007, 09:09:49 AM

It's a "big part" that was totally unecessary in Begins.

True though that may be, it doesnt matter whatsoever. Fact is, they DID put the role in there, and we're stuck with it. "What should have been" doesnt mean anything now.

Cheebs · « **Reply #12 on:** March 09, 2007, 09:11:50 AM »

Quote from: Solo on March 09, 2007, 09:10:43 AM

So....

Bale - Batman
Ledger - Joker
Eckhart - Two-Face
Gyllenhaal - Dawes
Caine - Alfred
Oldman - Gordon

Am I forgetting anyone? Has Freeman ever been confirmed? Is Flass back?

Freeman is back, yes

Solo · « **Reply #13 on:** March 09, 2007, 09:15:36 AM »

I like Freeman well enough, but he's the one character, aside from Dawes, that feels superfluous and could be cut from the movie. But whatever. Not like hes bogging the film down or logging significant screentime anyway.

Cheebs · « **Reply #14 on:** March 09, 2007, 09:19:09 AM »

But he is the Q of this batman trilogy! Everyone loves Q.

Solo · « **Reply #15 on:** March 09, 2007, 09:28:21 AM »

Not me. Remember? I am the one saying that he and the gadgets should go and stay gone forever.

Cheebs · « **Reply #16 on:** March 09, 2007, 09:29:29 AM »

Quote from: Solo on March 09, 2007, 09:28:21 AM

Not me. Remember? I am the one saying that he and the gadgets should go and stay gone forever.

Don't touch that, that's my lunch!

Robo · « **Reply #17 on:** March 09, 2007, 09:37:33 AM »

I can't say I'm a fan of the gadgetry either. Leave that shit to Adam West.

Tauntaun · « **Reply #18 on:** March 09, 2007, 09:52:00 AM »

Bloodwake · « **Reply #19 on:** March 09, 2007, 10:20:59 AM »

Quote from: Cheebs on March 09, 2007, 09:07:28 AM

I approve fully of this.

(Image removed from quote.)

Yes. I do as well. Much better actress IMO than Katie Holmes as well.

Tauntaun · « **Reply #20 on:** March 09, 2007, 10:27:53 AM »

Quote from: Bloodwake on March 09, 2007, 10:20:59 AM

Yes. I do as well. Much better actress IMO than Katie Holmes as well.

I agree, she'll do a much better job, especially since Holmes is prob on drugs to forget her reality. I wonder if Holmes will fight Cruise to the death? That'd be an interesting film.

Solo · « **Reply #21 on:** March 09, 2007, 10:28:04 AM »

I would have preferred Rachel McAdams as the happy medium (good looks, decent acting), but its looks like they just tried to get the best actor for the role, so good for them. Thats what sets BB apart from most of these movies, anyways, the great casting.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #22 on:** March 09, 2007, 11:21:29 AM »

That's odd to have that continuity break since everyone else is returning. This, to me, means we're probably going to see:

spoiler (click to show/hide)

Her character die and probably NOT a lot of screen time. Goyer and Nolan confirmed that Dent and even Gordon will want to kill the Joker by the end of the movie, but Batman prevents that from happening and has to live with the decision when Joker burns Dent turning him Two Face. My guess is the only reason why a guy like Dent and even Gordon would want to see Joker killed is if he murdered someone they knew, and imagine how much that would suck for Wayne if the only voice of reason is the only one who was romantically involved.

[close]

Solo · « **Reply #23 on:** March 09, 2007, 11:25:27 AM »

That sounds pretty feasible.

The Miles Trahan Burger Experiment · « **Reply #24 on:** March 09, 2007, 11:27:49 AM »

I hope she gets naked tut tut

Solo · « **Reply #25 on:** March 09, 2007, 11:33:03 AM »

She would in a heartbeat. But obviously WB will never have that in a Batman movie.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #26 on:** March 09, 2007, 11:36:34 AM »

I think it's probably logical. If that's not the case, they're going to have to introduce even MORE characters to motivate the central players to this showdown, and it has been said that the film will have a Wayne/Rutger Hauer/Roman Sionis subplot (so that Wayne's personal/business life comes under assault) that crosses over to the "Thorpe/Maroni"/Penguin subplot, which in turn leads to the whole Joker showdown (he effectively screws up the whole underworld).

That's a lot of story for one film to cover.

Solo · « **Reply #27 on:** March 09, 2007, 11:40:12 AM »

Rutger Hauer is back? Fracking sweet.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #28 on:** March 09, 2007, 11:48:16 AM »

Yeah, word is:

spoiler (click to show/hide)

He's going to be taking the caretaker and underworld liaison for Roman Sionis' company, who is supposed to be the antithesis of Bruce Wayne and make Wayne's personal/business life hell. Sionis is apparently caught up in deals (my guess is arms deals, from what has been circulating) between Thorpe/Maroni (I don't they've decided on the name of this character, yet) and the Penguin (Bob Hoskins, please!). The Joker, who has been described as an anarchist by crew and director, pretty much screws all of this up somehow. I kind of like how Bruce Wayne has dual lives and both come under attack at the same time.

That said, if they keep Dawes' character, he'll also have to juggle a romantic life, plus there will need to be new characters or plot elements introduced for Gordon and Dent to be push to murder. Gordon already has a relationship with Dawes, and it's logical that she'd share one with Dent since they're in the same office, so I think that's the best use of the character.

If they really want to torture Wayne, they could write that Dawes is set to marry Dent, even.

[close]

Yeti · « **Reply #29 on:** March 09, 2007, 11:48:36 AM »

The Penguin is going to be in the next Batman movie?! Wow lots of villains. I guess the first one was able to handle a lot of villains too, I'll just have to have faith.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #30 on:** March 09, 2007, 11:50:15 AM »

His role is minor and that of just an underworld dealer. No whacky origins or dreams of world domination. He's just another player in a seedy underworld. Also, his physical appearance is not supposed to be too outlandish.

Solo · « **Reply #31 on:** March 09, 2007, 12:04:17 PM »

This sounds great, if what you're saying is what is planned, Willco. This could top the original, with all the origin crap now firmly behind us.

Cheebs · « **Reply #32 on:** March 09, 2007, 12:07:39 PM »

I am dying to see Heath's Joker. I gotta see how he is pulling this off.

Solo · « **Reply #33 on:** March 09, 2007, 12:10:43 PM »

I actually can picture him in the role quite easily. I think that despite its initial unpopular reception, that will turn out to be inspired casting.

Cheebs · « **Reply #34 on:** March 09, 2007, 12:11:49 PM »

I expect him to easily be better than Jack's Joker in the '89 film. That was just him being himself but in makeup.

Solo · « **Reply #35 on:** March 09, 2007, 12:15:19 PM »

That's pretty much Jack's MO through his entire career, although its definately more noticeable in the past 15 years or so. He's obviously a larger than life figure, and his performances often feel like its just Jack being himself in costume. Same with The Departed. Aside from the fumbly attempt at an accent, that was just Jack being good ol' sleazy Jack.

Cheebs · « **Reply #36 on:** March 09, 2007, 12:17:40 PM »

Jack seemed to LOVE playing the Joker though. He was so giddy in the new interviews he did and such for the Batman dvd. He has a big joker button on his shirt too, he is so proud of the role.

Solo · « **Reply #37 on:** March 09, 2007, 12:18:33 PM »

All for show, since Jack was getting a huge backend cut from Batman.

Cheebs · « **Reply #38 on:** March 09, 2007, 12:19:25 PM »

Quote from: Solo on March 09, 2007, 12:18:33 PM

All for show, since Jack was getting a huge backend cut from Batman.

Well the interview was 15+ years later and he was still bubbly and giddy over the whole thing.

The Miles Trahan Burger Experiment · « **Reply #39 on:** March 09, 2007, 12:30:52 PM »

Quote from: Cheebs on March 09, 2007, 12:17:40 PM

Jack seemed to LOVE playing the Joker though. He was so giddy in the new interviews he did and such for the Batman dvd. He has a big joker button on his shirt too, he is so proud of the role.

Yeah, wtf. At least be proud of being in The Shining or tons of other good flicks he's done, but Batman?

Cheebs · « **Reply #40 on:** March 09, 2007, 12:32:13 PM »

I doubt his love is all for money, like I said it was 15 years later and he worked with Tim Burton again after Batman.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #41 on:** March 09, 2007, 12:43:21 PM »

Quote from: Solo on March 09, 2007, 12:04:17 PM

This sounds great, if what you're saying is what is planned, Willco. This could top the original, with all the origin crap now firmly behind us.

The Dawes stuff is pure speculation on my behalf, but the rest is what has been leaked to Batman on Film months following Batman Begins release when Goyer and Nolan were scripting ideas for sequels. They're pretty reliable and actually, Warner Bros. will listen to them to make moves. Before Maggie was officially cast, they had a poll asking fans whether or not they wanted her or Holmes, and Maggie won in a landslide. Shortly thereafter, negotiations were finished. Say what you will.

The Miles Trahan Burger Experiment · « **Reply #42 on:** March 09, 2007, 12:44:25 PM »

Willco's information is surprisingly on point.

Cheebs · « **Reply #43 on:** March 09, 2007, 12:45:01 PM »

Batman-on-Film has a lot of power, Goyer has mentioned the site a lot in interviews

Solo · « **Reply #44 on:** March 09, 2007, 12:46:06 PM »

Quote from: The Dark Shake on March 09, 2007, 12:30:52 PM

Quote from: Cheebs on March 09, 2007, 12:17:40 PM
Jack seemed to LOVE playing the Joker though. He was so giddy in the new interviews he did and such for the Batman dvd. He has a big joker button on his shirt too, he is so proud of the role.

Yeah, wtf. At least be proud of being in The Shining or tons of other good flicks he's done, but Batman?

One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest too. Probably Jack's very best.

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #45 on:** March 09, 2007, 12:46:29 PM »

Yeah, they were in huge in getting Bale the part. I think Nolan bought into the Bale hype, but Warner Bros. was understandably nervous about handing over such a huge franchise to an actor not known for box office dollars. It was that site that pretty much pushed them over the edge.

The Miles Trahan Burger Experiment · « **Reply #46 on:** March 09, 2007, 12:46:37 PM »

Truth, Solo, Truth.

Solo · « **Reply #47 on:** March 09, 2007, 12:48:03 PM »

Do I even wanna know who WB wanted as Batman? Can it be any worse than Brendan Fraser or Nick Cage as Supes?

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #48 on:** March 09, 2007, 12:50:27 PM »

I know that Joshua Jackson and Ashton Kutcher were tested, but I believe it basically came down to Jake Gyllenhaal and Christian Bale.

The Miles Trahan Burger Experiment · « **Reply #49 on:** March 09, 2007, 12:54:12 PM »

Thank god it was Bale. Gyllenhaal would have made the worst Batman/Wayne combo yet.

If I could choose any one actor to play Batman, it would be Cary Grant. Too bad he's dead, though. :'(

The Fake Shemp · « **Reply #50 on:** March 09, 2007, 12:59:00 PM »

I remember for awhile, there was strong word that Joshua Jackson might land the part and that sent shivers up my spine. I really didn't think Bale would get the part - it just seemed like another fanboy fantasy test that would never materialize.

Solo · « **Reply #51 on:** March 09, 2007, 01:30:27 PM »

Poor Jakie. All the man wants to do is a superhero movie!

Now he's been plutoed from Spidey, Supes, and Batman?

Van Cruncheon · « **Reply #52 on:** March 09, 2007, 01:40:12 PM »

good casting call. gyllenhall is a really good actress; holmes not so much.

Tauntaun · « **Reply #53 on:** March 09, 2007, 02:30:46 PM »

Quote from: Drinky Crow on March 09, 2007, 01:40:12 PM

good casting call. gyllenhall is a really good actress; holmes not so much.

In a couple more years though she'll be able to play a vampire or something w/o acting. She's getting that crazed look more and more.

The Miles Trahan Burger Experiment · « **Reply #54 on:** March 09, 2007, 02:33:08 PM »

Crazed? To me she just looks like she's always ready for another deep-dicking.

Cheebs · « **Reply #55 on:** March 09, 2007, 02:57:42 PM »

Quote from: The Dark Shake on March 09, 2007, 02:33:08 PM

Crazed? To me she just looks like she's always ready for another deep-dicking.

She does! She always looks horny.

The Miles Trahan Burger Experiment · « **Reply #56 on:** March 09, 2007, 02:59:26 PM »

I refuse to believe she was "acting" in Secretary or Mona Lisa Smile.

spoiler (click to show/hide)

Yes, I was forced to watch the latter. :'(

[close]

Tauntaun · « **Reply #57 on:** March 09, 2007, 03:01:15 PM »

Those bags under her eyes, I'm telling you man she's getting used to vampire hours.

The Miles Trahan Burger Experiment · « **Reply #58 on:** March 09, 2007, 03:02:16 PM »

OOOOOH, you mean holmes? lolz

Bloodwake · « **Reply #59 on:** March 09, 2007, 03:11:10 PM »

Quote from: Cheebs on March 09, 2007, 09:07:28 AM

I approve fully of this.

(Image removed from quote.)

This picture needed to be on another page.

News:

Author Topic: Why haven't you BB fanboys posted this? (Read 2650 times)