The first lady of Scientology used to rank among my more interesting actresses in Hollywood. No, I didnt think Katie Holmes was overly outstanding, I just liked her quirky charm and I find her terribly hot. Then Tom Cruise ebay’d her soul, and the rest is history.
So to see her do such a mediocre job in Batman wasn’t surprising, but disappointing that they didnt do MORE with her. Maybe they tried. But since I wasnt too trilled with her in Batman Begins anyways, I wasnt to distressed to read this on MSN Entertainment today:
Katie Holmes has turned down a $2.3 million deal to star in the ‘Batman Begins’ sequel.
The actress, who was expected to reprise her role as Rachel Dawes alongside caped crusader Christian Bale for ‘Batman: The Dark Knight’, has pulled out because of “scheduling conflicts”.
Rumours have already circulated that Katie has been replaced by ‘Wedding Crashers’ actress Rachel McAdams for the comic-book adventure, which will star Heath Ledger as The Joker.
I think Katie’s “scheduling conflicts” were a direct result of the $2.3million that she was offered for the role. In a movie this big, I would have thought a bigger paycheque was in order, but this is in Holme’s tax bracket. Perhaps she wanted more. I wonder what shes getting paid to be in a Queen Latifah movie.
Other rumours include troubles related to being a tabloid topic and her contraversal faith to Scientology.
Now would a different actress in the role of Gothams hottest DA make the role any different?
My only fear is that they will write in that the new actress is a different person (instead of replacing Katie’s character) instead of playing off that “I have known you since we were kids” angle that grounds Batman so effectively. IMDB lists her as only a “voice” of Rachel Dawes, so it sounds like this is where they are going with the character despite rumours saying they will replace Katie, not Rachel Dawes.
But we all know IMDB can be unreliable BEFORE a movie comes out.