The reviews are in on Katie Holmes' performance in her new flick, Mad Money, which opens today, and they're not exactly stellar, to say the least.
"And the cinematic comeback of the year award goes to - somebody other than Katie Holmes," says a New York Post critic, who calls her return to movies since giving birth to baby Suri, "the most cringe-making return since Love Boat: The Next Wave."
The critic goes on to say, "Holmes, with Alice Cooper hair and crazy Jim Carrey eyes, looks terrible and acts worse, unless this movie is unintentionally a lobotomy documentary. Whatever could have happened to her in the last couple of years to zap the talent out of her like this?"
Variety and the Wall Street Journal didn't have very nice things to say about Katie's acting either. Now, I don't claim to have a library of Katie Holmes movies in my home collection, and I will admit that my extent of watching her perform is limited to her time on Dawson's Creek, but I certainly don't remember her being that awful.
Could it possibly be that Katie is getting thrown under the bus because of who she's married to? Or could Tom Cruise have actually sucked the talent out of her? I don't know, but I'm curious to see if I think she's really that bad.
My husband and I are actually getting a rare opportunity to see a movie -- in a theater -- this weekend (that never happens!), but, to be honest, we won't be wasting it on Mad Money. I'm dying to see Juno. Sorry, Katie.