Aaron Eckhart unsure if he'll return as Two Face
"I'm not privy to these things. I just feel like with the death of Heath Ledger, I feel like maybe starting over might be a better thing. I just don't have any idea. I really don't know and if Chris gives me a call, I'll come but I don't anticipate a call."
Director Christopher Nolan is being extremely secretive about who the villain will be in The Dark Knight Rises, only stating that it for sure won't be The Riddler or Mr. Freeze. An announcement, either official or leaked, is expected soon, as casting is currently underway on the The Dark Knight Rises.
The Dark Knight Rises comes to theaters July 20th, 2012 and stars Liam Neeson, Tom Hardy, Christian Bale, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Anne Hathaway, Gary Oldman, Aidan Gillen, Marion Cotillard. The film is directed by Christopher Nolan.
Comments (106)
To leave a comment, please sign in or use
Facebook or Twitter
Mutant
He'll be back for sure, Nolan is just denying the exsistance of Two -Face. I would be happy to see Scarecrow back, even if it is a small part.
If this is better than Dark Knight then WB will want Nolan back for a fourth film.
2 years agoby @zenderFlag
deebo311
He'll be back atleast for a small part to get the ball rolling, just like the Scarecrow in Dark Knight.
2 years agoby @deebo311Flag
JasonKat
berry had a stupid game kinda walk., you could tell every time they showed her walking that it was the same walk you seen b4, only in a diff environment. Catwoman in batman returns was so/so...its a shame she never returned knowing that she never died. I would have loved to see catwoman vs batgirl. and dude im dying to know what batman's new batmobile is gonna look like... i wonder if they will bring back the 1 from part1/2. that1 was nice.
2 years agoby @jasonkatFlag
Cyn
@Iron - they'd never cast Berry. She's too connected to the sh*thouse Catwoman movie she was in...
2 years agoby @cyn-de-harvenFlag
Iron-Monkey
I nominate Berry as CatWoman I mean she did alright playing Cats but the movie was just to awful man for real.
2 years agoby @iron-monkeyFlag
Lane
@JasonKat: There was nothing wrong with TDK's story, it was great. The reason Rachel never ended up with Bruce is because he's Batman, plain and simple. Yes, they made it seem like they would be together by the second film, but Rachel's feelings toward Bruce only fleeted once she realized she wasn't okay with carrying the burden of his secret knowing that she didn't want to live the life he lived. So in all honesty, even with her tragic and unfortunate death, it ended just like it was supposed to.
Bruce Wayne is the billionare playboy. He doesn't settle down. Clark Kent is the one woman guy who does eventually settle.
2 years agoby @lane1Flag
Lane
Well, I agree with you on some of those aspects, Supes, but not all. I have to disagree with you about the purpose of her character as a whole. I think you're being a bit too harsh. First of all, you sited her being a made-up character as one of the reasons why she didn't work, yet there are made-up characters introduced to the comic book world all the time. Harley Quinn from Batman: TAS, Livewire from Superman: TAS, Chloe Sullivan from Smallville, just to name a few, are all examples are some successful "made-up" female comic book characters that were either instantly popular or became popular over time and eventually made their way into the comics as well.
Also, I have to ask, if you feel so strongly about Rachel Dawes being such a "weak" character, don't you think that that would be considered a big enough flaw in Nolan's universe that it would make Burton's Batman ultimately better considering both of his films had two different, yet very strong female leads?
"With him threatening Gordon's entire family in the end when he wasn't even married to Dawes seemed like quite a stretch to me. But maybe that's just me."
LOL, yes, its just you. :P - Logically, Dent did not have to be married to Dawes to go to such extremes. He just had to love her enough to want to marry her... So taking revenge for her death does not seem like that much of a stretch considering how he might've had the chance to take that next step had her death not ocurred. He would've felt guilty about what happened and both saddened and angered at the fact that he'd never get the chance to spend his life with the woman he loved. By the end of the movie we learn that would've indeed happened once its announced through Rachel's letter to Bruce that she was going to marry Harvey had she not died. Now with the both of them gone, we'll never know. I think that's what resonated with people about their love story and made it so important. That their relationship had always been doomed from the beginning. The events that took place, followed by their immediate deaths is what made it so tragic... It was bittersweet.
2 years agoby @lane1Flag
Dan
Dawes as Catwoman? fail.
2 years agoby @dan1Flag
JasonKat
Sumthing u guys said..just hit me... but its not gonna happen, but it would have been a masterpiece if it did. and i know 4 a fact it would have shocked everybody. too. ..That if Rachel would have survived. her death. and u never saw her again or atleast not til maybe another 1 or 2 more batman films, or maybe at the very end of batman3. dressed up as catwoman. being a badass, fighting against batman, 4 alot of reasons, maybe cause he killed dent. or he didnt save her. or i dunno. but it would have played out well. if all along she became catwoman. but BLAHHH neither katie or maggie can pull off a catwoman it suxs. but to think of an outcome..idea like that would have impacked the whole thing, because now it gives u a reason to like her, or hate her even more. :)
2 years agoby @jasonkatFlag
JasonKat
whatever the story was...i still would have been pleased if .katie would have returned to "TDK to finish off her character role even tho nobody really likes or cares about her, very few people like my self think she did a great job in batman begins and it would have made TDK alot better. (more feeling & character wize) into it,. and maggie was so not a batman character to me. i dunno why. On Another note tho, The whole Rachel and Harvey Dent, came WAY to soon. After the way batman begins ended, it looks pretty off the rail that rachel suddently has a new man. It was pretty clear to me that they would end up "an item" kinda like (spiderman's) peter parker and MJ. TDK feels like it should have been a part 3 or part 4. cause theres a big gap there. You never saw or heard of dent in batman begin, and out of nowhere shes in love big time. Anyway, it went down the way it did and its final. shes dead now. so nomore katie or maggie. HOPFULLY batman 3, tells a much better story than TDK. or atleast, NO EMPTY PLOT HOLES.
2 years agoby @jasonkatFlag
Dan
To be blunt, she was a pathetic love interest. Now for the final part, either no love interest, or go for broke with Cats. But nothing in between. This is the final act, let it also be the strongest. No more wishy washy characters who can't make up their minds on who they want to be with, and all that.
2 years agoby @dan1Flag
Daveactor7
@Cyn lol "prove he had a basis of humanity" was the main reason in which I believe she was there
2 years agoby @daveactor7Flag
Cyn
You guys are right. I never cared much for the character of Rachel Dawes. In the first movie, she was there to...what? prove he had a basis of humanity? A somewhat normal friend in an abnormal childhood? No idea. The second movie she was so far removed - to me - from the first movie's character, I barely bothered registering that they were the same person.
2 years agoby @cyn-de-harvenFlag
Dan
@Lane1 Even if she isn't, Dawes still doesn't matter much to me :P
Really, I saw Rachel Dawes as the weakest aspect of Nolan's version. She was made up, played by 2 actresses I'm not the biggest fan of, and I didn't entirely buy Dent's rage over her death. With him threatening Gordon's entire family in the end when he wasn't even married to Dawes seemed like quite a stretch to me. But maybe that's just me.
2 years agoby @dan1Flag
Lane
Well obviously, Supes. Rachel Dawes does not and will never even compare to Catwoman... (unless she's never brought into the Nolan universe, then Dawes would still have a pretty strong impact)
2 years agoby @lane1Flag
Lane
However, I think I pretty much explained my stance on Katie Holmes/Rachel Dawes so... yeah. @JasonKat, I'm sorry, but that was one recasting I did NOT have a problem with. Better for the movie and didn't hurt it in the least. It really was not a big enough deal to hate on the movie, LOL.
2 years agoby @lane1Flag
Dan
All this talk over the Rachel Dawes character when Harvey Dent is the one the article suggests coming back lol. For me, I didn't really care too much about Rachel dying. It was a plot device to make Dent become Two Face and mess with Bats' psyche, so I kind of have a cold detachment looking at it from that angle. TDK didn''t give me any warm, fuzzy feelings for any of the characters, it was a crime masterpiece with people playing an elaborate chess game using Gotham as the board.
Now if you bring in Catwoman (I'm not speculating, just saying) into the equation, and make her a love interest with the love/hate thing with Bats, then you might have an interesting relationship. Someone who is on his level and fighting his war on a more visceral level would have more meaning for me then someone who just works a day job.
2 years agoby @dan1Flag
Lane
lol @ejk, I would've liked to see that too. :P But I don't agree with you @Narrator on the part that Rachel had a smaller role in this film. I actually felt that Maggie's role in this one equaled if not surpassed the amount of screen time Katie had gotten in the first film. But ultimately, I thought Maggie was a much better actress/choice for the role which is another reason why I didn't want to see her die so soon, lol. And Katie's "unavailability" is not the only reason she was recast. It had more to do with the fact that most people simply didn't like her in the role coupled with her Tom Cruise drama at the time, that it came to the point where Nolan just wanted to "stay away" from her... Tainted this movie would've been with her in the cast.
2 years agoby @lane1Flag
Lane
@Diaigma: Yeah, he did. I never saw it but my brother told me Nolan apparently stated that in one of the special features on the DVD. That "Two-Face was dead" (for sure). So I don't know why this is even news until Nolan speaks to Eckhart directly that he's changed his plans.
And I like where @JasonKat was going with his argument, lol. I think Rachel's character played an extremely important role in the movie and I liked how much emotion came from that and thought Maggie's performance was excellent. All of this excluding how much her character's struggles and immediate death resonated with me and the fact that her name was Rachel which I otherwise hated... :'(
(being obviously emo, lmao)
2 years agoby @lane1Flag
slysnide
@JasonKat: I get that people like keeping the same cast members, but the Two-Face/Rachel thing was subplot. The whole reason any of that happens is cuz of the execution of Joker's plan. That's what the film was about. The psychological face-off. Confronting the facts as hard as they are to face. Rachel was merely an anchor for Bruce's sense of normalcy that Joker strikes down as an example that Batman is the real guy, not Bruce (as is written in the comics). A byproduct of Joker's plight is the death of Rachel and Harvey. Hence why their story was introduced in this film. We never got to see Harvey do much of anything, only that he and Rachel are dating and he's a smash in Gotham's crimeworld. It's all in the interrogation scene. For Nolan and DC, the Batman persona and his dilemmas are the real issue, with severing Rachel & Harvey from the Bruce persona to further extrapolate on that point. For even here, Rachel didn't do much.
2 years agoby @slysnideFlag
Emmytt
i hope two-face comes back
2 years agoby @emmyttFlag
JasonKat
@slysnide, I know what your saying, and ur right about everything u just said. However i am not talking about batman's situations or jokers or anything that happened in the movie the way they did. I was talking about diff actors/actresses being removed/replaced or the dept's of change. By all means. Rachel WAS the pin point of the movie but alot of u dont see wat im getting at...It was about her and 2face, her feelings for bruce wayne, her being captured by joker , batman saving her.and then later..killed by the bomb.. AND then, twoface going nutts over everything. because the 1 he loved has been killed. so he takes it out on batman, gordon ect. Like @narrator said katie was unavailable at the time...Rachel got more air time in this movie. than batman begins. But i know most of u will still b against wat i just wrote because u dont seem to c wat im saying. The Dark nigth had alot of things happenin at 1 time, w batman, joker, 2face and Rachel. the chinse guy, not to mention gordon. Hopfully i got my point out but i prob didnt, oh well. :)
2 years agoby @jasonkatFlag
Dan
That is one passionate fan below me :) I love it.
2 years agoby @dan1Flag
slysnide
@JasonKat: Rachel wasn't the center of attention, and that doesn't change because they recast her. The film was a psychological analysis of the psyche's of Batman v Joker. For Joker isn't crazy, only his motivations are. For all his predictions about society come true. People blow the most pathetic sh*t outta proportion. Just look at politics in the US. Totally f*cked with people bitching about non-issues like 'moral values' and avoiding actual solutions. Batman is the same, for he feeds the criminal system by recycling the same criminals in and out of jail constantly with no differences. Harvey accomplishes things. Joker tears them down logically for what they are. For example, the mob mentality is as scary as it is idiotic. People fretting about having heroes is too, and more so playing the blame game by appeasing an aparent terrorist, and raging with bloodlust for the 'hero' they've turned a blind eye to all year cuz it now suits their desires to turn him in (no loyalty or kindness those f*cks). Hence, Joker's right, Batman's very existence shows that there never will be triumph, as the presence of a random vigilante (which Batman is no matter how you slice it) means there is no justice. For every city has crime, that never ends, but to the point where the DA is being targeted for death by the mob, and a guy must put on a cape & cowl to enforce HIS version of the law means that the existence of Joker is a purely logical response to such insane psyches of Batman the vigilante, Harvey Dent the hypocrite (who goes vigilante for all the wrong reasons), and the citizens of Gotham who go for the jugular. Nolan himself has expressed this.
2 years agoby @slysnideFlag
JasonKat
lol @ejk1 she was gonna die anyways, whoever ended up on her role. but her role in batman begins would end in the dark knight like scarcrow did. batman 3 is awhole new/diff movie now.. We just have to wait and c who our new bad guy is. or..good guy? no robin? night wing? bat boy? lol
2 years agoby @jasonkatFlag
ejk1
Guys, lay off JasonKat. I don't see what the big deal is, I mean all he wanted to do was see Katie Holmes burnt to a crisp instead of Maggie G.
2 years agoby @ejk1Flag
Major Tom
What if they began the movie with a flashback of Harvey/Two-Face talking to (insert ACTUAL villain's name here) before he confronted Batman at the end of TDK? That way, Two-Face would get more screen time, and it would set us up for the actual villain's exploits throughout (sp?) the rest of the movie? It's foolproof!!!!!
2 years agoby @movie-nutFlag
Daveactor7
@Narrator agreed. A supporting actress is important, but even she had a small role-her death caused a strong emotional response from both Harvey Dent and Bruce Wayne. It drove Harvey mad and thats the strongest reason why he becomes two face. And Wayne descends into darkness once again and yet becomes a spiritually stronger batman.
2 years agoby @daveactor7Flag
Diaigma
Didn't Nolan already say "he's toast" when asked if Two Face would come back? : /
2 years agoby @diaigmaFlag
The Narrator: The Better Man
@JasonKAt, you didn't like TDK because Holmes was replaced? I'm sorry but thats retarded. She has an even smaller role in TDK, and its not like Nolan wanted her gone. She was simply unavailable, so she was replaced. Its how the business works. Dawes was not what The Dark Knight was about. It was about The Dark Knight. Meaning Batman of course but also, the darkness that The Joker was pushing over Gotham, even Two Face.
I'm sorry, but to dislike an outstanding movie simply because a supporting actress was replaced is irresponsible as a film goer.
2 years agoby @narratorFlag