Home Celebrity Katie Holmes Gets Smeared by US, Hollywood Reporter

It must be a funny alignment of the stars if I have to come to the defense of Katie Holmes. But she and the film she’s in here at Sundance–“Son of No One”–have been smeared and maligned by the Hollywood Reporter and US Weekly. The result is dozens of automated pickups by blogs, causing a search nightmare based on total falsehoods. I was at the press screening of Dito Montiel’s “Son of No One” on Monday. No one chuckled or snorted when Katie was on screen. No one walked out of the film. There was no exodus, no running for the doors. No “collective groan.” The Hollywood Reporter–now a tabloid effort–reported this even though the writer of the piece was not present. Then US Weekly regurgitated the material from THR. The THR editor, Lindsay Powers, came from tabloid US,manufacturer of celebrity fictions. So you can’t believe a word of any of it.

“Son of No One” is Dito Montiel’s follow up to his very good “A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints.” Like “Saints,” this film stars Channing Tatum. He gives a powerful performance as a crooked cop. Katie plays his wife. Montiel in a sense has made his “Prince of the City,” very much influenced by the legendary Sidney Lumet. This is Katie trying to break her image of a goody two shoes. She is perfectly fine. Her character curses several times in the first fifteen minutes. No one laughs. Her delivery is impeccable.

Inside “Son of No One” lurks an outsized fun performance by Al Pacino. The THR report –then copied into US–suggests that Al is working with a “wink” to the audience. Hardly. He is chewing scenery and having a ball, but he’s dead serious about his work. The rest of the cast is also quite good, from Juliette Binoche and Ray Liotta to two kids: Jake Cherry and Brian Gilbert.

The end of “Son of No One” may have caused a problem on Monday. There are three or four fade ins and outs mixed with type. You’re not sure the movie is over. Then there’s a “surprise” ending that explains the movie’s central mystery. Everyone remained seated until the end, however.

It does seem to me that Katie Holmes was attacked by THR and then US Weekly. Do they hate her because she’s married to Tom Cruise. We can’t really pile on Katie for her personal choices masked as movie criticism. We may not agree with her personal life, but that’s another area completely.

And to see how it works–a lie, a misreported story, then exponentially grows through the internet and cannot be reversed–is very distressing. It’s the reason why the web is just full of sludge, unmonitored and unchecked. THR should apologize, and US Weekly–which had no reporter there–should retract their story. I just don’t understand the upside of trying to kill an independent feature, shown once to a small audience. It’s a pathetic misuse of the press.

Share and Enjoy !

18 replies to this post
  1. i was at Eccles and this movie was breathtaking. Definitely not what you might gather about a cop thriller by Millenium. No car crashes (well one) no explosions but a slow intelligent and deep burn as the film boils and boils. I loved it because i love great movies.

  2. In the last paragraph, you have the word ‘there’ when it should be ‘their’, i.e., ‘should retract their story’. Sorry, but typos are a pet peeve of mine and there seem to be more everyday.

  3. I was at the very same press & industry screening Monday and I walked out. Ms Holmes wasn’t terrible. I thought she was doing the best she could in a one-note role in a film that gave me no reason to stay to the end.

    At the same moment the very well-known head of a major specialty distribution company hit the hallway too. I won’t repeat what he said, or identify him, but let me assure you, there were walk-outs.

  4. I never would have thought that this would happen but I have to agree with Roger Friedman here: the currentl abuse of the media to smear Katie Holmes is more than obvious.

  5. Its sad what has happened to Katie.

    Has a marriage ever damaged someones career so much?
    Tom’s career is relatively back on track after all of the controversies, shame hers hasn’t.

    At least hey don’t need the money.

  6. Thank you very much for the piece of information. As a long time Katie Holmes fan, sometimes it is just very hard to believe any report as everything seems to be blown out of proportion or just completely fabricated. It is fustrating.

  7. I certainly put some belief into the story, though I will say I looked to a couple fairly reputable sights (this one included, in fact) to try to verify the account–not trusting the site where I first saw it.
    Very much a shame. I do think she is talented, though she makes bad choices (her contractual husband included).

  8. wow. thank you, Roger, for setting everyone straight. I read the “review” yesterday somewhere on the internet – can’t remember where – and read just what you talked about; “the collective groan”, the audience chuckling when Katie was swearing, how terribly “miscast” she was…..it was awful. I winced when I read it and thought – oooh, how humiliating for Katie. Such a bummer for her; she has no control over the bad press…how do you unring a bell?

  9. THR should not hire tabloid gossip writers. What Lindsay Powers did is shameful. We all love celebrity news but the same person who trashes Britney for being “crazy” etc. should not be given the responsibility of covering film–especially killing the chances of talented writer-directors. Dito Montiel is incredibly talented and I was shocked by this news given how good “A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints” was. Glad to know it’s all bullsh-t. Go back to J-school, Powers, and learn some ethics.

  10. You are so right-I was there in the screening and she’s just fine and the movie is quirky and interesting. The press needs to be careful and sadly, they are not.

  11. OMG the sky MUST be falling. For once you’re reporting something accurate and verifiable about Katie. I hope this means the next time a film with her in it comes out and does or doesn’t do well, her husband daughter and religion will not be mentioned

  12. too bloody right. There should be a law against such malicious and false reporting. Oh, right. There is!

    Too bad more decent people (who have the money) to press such lawsuits don’t! These shoddy “organs” ought to be shut down …

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.