Just when you thought she was about to succumb to the mind-numbing effects of too much niacin, Katie Holmes may make her debut on Broadway. The Daily Mail is reporting that she’s in final talks to star in a revival of Arthur Miller’s dramatic play, “All My Sons.” John Lithgow and Dianne Wiest have already committed to the play, and it sounds like Katie is about to sign on:

Katie Holmes is in final negotiations to make her professional stage debut on Broadway.

The producer of a revival of All My Sons, Arthur Miller’s heartbreaking, post-World War II family drama, is clearly hoping Holmes (aka the third Mrs Tom Cruise) will create some sizzle at the box office later this year.

It would be the first major revival of a Miller play since the dramatist’s death three years ago.

All My Sons, to be directed by British-born Simon McBurney, would also allow Holmes to be more than “Mrs Tom Cruise” for six nights a week.

The actress has committed to taking part in a private workshop of the play in May. She will play the part of a woman who visits her former neighbours, the family of a missing pilot she once loved.

Producer Eric Falkenstein has already cast Broadway veterans John Lithgow and Dianne Wiest, which has had the desired effect of making Ms Holmes more comfortable about taking on her first play since high school.

Holmes has told McBurney and Falkenstein that she is serious about working in the theatre.

[From The Daily Mail]

Do you think Katie Holmes has the chops to star on Broadway? I read through the plot synopsis on Wikipedia (spoilers), hoping that there would be a kissing scene that would cause Tom to reject her bid for Broadway, but unfortunately that doesn’t seem to be the case. Like Miller’s other work it’s not a very uplifting story, but it’s probably moving and thought-provoking. I think Katie will play the character Ann Deever, who is a 26 year-old woman interested in the brother of a man she used to date who is missing in action. It takes place during WWII and involves a family torn apart by the war and an ethical dilemma.

Doesn’t Katie have a $35 million mansion to decorate and thousand dollar shoes to buy? She doesn’t have the time or the energy to play a character on Broadway. Maybe she can hire a more talented actress to do the role for her and slip in for the end part where she bows on stage. There are plenty of other mousy women that look just like her. She could get away with it.

Katie Holmes is shown on 3/16/08 after having lunch, when she stumbled and Star made a cover story about it. Thanks to WENN for these pictures.

Where in the world has Suri Cruise been? The normally ubiquitous toddler hasn’t been spotted in eight weeks, and theories on her sudden removal from the public eye are abundant. Some sources say Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes have been keeping their little rugrat at home because the paparazzi crush at a recent restaurant outing frightened her; others are speculating that the couple is purposely keeping Suri’s profile low in anticipation of her big birthday bash next month. Perez Hilton even jokingly (I hope) suggested that Suri checked into baby rehab.

Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes looked thrilled to be out at Cut restaurant in LA on March 5. Dining with actor Forest Whitaker and his wife, Keisha, the couple were celebrating the near completion of their new Hollywood Hills mansion. But something was out of place. Where was Suri? Until recently, Tom and Katie had taken their 23-month-old daughter with them everywhere. But Suri hasn’t been spotted in public since Jan. 16 — 61 days and counting at press time.

So what’s happened to her? Katie, 29, and Tom, 45, have always spoken about Suri as if she were a small adult. But an insider close to the Cruises says a series of events reminded the family that Suri’s just a child after all. One evening, on the way out of a restaurant, fans surged. “Suri freaked out,” the insider says. “She started blinking her eyes because people started taking pictures, and she put up an arm to shield her face. She cried and clung to Katie the whole way back to the hotel. That really upset Katie.”

There’s another only-in-Hollywood reason Tom and Katie have been keeping Suri holed up at their apartment in the Scientology Celebrity Centre: fear of overexposure. To celebrate Suri’s 2nd birthday, on April 18, “Katie and Tom are throwing a party to end all parties,” says the insider. “With all the publicity that it’s going to generate, Katie thinks it’s best for Suri to lie low.”

[From Life & Style Weekly]

Other theories on the whereabouts of the toddler from the “Best Week Ever” blog over at VH1:

Now, if this were any other baby, the world would probably not even notice. But this being Suri, handily the world’s most adorable and, up until recently, the most photographed baby, her absence is cause for concern. Which leads us to ask: Where Is Suri? Here are 7 plausible theories:

1. Accidentally mistaking her for a chicken wing, Kirstie Alley threw Suri into a deep fryer. Upon realizing the mistake, Alley immediately removed America’s Best Baby from the fryer, but sadly… it was too late. Too, too late. On the bright side, Alley insists it was the most delicious baby she has ever eaten.

2. Tom and Katie panicked when they learned that Suri’s first words were “I want Ritalin.” She is now resting comfortably in a soundproof, padlocked drawer.

3. Katie Holmes has pawned poor Suri to buy Armani’s latest creation: A python-skinned covered baby shaped bag. Think of how many diamonds you can fit into it!

4. Suri was murdered by supposed fellow baby friend Shiloh Pitt… who is now on the crawl from the law.

5. Giving free stress tests in Times Square…

[From Best Week Ever]

My theory is that she’s involved in some kind of Scientology ritual, just like her mysteriously absent older siblings. What do you guys think?

Suri Cruise is shown on 1/16/08 with her parents in Manhattan, thanks to Splash News.

composite image made from Splash News and image from NYMag.com
Suri Cruise allegedly turns 2 years old on April 18, and sources say the party is going to rival anything you’ve seen on MTV’s “My Super Sweet 16.” The entertainment for the toddler’s party won’t be a clown or a pony– instead, it’s going to be a Grammy-winning producer and DJ, Mark Ronson, whose latest claim to fame was producing Amy Winehouse’s album, “Back to Black.”

Tom Cruise and wife Katie Holmes have asked top British music producer Mark Ronson to DJ at their daughter, Suri’s second birthday party.

Suri turns two on April 18 — and the Hollywood couple are planning a huge bash to mark the occasion.

They reckon Grammy and BRIT Award winner Mark — who has worked with the likes of Amy Winehouse, Lily Allen and Robbie Williams — is just the man to spin some tunes.

32-year-old Mark — who made his name as a DJ on the New York club scene in 1993 — was the official DJ when Tom, 45, married Katie, 29, in Bracciano, Italy, on November 18, 2006 and impressed the groom with a re-worked version of the Top Gun theme.

[From Showbizspy]

Last year, when Suri allegedly turned one, the Cruises had a simple party in comparison - close friends and family ate cupcakes and pizza in a backyard party on the Cruise compound, which was decorated with dragonfly pinatas. It looks like this year, Suri decided to step it up a notch. After all, she’s been alive for millions of years and already knows everything she needs to know.

Seriously, though, what does she care who the DJ is, as long as he plays The Wiggles?

I hope my 8-year-old daughter doesn’t catch wind of this. She announced last week that she wants Beyonce to sing at her birthday party in November. I don’t have those kind of connections!

Even though Suri Cruise is barely two years old, her parents, Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes, treat her like she is an adult. That’s because according to Scientology, Suri isn’t really a baby - she has lived for millions of years. (If you could see me right now, you’d see that I am making that circular motion with my finger next to my head. You know, the universal signal for “batshit crazy.”)

She’s not yet 2-years-old, but Suri Cruise’s face is known the world over. Whether she is out shopping at high end New York stores, sightseeing in Paris or watching the Spice Girls in LA, her parents Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes treat her like a little adult.

That is because that is how they see her. As Scientologists, they believe their daughter has lived for billions of years and so she already knows all there is to know. Just like a grown-up she doesn’t even go to bed until 11 p.m!

For Suri there is hardly any discipline, a fascinating Star probe into her life reveals. But there are rules. Tom forbids television and because of anti-Scientology sites, when she is old enough, her computer use will be very limited. “The Internet has become a major source of problems for Scientology,” cult expert Rick Ross tells Star. When it comes to education, Suri will follow Tom’s other kids, Isabella and Connor and be schooled in the controversial church.

McDonalds is out, her diet is organic, with boiled barley juice one of its major ingredients. Her health is maintained not with medicine, but by herbs. Her friends are virtually all the children of fellow Scientology believers.

[From Star Magazine]

No McDonald’s or TV probably isn’t a bad idea. And we’ve heard about the barley juice before. There was a story that instead of breastfeeding Suri as an infant, Tom insisted that Suri be fed on barley water. At that time, I thought there was no way a child could be nourished on that stuff, but Suri looks very healthy, so maybe there’s something to that barley juice after all.

That part about no discipline is bothersome, though. I don’t know how you let a two-year-old run rampant in your house without at least the occasional “no” or “don’t touch.” Anyone who’s raised a toddler knows what I’m talking about here. If you don’t set rules and boundaries, you can pretty much count on having yourself a selfish brat.

I wonder - were Isabella and Conor raised the same way? Somehow I can’t see Nicole Kidman agreeing to the “no discipline” part. Which could partially explain why they are no longer together and her kids never see her. I’m sure given the choice, my kids would rather live with their good-time, no-rules daddy too.

Thanks to popbytes for the header image.

Remember how everyone was getting those terrible helmet bangs about a year and a half ago and how Janet Jackson popularized it? My hairdresser had a big poster up from Jose Eber featuring that style, and when I asked him about it he just shook his head and said he hoped it would pass.

The severe bangs were flipped to the side until they slowly grew out to make way for more classic hair trends, but now they’re back again in all their forehead-blocking glory. I blame Katie Holmes for bringing back this questionable style. She manages to pull off a severe interpretation of her daughter’s bowl cut, but only because she has either naturally thin straight hair or enough volume has been taken out of her hair to make it flat and sleek. In my opinion this style just doesn’t work with thicker hair and looks silly.

Here are some celebrities who work it, and others who just should flip it to the side and wait for the trend to pass. Rather than group them according to my opinion, I’ll just post the photos and let you discuss. I don’t think this style works with hair that isn’t straight and thin, but you may disagree.

It’s just hair. It will grow out eventually and can be styled to compensate, but unlike a bad outfit you can’t just switch it for something else the next day without some effort.

Shown are Katie Holmes, Heidi Klum, Kate Hudson, Christina Ricci, Elle Macpherson, Selma Blair, Kylie Minogue, Kelis, Paula Abdul in a messy interpretation of the style, Rihanna, Myleene Klass, and Janet Jackson.

Katie Holmes’ recorded times crossing various markers on the NY Marathon route were identical down to the second at nearly every point in the middle of the race to one of the guys seen jogging with her, sparking theories that she had one of the other joggers wear her chip. Her composed appearance, lack of sweat, and seemingly completely inappropriate and probably uncomfortable attire had many people claiming that she didn’t run or even walk the whole 26 and a half miles.

Fox News has an interview with the mother of the unregistered and previously-unnamed runner, Wesley Okerson, and his mom says that both he and Paul Vincent, whose times mirrored Katie’s down to the second, are her trainers, and “yes, she really ran the marathon.” Case solved then I guess.

Katie and her two trainers. Okerson is on the right. He is wearing a tracking chip despite not being registered for the race.

Defamer notes that Okerson is an aspiring actor and that he was a personal guest of the Holmes-Cruises that night at the premiere of Tom’s movie Lions for Lambs. Katie wore peep-toe heels that night and her feet looked perfectly fine. No swelling or abrasions that are common among marathon runners.

Commentors on Gossip Rocks, where we get a lot of stories, note how naturally and repeatedly Katie Holmes lied on her Punk’d episode (link leads to video) when she was led to believe that director JJ Abrams was cheating on his fiancé. She didn’t seem to have any ethical issues and instead of telling the truth or refusing to answer the fiancé about whether there was another woman in the room she said “no” over and over again when it wasn’t true. She was put in a bad position and was just trying to get out of there, but when asked “Do you always tell the truth? About everything?” she easily said “yes.”

Katie Holmes’ trainer, who was seen finishing the race with her, wearing a tracking chip despite not being registered and a bib from 2003. Katie Holmes was nowhere to be found in three different photos at this point.

Update: Thanks to Calimoonchild on Gossip Rocks for the link to this photo on sawzy’s Flickr of Wesley Okerson, who was not registered in the NY City Marathon and wore a bib from 2003, wearing a tracking chip despite the fact that he wouldn’t need one or presumably get one if he wasn’t registered. Katie Holmes is nowhere to be found, although she finished the race alongside both Okerson and Paul Vincent as seen in the photo above. Okerson is obviously behind the smiling old guy. There are three photos of just Okerson with no Katie in sight on sawzy’s Flickr. Commentor sc on our other post about this curious issue said he was a volunteer for seven hours on the course at the same spot and that the celebrities were easily spotted, but that he never saw Holmes pass.

Katie Holmes is shown outside the Late Show on 1/14/08, thanks to PRPhotos.

There have been rumblings for some time that Katie Holmes couldn’t possibly have run the full NY Marathon during the day and gone out with heels on that night. Katie drew some skeptics when she was seen at her husband’s side that very night wearing heels at the premiere of his film Lions for Lambs. She could easily obtain custom made sneakers as well as those insanely expensive Louboutins that are made from a mold of your foot, so maybe her feet were immune to the wear and tear that plague average runners.

Katie also ran 26 miles on concrete in 5 and a half hours wearing a camisole-type top with just a built in bra and no sports bra. Many female runners say that would chafe and be extremely uncomfortable, but Katie told David Letterman that she felt “strong” afterwards. Others note that her pants seemed to drag on the ground and looked too long. Five and a half hours is not an incredible finish time, and a 12 minute mile is not a brisk run, but it’s very physically grueling and it seems like you would need to wear a sports bar.

There are hardly any photos that I could find of Katie Holmes running the race apart from when she crossed the finish line. That could be explained by the fact that she wasn’t recognized until the end. The NY Daily News says that husband Tom Cruise met her halfway through the race to give her an encouraging kiss, but there are no photos of that. She is seen in just a camisole in the few photos of her on the course and is in a jacket when she finishes.

A “mystery” guy was seen running with Katie with a bib number, 6074, that was not registered in the marathon. He is widely assumed to be her bodyguard, which doesn’t seem like a big deal, but I’m mentioning him because he figures in some of these stories.

It sounds ludicrous to use such flimsy evidence to suggest that she would fake running the marathon for publicity purposes, but there are some real indicators to suggest she may well have.

Defamer had a tipster send them in the “split times” of Katie Holmes compared to another runner from the NY City Marathon, as found on the official marathon website. The split times are registered electronically at specific stations on the route using the chip for each runner. She has the exact same times, down to the second, of this other guy for most every benchmark in the middle of the race. Even if someone was running alongside her the entire time, would they have the exact same time down to the second like that?

The other guy is registered as Paul Vincent, bib number 28994. He was seen running near her in several photos at the finish line and is shown above in the header image. Katie, the unregistered guy who is thought to be her bodyguard, and the guy with the exact same “split times” as Katie are all wearing similar black jackets.

A commentor on Defamer notes that they finished just two minutes behind Katie and never saw her:

OK…I ran the NYC marathon too and came in about two minutes behind Katie…however, my first half of the marathon was better than the second half due to a bathroom break gone bad in Fort Greene…(I know TMI) However, this would mean at some point Katie and her many, many handlers would have passed me. And the people I was running with. And I never saw her—and people who are running in entourages are extremely obvious. My take…she was dropped in somewhere around Long Island City where no one would notice and ran about half the damn thing. Her “chip” was actually worn my someone else who did run the whole thing…(whether it is this guy, who knows?)

Not like I’m bitter or anything, but she beat me by two minutes. I still smell a conspiracy…

[Comment from Defamer]

Maybe it’s possible that Katie and her bodyguard did cross specific markers at the exact same time down to the second, another commentor on Defamer says that the same split times are possible:

I’m all for a good conspiracy theory, but I ran NY and have to disagree. There were so many people running that it is very possible to have exact spit times b/c several people cross the markers at the same time.

[Comment on Defamer]

Also, Katie was 28 at the time of the marathon in early November, not 30. It is thought that she raced in the higher age bracket in order to receive a more favorable finish rating.

It’s a real accomplishment to run a marathon, and Holmes deserves a lot of credit if it all went down as she claims. This could just be a far-fetched conspiracy theory and maybe she did run/walk the entire marathon without a bra, and one of her bodyguards was close enough to her the entire time to mirror her finishes down to the second.

A story about how Holmes was able to register for the Boston Marathon despite not having a qualifying finish time in the NY Marathon was quickly removed from US Weekly’s website. They decided to delete the post instead of issue a correction.

Katie Holmesbot recently gave an interview to Diane Sawyer as part of the publicity tour for what I can only assume is the atrocious “Mad Money” with Diane Keaton and Queen Latifah. To see Katie all on her own talking for a few minutes is rather jarring. Normally she’s either with (and presumable guided by) husband Tom Cruise, or you just hear little clips of her talking. To watch her all alone, you realize how flat she’s become. She seems like someone who has been given lessons in how to act like an adult. As a result, she doesn’t seem like herself. There’s all sorts of different kinds of adults. We don’t all have to act like unnaturally-poised drones. I can’t help but wonder if it’s part of Tom’s whole renaming her “Kate” thing, as he said something along the lines of Katie being a kid’s name.

Katie seems very unnatural, though not necessarily uncomfortable, in the interview. She talks with her hands a lot, and often looks down when responding to questions. She seems very sedate, and if Tom weren’t so vocally opposed to drugs, I would accuse him of medicating her. Katie just turned 29 in December. Somehow I can’t put my finger on it, but she comes across as much older than that.

During the interview, Diane Sawyer comments, “In April Suri will be two.” Katie responds very seriously, “I know. So fast.” Instead of the enthusiasm with which most people express this sentiment, she seems very concerned about it. She furrows her brow and shakes her head. Katie, Diane Sawyer just told you your child is growing up, not that you have a bowel disorder. Look a little happy. She makes a half-hearted attempt to make a joke and show how fun she and Cruise are while mentioning a recent trip to FAO Schwartz for Suri. “Tom and I were playing with a lot of the toys ourselves,” she notes flatly. Watching it, you get the impression she’s trying to be funny, but it’s awkward and unbelievable. She pauses for laughter or some reaction from Diane Sawyer, who doesn’t really give one. It somehow comes across as flat, and almost seems like Katie is acting. There’s no real enthusiasm or light in her eyes or her face when she talks about Tom, and not even much when she talks about Suri.

Here’s the video of Katie talking with Diane Sawyer.

It’s interesting to compare current Katie to “Dawson’s Creek” Katie in an appearance on “The Late Show” with David Letterman. She’s very funny, both accidentally and on purpose. Dave asks her about the recent sex plotline on Dawson’s Creek, and Katie explains that her character and her boyfriend almost finally “closed the deal” as she put it, but it didn’t quite happen. And later she finds out the reason is that her character’s boyfriend is gay. Joking about the experience of discovering the boyfriend’s secret, Holmes comments, “It was hard,” then immediately realizes what she’s said and turns bright red, covering her face with her hand. Everyone cracks up, and she has trouble moving on from it, but it’s really funny and genuine.

Later on when Dave asks her about her interests, she jokes, “Shopping… coffee….” and rolls her eyes. It was cute and funny then, though the shopping part turned out to be less of a parody than she probably intended. When Dave asks her if she has a lot of friends, she jokingly responds, “a couple.” She’s adorable, very animated with a lot of life to her. I would want to be that girl’s friend. One would think those qualities are likely what drew Tom Cruise to Katie. Yet she seems completely devoid of them now, and most people think that’s at Tom’s behest.

The best part of the interview might have come back to haunt Katie. Dave notes that she is very tall, and Katie mentions that she was self-conscious about her height when she first came to Hollywood, as everyone else is very small.

Dave: “You hit upon something interesting. They’re tiny, and I think that’s why some of them go into show business. They’re driven by that physical insecurity. “

Katie [laughing] “Yeah, you’re right, mostly.”

Dave: “Like Tom Cruise for example. Tiny man.”

Katie: “Again, yes!”

Dave. “Pretty boy Tom Cruise. Tiny tiny tiny man.” Katie nods along.

[From the Late Show]

Wonder what Tom thinks about that now? When you watch the two videos, it’s really sad to see that Katie’s turned into a “Kate” Holmesbot. I can’t help but wonder what she’s actually gotten out of this. Tom has a ton of money and her profile has certainly raised, but she’s capable of earning her own living, and she’d stay famous if for no other reason than giving birth to his child. I’m confused why she’s still in her relationship. But if you watch carefully, she tends to agree with everything David Letterman says. I think she’s likely either pretty passive or an all-out follower, and Tom loves to be a leader. Either way, look forward to more semi-creepy interviews in the next few weeks.

It really is celebrity pregnancy season. Katie Homes’ husband’s ex, Nicole Kidman, just announced that she is pregnant with her first biological child. Last night at the premiere of Holmes’ female crime caper movie, Mad Money, her first film in three years, she wore a strapless silver dress with a band right above her stomach. From some angles her stomach is sticking out and she looks pregnant. A false bump was spotted on Katie last year when she wasn’t pregnant, and she looks like she’s really sticking her stomach out from some angles. Katie also wore an odd toga-like dress to the People’s Choice awards and some people speculated that it was an attempt to hide a growing baby bump. So is she pregnant or just slouchy? She could be trying to look less tall next to her husband.

Homes is very athletic and thin, and I can’t see her having a bump like this unless she’s pregnant. It’s hard to tell in that dress, but I’m voting for yes. How convenient for Holmes and Cruise’s PR that she’s pregnant again right at the same time as Kidman and right around the release date of Andrew Morton’s negative biography of her husband. We’ll have to wait and see, though. She really does look like she’s slouching in these photos, but maybe that’s because she wants everyone to get the hint.

There was a rumor that Tom Cruise couldn’t get Katie Holmes’ pregnant on his presumably second attempt, and we’ve all heard the theories that Suri isn’t Tom’s biological baby and that he’s really sterile. Whatever the case, congratulations to Tom and Katie on their second baby if this is true. They aren’t my favorite couple by a long shot, but if they want to have another baby and they’ve been successful we can wish them well. Katie probably feels the same about her husband’s ex. She said on the red carpet that “I’m so happy for [Nicole]. It’s wonderful.”

I hope Mad Money tanks at the box office, though, because it looks like a piece of crap. Fox News reports that the film makes no sense and is not entertaining. They also note that Katie and Tom skipped the post-premiere party. None of Tom and Katie’s friends like the Pinkett-Smiths or the Beckhams showed at the premiere.

Update: Everyone is voting for slouchy, so I’ll have to go with the majority on this one. Oh and she’s also going to run the Boston Marathon. My pregnancy-dar needs to get recalibrated after Nicole Kidman broke it.

Thanks to WENN and PR Photos for these pictures.

It doesn’t look like Katie Holmes’ lackluster career is going to improve much after Mad Money comes out. She’s in talks to costar in what’s deemed a “family dramedy” with Christina Aguilera called Humboldt Park. It supposedly starts filming in February, but if that’s the case then maybe they’re filming Aguilera’s part later or she’s only in consideration for the role as she’s due to have a baby any day now and is rumored to be scheduled for a c-section on January 10th.

Star has learned that [Katie Holmes and Christina Aguilera] are in talks to costar in the family dramedy Humboldt Park, which starts shooting in February. The Mad Money actress “is trying to prove she can do more than fluffy popcorn movies,” an insider tells Star.

[From Star Magazine, print edition, January 14, 2008]

I don’t see Christina Aguilera turning out to be the most devoted mom, but surely she has a schedule full of spray tans, trainer appointments, and photo ops for the month after her baby is born and it’s going to be tight for her if she starts working on a film at that time. Also, how great a movie is is going to be if they’re even considering using Aguilera in a main role? She has no films to her credit apart from brief performances in Moulin Rouge in 2001 and Shark Tale in 2004. (Which I’ve seen at least 10 times thanks to my son. It’s a cute film.) I hope this rumor isn’t true or Katie Holmes’ career really is doomed. That’s probably fine with her. Acting and promoting the few movies that get thrown her way must keep her from her preferred profession - spending Tom’s money.

Now that Cruise runs a studio, though, he can create chaste heroine roles just for his wide-eyed Kate. Cruise’s studio United Artists has even struck an independent deal with the Writer’s Guild, and it looks like they have a huge advantage over every other film studio for the time being. Look for a buddy film starring Katie Holmes and Victoria Beckham with Jada Pinkett Smith in a supporting role.

Katie Holmes is shown wearing a toga dress at last night’s Peoples Choice Awards. Christina Aguilera is shown out to dinner on 1/5/08.