'Dark Knight' Gets New Leading Lady
Maggie Gyllenhaal continues trend, replaces Katie Holmes in "Dark Knight."
July 18, 2008 — -- When Katie Holmes turned down her role in "The Dark Knight," many people asked: Why?
A revival franchise like Batman, under the auspicious pairing of director Christopher Nolan and star Christian Bale, seemed a no-brainer for box-office success. And early watchers said Heath Ledger would be perfect in the role of The Joker — a belief that has only gained traction since the unforeseen death of the young star in January.
The Batman franchise is dominated by the Caped Crusader and his arch-villain foes, but could a leading-lady casting switch — with Maggie Gyllenhaal replacing Holmes as Rachel Dawes — raise eyebrows?
"I don't think people care. It was interesting that she was cast at all," Stephanie Zacharek, senior entertainment writer/film critic for Salon.com, told ABCNews.com. "Not to cast any aspersions on Katie Holmes, but [Gyllenhaal] is more of a straightforward girl. [Holmes] doesn't have the underlying prickliness that Maggie Gyllenhaal has."
For an actor who has a predilection for darker roles, such as a receptionist with a fondness for S&M in "Secretary," and under-the-radar indies such as "SherryBaby," Gyllenhaal, 30, has something more going for her than a famous little brother. And early word is that she uses her acting range in "The Dark Knight."
"I think she's doing the full pirouette for what she was given [in 'The Dark Knight'] and what the role demands of her," Zacharek said.
Before Gyllenhaal took on the role Holmes created in 2005, she sought out her predecessor's approval.
"I wanted to be sure, first of all, that I had her blessing," she told The New York Post. "And I was assured that I did. I'm a big fan of hers. I think she was really great."
Not only did Gyllenhaal say she got approval from Holmes, but she also has received pre-opening critical commendations for her more grounded interpretation of the character.
What remains to be seen is the verdict of movie audiences, never shy about vocalizing their opinions when a new actor takes over a role after a high-profile star drops out. "The Dark Knight" opens today.
A secondary role like Rachel Dawes is easily replaceable, said Brandon Gray, president and publisher of tracking firm BoxOfficeMojo.com. He noted that the Batman franchise has a history of replacing the lead role, "so in that context, it's even more expected or forgivable.
Gladston said he has not heard much commotion about the Rachel Dawes character switch.
"It was a small role in the first movie, and it didn't have that much of an impact," he said. "But that could change with this movie."
Gladston knows of no tie-in products made in Holmes' likeness as Rachel Dawes — nor, so far, of Gyllenhaal in the role.
"But anything with The Joker, of course, with Heath Ledger" has been a big seller, he said.
When actors such as Holmes are busy with other things — a Scientologist husband, a new baby, a new career direction — that also can be a reason to want to make a switch.
During an interview earlier this year with MTV News for "Mad Money," the comedy Holmes opted to star in rather than "The Dark Knight," the 29-year-old actress said she had no regrets turning down the role of Rachel Dawes.
"I had a great experience working with Christopher Nolan [and] I'm sure it's going to be a great movie," she said. "I chose to do this movie ['Mad Money'], and I'm really proud of it. I was so excited to work with Diane [Keaton] and Queen Latifah and [director] Callie [Khouri]. It was so much fun to create this character. I wish them the best for the summer. I'm excited to see it."
"Mad Money" earned $20.7 million at the box office.
Stepping into a supporting role certainly is easier than taking on the weight of established franchises, often with Oscar-winning performances.
Such was the case when Julianne Moore took on the role of Clarice Sterling in 2001's "Hannibal," perfected by Jodie Foster's Oscar-winning performance 10 years earlier in "The Silence of the Lambs."
The "new" Bond, British actor Daniel Craig, underwent an online thrashing when he was chosen to play Agent 007, even inspiring the Web site www.danielcraigisnotbond.com. But his first outing as the dashing secret agent in 2006's "Casino Royale" changed many naysayers' minds.
Salon's Zacharek also was originally skeptical when Craig was cast, describing him as "scrappy ... a street cretin Bond."
But then "I fell in love with him," she said. "He takes the basic template and brings something to it," including looking great in a suit and lots of physical action.
"That's what an actor has to do. You don't want to be disrespectful, but you do have to look at the foundation and see what you need to take of the previous characterization," Zacharek said. "I don't think there's any other way."
While Bond has a history rooted in lead-character changes, the Jack Ryan franchise, based on the best-selling Tom Clancy books, has more to do with the actor in the role. After Alec Baldwin abandoned the franchise following "The Hunt for Red October," in 1990, the studio instead used Harrison Ford's popularity to market the next films, 1992's "Patriot Games" and 1994's "Clear and Present Danger," Gray said.
"The Jack Ryan character doesn't have as much stock as a Batman or a Bond," he added.
Related Stories
ABC News Live