I remember there was a project for Rachel with Saoirse Ronan
that looked really interesting , I remember they were saying it's based on a novel or something like that
what happened to that project ? ... I was really looking forward to hear news about it

We Have Always Lived in the Castle? It was just another rumor, haven't really heard anything since, except for that one time. Michael Douglas has been sick, so I'm assuming this project is going to be shelved for a while, since I think it was meant to be a vehicle for him.

It sounded really interesting, though, I agree! The cast looked really good.

Hm.. that could have been interesting I agree.

Who knows, it could still happen!

Oh, I've forgotten about that project! I agree -- it sounded really interesting and dark. :nod: I'd love for Rachel to work with Saoirse.

Did you ever end up reading the book it's based on, Belle? :)

Wasn't there something about Rachel being involved in the remake of The Orphanage in the same article? That could have been different as well. :)

No, I haven't read it. How about you? :)

Nope, I haven't read it.

Oh yeah -- The Orphanage remake was mentioned! I'd love for Rachel to do it! I've watched the original, and I liked it a lot. It's very dark and suspenseful. :nod:

I haven't seen the original, but it did sound really great. :nod: Even if most of the time, the American versions do not compare to the originals.

I'd love to see Rachel in another thriller/suspense film. She should do more of those, like Red Eye. :D

Yeah, American remakes aren't usually as great, but I'd love for Rachel to be part of the remake anyway. It's too good of a project to skip out on!

I'd love for her to be in another thriller/suspense. :nod: Something darker though than Red Eye... as much as I love Red Eye. :P

Couple of thoughts here - I think I've read all of these rumors at some point or another. I think Rachel said in an interview a few years back that she didn't want to work on huge big-budget action films and had to be passionate about a role or she wouldn't take it. A lot of actors take roles for the paycheck but Rachel doesn't strike me as that type of person. Again, she's know for being very methodical and careful in choosing her scripts - and although she doesn't always choose the right ones, she is very picky.

Take Sherlock Holmes for example. She turns down Casino Royale, Dark Knight and Iron Man - why? Well, Dark Knight was the whole female kidnapped and in distress role which was too much of a stereotype for her. Iron Man's Pepper Potts was pretty much the love interest so the role was very one dimensional. Vesper in Bond, again was just primarily a love interest who ends up getting kidnapped, very one dimensional... but Rachel probably looked at Sherlock Holmes and saw a character in Irene Adler who was independent, witty, strong and an equal foil to Sherlock Holmes. I think Rachel saw the role and immediately thought that if she was going to do a blockbuster, Irene's female role was least stereotypical and would give her the best chance to exercise her acting chops. Unfortunately she was miscast in this role and not given enough lines to make her role relevant.

I would've loved to see her in Prada and Mama Mia. Prada opposite Streep and with Emily Blunt would've altered her career and I think it was probably a mistake she didn't take it. Also, Mama Mia would've been a great role too but like many have said, not sure she can sing? Otherwise, I'm ok with her not taking the other roles. And thank god she lost out to Alba on those 2 roles. Those movies were disasters.

BTW - one more rumor - Rachel was in the running for We Bought Zoo (Cameron Crowe's next film) but lost out to Scarlet Jo (Cameron Crowe Eyes Actresses For ‘Zoo’ – Deadline.com). I would've loved to have seen her opposite Matt Damon. Oh well.

I agree, Rob. Rachel doesn't seem like the type actor to be choosing roles for the 'money'. I think she puts a lot of thought into choosing her roles, and I like that about her.

I would've loved to have seen Rachel in all three movies -- Casino Royale, The Dark Knight, and Iron Man. I don't mind if Rachel does big blockbuster movies at all -- some of them have a lot of depth like Christopher Nolan's movies. With the right role in a big blockbuster movie, Rachel could earn even more exposure as an actor (which she wholly deserves).

I love Vesper Lynd! It was such a great femme fatale role! Eva Green was great in the role, but Rachel would've been awesome as well. Rachel Dawes was a pretty one dimensional female role, but I'm a huge fan of Nolan's Batman franchise, and I would've loved for Rachel to be involved in them. The entire cast was outstanding (Christian Bale, Michael Caine, Heath Ledger, Gary Oldman, etc), and it would be just so great to see Rachel work alongside them -- whether she has a minor role or not. I'd love for Rachel to be cast in the third Batman film for Nolan if there ever is one in the future. Same goes with Pepper Potts -- I agree with you -- it's another one dimensional role, but I enjoyed Iron Man immensely as well (it was one of the better comic superhero movies), and I think the role would've given Rachel great exposure. Plus, she'd get to work with RDJ! I know she eventually did get to work with him in Sherlock Holmes -- but I'd rather see her as Pepper rather than Irene. The role of Irene seemed like it was horribly diminished to nearly nothing. :(

I would've loved for her to be in Prada as well! :love: That would be so amazing! Meryl Streep was outstanding as Miranda... and just for Rachel to work with Meryl! :thud: I love Emily Blunt as well.

Thanks for that rumor. We've heard of it before, too. Too bad Scar Jo got the role -- I would've loved to see Rachel work with Matt Damon, too! Maybe in some other film in the future...

Yes - all of those were great movies and I absolutely loved them (Dark Knight, Casino Royale, Iron Man 1/2) - I was just trying to rationalize Rachel's reasoning from what I thought she might be thinking :) - if that makes any sense at all.

She almost purposely shies away from blockbusters. As I've mentioned, I'm always torn about what I want to see her do - part of me wants her to do the blockbusters and become a household name, but then at the same time, I respect her for her decision to be picky with her roles and stay out of the spotlight most of the time.

She's kind of continuing that trend with her new projects. She interviewed that she was uncomfortable at first with MG despite doing a terrific job. But if you look at The Vow, it sounds like a low-key love story like Dear John/Notebook/Last Song - although I hope its better than all 3 of those. Midnight in Paris is a quirky Woody Allen film, who's never been really mainstream and The Burial, although has an impressive cast, wouldn't be classified as a 'blockbuster' - based on the description, it's more of a love story.

I think she'll keep being choosy with her roles and that's fine. She seems to want to do projects she really believes in rather than just do movies for the sake of working. I think Roger Mitchell and Woody Allen have mentioned that she's known to be pickier and they had to convince her. :)

In her recent MG press junket, I remember an interview where she said she used to want to make a movie, then take a break for a while before the next one, but now she has different approach; if she loves the script she'll sign on even if it's back to back...so she's willing to make more movies now with a good script.

I would have rather seen her as Pepper than Irene as well. :shrug: If she had accepted some of those bigger movies, she would have gotten more exposure. That could help her get more opportunities for better scripts. :)

I would have loved to see her in the Batman franchise. A few weeks back, there were rumors that a bunch of actresses were auditioning for the 3rd film, but she wasn't on there. And The Devil Wears Prada remains the movie I really wish she had been in. :love:

I agree none of her three upcoming projects are going to be blockbusters, they seem like smaller movies. The Vow sounds the most mainstream one to me.

Yes - and if The Vow is the most mainstream of the 3, she may not be a big box office draw again. I'm hoping the Terrence Malick film highlights her acting. He's a widely acclaimed director (Thin Red Line, New World). Ben Affleck has grown on me over the years. Ever since he directed Gone Baby Gone back in 2007, I feel like he has turned around his career and legitimized his career again.

The more I think about it, the more I feel like her year off in 2006 kind of changed the path of her career. Imagine if she had decided to work in 2006 and ended doing Iron Man, Dark Knight and/or Casino Royale? She would've totally blown up and had her choice of any script for the next 5 years. I guess all things work out for a reason. But it's hard not to wonder. The good thing is that she's only 32 (and a young 32 with no many miles at that) - so she'll continue to get her chances as long as she is willing to take them.

Yes, I'm fine with Rachel being choosy about her roles. I like that about her. I don't think she necessarily shies away from blockbuster roles just to stay out of the limelight. I think she'll go for a blockbuster role if the movie has a good script. :)

Aw, Belle, I wish Rachel were rumored to be auditioning for the next Batman movie! It would be a dream come true for me for Rachel to work with Nolan. :D

I agree, Rob, that her upcoming movies aren't mainstream, but I agree with you, Belle, that The Vow is the most mainstream. Those type of romance movies appeal to mass audiences... but not to me. :lol:

Rachel would've totally blown up the scene if she were involved with Casino Royale, The Dark Knight, or Iron Man!!!! Oh well... next movie, I hope. :)