Katie Holmes and Tom Cruise Inside New York Times Magazine
December 4th, 2008 by Evil Beet
What do we think?
Looks like it’ll be a great photo shoot, if nothing else.
“There’s a misperception about me that I just became this wallflower, this woman who doesn’t have any control of her life,” says Katie in the issue hitting newsstands Sunday, which includes a feature on TomKat’s life. “And that’s pretty wrong. From the very beginning, I’ve made choices in my life that have been very strong.”
It is certainly very cool to look at the evolution of Katie Holmes — from this girl-next-door TV starlet to this glamorous, untouchable woman of mystery.
More pics of Katie here.
Before you leave a comment, please make sure you've read our Guide to Commenting. It could save you a great deal of embarrassment.
I almost hate to say it… but she looks gorgeous, and he looks kind of hot. Oh i hate myself
pseudo film noir idea? anyway, tom looks about 20 years older than he is. yuk yuk yuk
she looks absolutely flawless. i don’t like her eyebrows, but besides that…perfection.
the eyes and hair on katie give her a sort of claudette colbert look… i don’t care about katie, but claudette i love. so not bad.
They are just doing this publicity in the midst of a book which is being released on Scientology by John Duignan who is an ex scientology (high ranking) member, this book spills pretty much everything about how Scientology works, how they manipulate their members and several other things which the general public never hears about its called The Complex and I definitely recommend you pick it up. Tom mostly likely paid his way to be seen in this magazine and portrayed as “perfect” since his cult has been getting a lot of bad press lately. Anyways as for these shots, they look alright, Katie looks flawless of course, but it looks like they failed to conceal poor Toms wrinkles! haha.
That looks NOTHING like her.
Katie looks very 1930s Jean Harlow
Not being funny.. but Tom Cruise CHOSE to go for the profile shot?
Wow.
damn, that first pic’s almost a mome piaf! amazing what professional photographers / retouchers can do. apropos the “glamorous, untouchable” bit — ?! — are you kidding me? she looks like a stale old piece of toast, like, 99% of the time!
I find them & their glamour shots very ho-hum. And that bit in the article about Tom buying another apartment in their building so Suri doesn’t have to mingle with the masses to play. How sick! The Cruises & the Beckhams are just too weird for me – & I don’t find them the least bit attractive. (Well maybe Tom & David just a little bit).
Tom looks like the Penguin. Katie looks like the Scream by Edvard Munch.
Tall women that marry short men are weird.
i think glamorous is an overstatement
katie looks quite pretty, but her eyes are dead, as usual.
“Pretty wrong?” “Strong choices”…. she is so inarticulate!
Pretty pictures, but…I’m not sure that the best way to emphasize the claim that you’re a women who makes strong personal choices and is not a brainwashed wallflower is to be photographed looking like a blank-eyed mannequin.
Eloise is correct. Why is any one still posting pictures of these has-beens? They both are now ‘D-List’ at best. When was the last time ANYONE flocked to the theaters to see either one of them?
Katie running around with the daughter, for convenient photo ‘ops’, has not won any fans. “New York Times’ comes off as desperate and practitioners of Yellow Journalism.
aliens…
This is not the real “Katie”, she left him a few months back, this female impersonator took her place. I was best friends with the real Katie…….But the real deal is I am married to him, Anthony. I am having the change over for him into a woman. Why in the hell they put these ugly photos on here I dont know…I told him, black and white isn’t him………have a great “Holiday Season”.