Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes

78 opinions for Adorable New Suri Picture From In Touch Magazine

• LIBRAESQUE
  Mar 8, 2007 at 4:32 pm

  that is one enormously large “11 month old” baby. Looks more like 15-16 mos.

• Claire Cruise
  Mar 8, 2007 at 5:26 pm

  I don’t know… I think Suri looks her age. As a baby, my leg muscles also appeared to be rather developed when compared with other babies my age. Suri just takes after me, her biological mother. Her father, Tom, may also have developed similiarly. I have to admit, though, that I do get depressed seeing all these baby pictures everywhere. To STILL see Suri in the clutches of Katie after all of this time makes me just want to give up. TOM: when, oh when, will I be allowed to be with my baby?!!!!!!!!

• Kay
  Mar 8, 2007 at 8:40 pm

  That “baby” is way older than they are telling us. She is over a year. She is too mature looking to be 10 -11 months old.

• Janina
  Mar 8, 2007 at 10:46 pm

  Remember this is In Touch. People nowdays are so good with tweaking pics for the internet and magazines.

• gia
  Mar 9, 2007 at 9:33 am

  whatever it she is so cute,adorable &so on just like her parents

• LIBRAESQUE
  Mar 9, 2007 at 12:57 pm

  #5, you’re kidding right?
  why would they “tweak” a picture of a baby for godssake
  to make her look taller and bigger???? Why???

• Ana
  Mar 9, 2007 at 1:43 pm

  I do not think she looks any older than her Age. Actually she looks tall but small boned for her age. My oh my she is a beautiful child!Her hair still makes me jealous since both my kids had bald heads for a long time. I badly wanted to do something with their hair.LoL

• LIBRAESQUE
  Mar 9, 2007 at 2:21 pm

  “kay”, exactly.
  Katie was photographed one time in Feb 2006 with a flat stomach, so my guess is she had it in mid-January. After that photo appeared is when she was seen with those ridiculous “bumps” humungous one day, smaller the next day
  Also the baby was photographed when they got off the plane from their honeymoon and she had on hard soled shoes that were scuffed up.
  Babies don’t walk at 6-7 months

• Kalista Brat
  Mar 10, 2007 at 12:02 pm

  For the stupid idiots who previously posted, Suri is going to be 1 year old next month. Some babies learn to walk sooner than others, stop making up these stupid conspiracy theories, get a freaking life, shes a normal baby with a pretty face. It isn’t surprising that she is walking, by now, some babies walk at 8 months old. I can’t wait to see new pics of her.

• Johan
  Mar 10, 2007 at 4:06 pm

  Subject: Happily there is hope!

  For: Tom Cruise, Katie Holmes.
  Of: Johan van der Beek.
  Subject: Sponsoring / donations.

  Dear interested party,

  First of all we wish to express our appreciation for your beneficial work in the field of charity. We want to let you no that the internet site “The United Universe” is ready and operational. The United Universe would like to welcome you as head sponsor or benefactor of The United Universe This brand-new site with a unique concept contributes to a better world.

  How does it work?

  Now referring to the global website “The United Universe” with built in specific orientation towards every country our world counts. In this way the same number of nationalities can place their problems on ‘their’ site for general information.
  In this way too a worldwide think tank could come into being in which truly everyone, regardless of social class, development and conviction, can participate. This might concern smaller local problems but also the more structural problems, even with a view to international affairs.

  The structure of the internet site:

  Each of the 237 independent states and self-regulating areas on our planet has its own Internet site and a separate database for registering problems. That means there are 237 galleries, containing problem issues that have been registered by local people. These people also choose the problem that needs to be tackled first, using the referendum tool.
  Once a month, the most urgent or poignant problem is discussed and turned into a project plan. The project plan lists the necessary changes, how to implement these, and most important, who will implement them. This is made possible through on-line question and answer protocol (Q&A sessions).
  All projects can be followed live, 24/7, on the project coordination website.

  Please help now!

  If The United Universe gets the support, time and opportunities it needs to function, all the problems in our world can be solved.
  It goes without saying, that the problems cannot be solved all at once, but by taking many little steps The United Universe will have the strength to actually mean something in our world.
  We therefore need your support, morally and financially. So please back The United Universe for as long as possible.

  Why choose The United Universe?

  Because The United Universe is able and willing to help those who are in need of help. The United Universe turns every living room into an emergency room (base of support).
  Check: http://www.TheUnitedUniverse.org and/or http://www.TUU.nu .

  Thanking you in advance.
  With kind regards,

  Johan van der Beek (webmaster/-owner).

  24/7 contactable on:

  Office telephone no : 0031-207735585 = Johan van der Beek, “webmaster”.
  Mobile no : 0031-652348759 = Johan van der Beek, “webmaster”.
  E-Mail : JB@TheUnitedUniverse.com
  Internet address : http://www.TheUnitedUniverse.org

  PS If you are not interested then possibly you could think of others who are; in that case you might take the trouble of forwarding this e-mail to them.
  Without your help the site will not come to notice, and so all the trouble would have been to no avail.
  Do you have suggestions? All your possible propositions will be dealt with, and if necessary, find an answer.
  We would greatly appreciate your positive response to the above.

  The mail address for the above: JB@TheUnitedUniverse.com

  © 2007 The United Universe. All rights reserved.

• dark faith
  Mar 10, 2007 at 11:43 pm

  suri was born in april she is going to be a year old she is an aries we are in march, april is next month, they had all over the entertainment knews last year.

• LIBRAESQUE
  Mar 12, 2007 at 10:44 am

  To # 10 and # 12…that kid WAS NOT born in April. Katie was photographed in Feb with a flat stomach. Would anyone like to chim in and say how a 7 months pregnant woman is photgraphed with a flat stomach.

  Would you also like to chim in and explain the absurd “bumps” she sported after that picture hit the publics eye?

  Or about the fact that Suri was photographed with scuffed, hard sole shoes in Nov., when she was 7 months old (most babies walk between 9-11 months)

  Or the fact that she was photographed pregnant for the first time in Oct., sporting a 5-6 month bump?

  Or how about the fact that NO ONE at the hospital the day she supposedly gave birth saw her arrive or leave, BUT TC was photographed that day at the Celebrity Centre (and how ironic that TC enemy Brooke Shields gave birth that same day at that hospital)

  How about the FACT that TC is sterile?

  Add it up kids. The picture this paints is that KH was pregnant when they met. It supports EVERY fact that I’ve listed above.

• Helen
  Mar 12, 2007 at 10:57 am

  # 12 libr, where is your photo prove that Katie’s stomach was flat in Feb? for goodness sake give it a rest alreay its been a year and I don’t even think Katie had a flat stomach at her wedding in November let alone in Feb. Check the pics, people were actually saying she was pregnant again at her wedding because she didn’t have a “flat stomach” as you put it.

• LIBRAESQUE
  Mar 12, 2007 at 12:59 pm

  here it is, OH, and my bad it was Jan. 15th

  http://forum.purseblog.com/celebrity-section/katie-holmes-bump-timeline-2605.html

• Helen
  Mar 12, 2007 at 3:38 pm

  # 14 LIBRAESQUE, Are you kidding me? This is the best you can do? One photo which you can’t even see properly from that angle. Here is a pic from the same day from another angle where you can see she is clearly pregnant and does not have a “flat stomach” so please give it a rest!!!
  http://www.katie-holmes.org/gallery/displayimage.php?album=704&pos=3

  People here should just ignore this person then he/she might go away. One advice to you from me is spend your time on the celebs you like/love instead of hating so much and trying to brainwash people against TomKat who we clearly don’t care what they do in their personal life or their cult, we adore them and their little cutiepie suri no mater what you say.

• Helen
  Mar 12, 2007 at 3:45 pm

  Even in the pic you provided you can clearly see Tom’s hand touching the bump and showing how big her belly was so for you to say she had a flat stomach sounds like a guy who is desperate to say just about anything like the gossip site and magazine to sell people nothing but crap.

• LIBRAESQUE
  Mar 13, 2007 at 10:39 am

  Helen, in the pic I provided there is a HAND, how are you determining that it’s Tom’s??????
  Also, there is CLEARLY no significant bump in the picture, and it’s a SIDE SHOT!!!!!!!!
  And I guess the dozens of sites dedicated to the strange up and down of her bump was because………….???????????????

• Helen
  Mar 14, 2007 at 4:50 am

  Because they are just like you who have nothing better to do than start a conspiracy about someone they don’t know personally!!! I understand why gossip site and magazine do this because its for the money but I don’t know how you can take their words when clearley they’re pics that haven’t been touched or manipulated to show the facts but you choose to believe them WHY?

  Why else do you think they choice a pic you can’t even see properly when there are lots more pic that shows she is pregnant. I know its Tom’s hand touching her belly because I’ve the full pic before and I don’t think its important whose hand its anyway so don’t change the subject.

  Again I’ve provided a link to show she is pregnant with a pic from that same day so admit when you are wrong!!

  This is not even important anymore!! use your brain which it seems has been brainwashed by gossip so you can’t even think outside the box but if you can think for one minute then do the maths. If she already had the baby by Jan 15 then she must have been pregnant sometime in March or April 2005, but she didn’t show till October 2005 where she would have been 7 months pregnant???? AGAIN PLEASE USE YOUR BRAIN!!! And stop wasting our time!!!

• Helen
  Mar 14, 2007 at 4:52 am

  I meant to say I’ve seen the full pic before not have.

• LIBRAESQUE
  Mar 14, 2007 at 9:57 am

  sometime between the time she broke up with Chris K, in late March, to the time she met Cruise in late April, she dated Josh Hartnett, which would have put her at just 6 mos pregnant in Oct, which is EXACTLY what she looks like in that 1st pic….6 mos.
  Compare Pics of Suri w/Josh, she has his eyes EXACTLY, his hair, etc
  And I don’t think anyone in their right mind could believe that ridiculous “bump” she was sporting the last 3 mos of her pregnancy

  Also, is it ONLY on Katie H.’s fan site where that pic is from, because it would make sense that THOSE photos are photoshopped, not the others

• Helen
  Mar 15, 2007 at 3:31 am

  Libraesque, I feel sorry for you how little is your brain? Like I said think outside the box!!! I’m not gone waste my time on you and Tom and Katie are happy, Suri is a Tom min-me his clone has his face, eyes and so on. its seems to me its only you who are going on about this even the gossip site and magazine have accepted the truth Suri is indeed Tom and Katie’s now and have moved on to better gossip. Tomkat have also proven all the gossip that was said about them to be nothing but lies, that includes changing Katie’s name and so on…Anyways don’t bother replying because I’ve no time for people who love to hate for no reason what so ever!!! Have a nice life hating!!!

• LIBRAESQUE
  Mar 15, 2007 at 9:47 am

  Helen, you’re a douchebag, TC & KH HAVE NOT proven that ANYTHING said about them is false
  How do you figure?
  Was a DNA test done to prove that Suri is indeed his?
  I guess EVERYONE at EVERY gossip site going on and on about it being Chris Kliens, or Josh Hartnetts, or Tom’s cousins, etc etc etc, those are all me right??

  You need to SHUT UP

• bumblebee
  Mar 15, 2007 at 2:03 pm

  It´s only losers who go on and on about it.

  And his name is Chris KLEIN, not Kliens.

  Plus: this is a TomKat fansite: YOU need to shut up. She´s TomKats daughter, Tom´s bloodline or not. What do YOU care about it? Can´t he love that child without YOUR blessing? Well, doesn´t look like he cares much about YOU not believing him huh?

  Oh, and by the way, Hollywood doesn´t hate him as reps for Paramount (Brad Grey), Universal Studios (Ron Meyer), MGM (Harry Sloan) and several other powerful people in the industry will throw a party in his honor next week at Fox.

  http://movies.go.com/variety/feature?featureid=859932

  Los Angeles nonprofit org lauds Cruise

  Mentor L.A. will honor Tom Cruise at a fund-raiser chaired by Megan and Peter Chernin March 22 on the Fox lot.

  The nonprofit org aids schools in L.A.’s poorest communities, primarily through educational reform and outreach to the private sector. Crenshaw, Manual Arts and West Adams Prep are three of the schools that will benefit.

  “Tom is really, truly passionate about helping public schools,” said Megan Chernin. “And our organization wants to help the large public schools in areas desperately in need of revitalization. We want to make the schools the beacon of hope in these neighborhoods.”

  For the gala, the org has lined up as co-chairs Brad Grey, Robert Iger, Michael Lynton, Kathleen Kennedy, Frank Marshall, Barry Meyer, Paula Wagner, Rick Nicita, Harry Sloan, Ron Meyer and Terry Semel.

• bumblebee
  Mar 15, 2007 at 2:13 pm

  Did not prove anything wrong?

  Well,

  Rumour: “they split shortly after Suri´s birth” - Truth: They married by the end of 2006.

  Rumour:”Katie has given up her job for good”
  Truth: Katie is shooting “Mad Money” next month.

  Rumour: “Suri has a harelip”
  Truth: Suri is very healthy.

  Rumour: “Suri does not exist”
  Truth: Suri DOES exist and looks much like Tom not only here, but also to many reporters in the gossip media.

  … and many more.

• Helen
  Mar 15, 2007 at 2:30 pm

  more rumour that turn out to be all LIES!!!
  Holmes will not have Epidural to give birth, Katie’s parents are boycotting her wedding, Cruise and Holmes buy British Mansion and many more.

  Lets all please ignore this person (LIBRAESQUE) from now on and then he/she might just go away. Lts not reply to his comment!!!!

• LIBRAESQUE
  Mar 15, 2007 at 4:20 pm

  Helen, this is a PUBLIC site.
  And Bumble, I’m not talking about something as dumb as rumors of a hairlip

• Ana
  Mar 15, 2007 at 4:28 pm

  Libraesque, make up you mind, Josh Hartnett or Bill Mapother, atleast be consistent in your foolishness.

  Helen#25 is a tempting proposal, but then who shall we kich around. You know Libraesque is the ‘ball’ of the site and if you notice all her attempts to bad mouth Tom and Katie are feeble, ludicrous and only hare brained losers like her can believe them!!!!

  I do feel sorry for her sometimes, but It is fun kicking her around all the time you have to agree.

• Ana
  Mar 15, 2007 at 4:34 pm

  Libraeque’And Bumble, I’m not talking about something as dumb as rumors of a hairlip ‘

  Your rumors are ven worse than the hair lip!!!! What are you talking about. Not even one biographer of Katie holmes has Hatnett as an ex! I mean show me an article even from those rags that you treat as bibles that has referRed to Hartnett as Holmes ex?

  Are you kidding gal? Some of the statements you have made on this site make you sound like an overweight, bitter, jaded, pathetic loser f** who can believe that Elvis is till alive and lives on an Island and Americans went to the moon!!!!!!JEEZ..

• D'lila
  Mar 15, 2007 at 4:43 pm

  Libraesque. Katie Holmes appeared on the Letterman show in June 2005, if your theory is true, she should have been 3-4 months pregnant. Here is the link. Does she look pregnant to you?

  http://youtube.com/watch?v=ImYlyck9qoU

  Your Klein and Hartnett theories are worse than the hair lip theory. I a quite new here but man you sound crazy, loco. Your posts are kind of weird. You do not seem to like Tomkat and yet you camp on this site and have more posts than any one. What is your problem? Are you alright?

• LIBRAESQUE
  Mar 15, 2007 at 6:27 pm

  #30 and what would you think a 5′9 inch girl would look like three months pregnant? Most woman don’t show very much the first three months. A 3 month fetus is 3 inches and weighs ONE OUNCE

  I’ll tell you one thing for sure, she definitely didn’t look 3-4 months pregnant October 8th.

  http://forum.purseblog.com/celebrity-section/katie-holmes-bump-timeline-2605.html

  That’s a 6 month bump

  From NNDB:
  Boyfriend: Joshua Jackson (dated 1998-99)
  Boyfriend: Chris Klein (dated 1999-2005, broken engagement)
  Boyfriend: Josh Hartnett (dated 2005)

  Who’s cryin’ now, who’s cryin’ now

• Helen
  Mar 16, 2007 at 4:11 am

  LIBRAESQUE, what don’t you try to use another pic or another website besides that one. And about Jose Harnett its not a fact that they dated its a rumor which started after they were seen having a coffee and he gave her a friendly peck and his representative states, “They have been friends for a long.”
  And why would she has a child with Jose when she didn’t have any with Chris even though they were engaged and together for 5 years? With Tom Cruise she was ask in June 2005 after they got engaged by PEOPLE privately if they plan to have children, Holmes paused and then said, “Yes,” as both she and Cruise broke into smiles. Here is the link http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,1073518_1073510,00.html

• Helen
  Mar 16, 2007 at 4:12 am

  I can’t believe I’m even trying to justify your rumblings. When we provide answer to your questions they are either not enough or not what you’re looking for but I can’t believe you’re using NNDB as a prove they have dated???
  Plus Jose and Katie was seen in the beginning of March that will make her 7 months pregnant in the pic you provided and you’ve to be blind or insanely jealous of them you’ll believe anything nagative about them. Besides in that pic the wind made her top is very tight on her belly. Here is a pic of Katie that same day October 10 where you can clearly see she is less than 4 months pregnant and not anywhere near 6 to 7 months!!!!
  http://www.katie-holmes.org/gallery/displayimage.php?album=587&pos=7

• Helen
  Mar 16, 2007 at 4:13 am

  And here is a pic of her in July 12 2005 where according to you she will be 4 months pregnant. Click on the pic to enlarge.
  http://www.katie-holmes.org/gallery/displayimage.php?album=488&pos=7

• LIBRAESQUE
  Mar 16, 2007 at 9:57 am

  Helen, who the hell is Jose???
  it’s pretty damn funny that you say I don’t accept your answers but when I give one it’s “I can’t believe you got it from there!”
  Someone walked by them while he was dropping her off at her car and they were making out. And what makes you think they weren’t together up til the time she and TC met in late April?
  Don’t you think the smiles they both gave at the interview would indicate they both already KNEW she was pregnant, which has been my theory all along. Plagued by gay and sterile rumors, what more could the guy ask for then a beard who was already knocked up
  And you MUST be kidding with your wind comment, dumbass. YES the wind makes it OBVIOUS that she’s 6 months because it shows how truly far along she is.
  what kind of an idiot are you? If I had said “look how pregnant she looks in that big huge shirt” THEN you’d have an argument

• LIBRAESQUE
  Mar 16, 2007 at 10:05 am

  OH MY GOD Helen, you’re trying to support your argument with a aerial picture from how many feet away, then a front shot of her from Oct. 10th when I provided a SIDE SHOT which is a clear indicator of how far along she was . YOU”RE A JOKE. Next your going to post a picture of her from behind and say SEE SHE’S NOT 6 MONTHES PREGNANT

  hahahahhahahahahahahahaha

• Helen
  Mar 16, 2007 at 10:55 am

  very funny hehehe…you can’t spell KLEIN and I misspelled Josh big deal. I didn’t realize we were having a spelling contest.

  You know what if it makes you happy you can go on believing Josh is the father and we’ll get on with our life.
  And to answer your earlier question like bumblebee said its only blog losers like yourself who won’t drop this, even the super TomKat basher Roger Freeman at Fox, X17, star, In Touch weekly, Us Weekly and the trashiest of all Enquire magazine have gave in and have said Suri is all Tom’s in so many words but bloggers like you who are in denial didn’t want to believe that beautiful child who looks a lot like Tom is his daughter because you’re jealous and obsessed with pulling down any one who seems to have it all.

  I tell you being positive, laughter, and loving are better for your health and life rather than being negative and hating so much so you should try it by staying away from blogs of celebs you dislike I for example do not like Brangelina and you’ll not find me reading or commenting on them because its a waste of my time and don’t see the point of knowing about celebs I dislike and why would I want to give them web hit since it counts towards their popularity on Forbes annual listing regardless of my negative comment, but my reason is not that I just don’t like them and don’t want to spend my time on them when I can spend reading about Tom and Katie.

• Helen
  Mar 16, 2007 at 10:59 am

  I can’t wait for Tom and Katie to have another child. I hope they’ll have a couple more beautiful babies just like Suri.

• LIBRAESQUE
  Mar 16, 2007 at 11:25 am

  hahahahahah, yes Helen, I hope “they” have another child too, since $cientology has clearly cured Tom of his sterility, just like it cured him of dyslexia…..OH WAIT, the mediacal community is laughing their asses off at him for that statement.
  You know TC deserves all you dim wits as his fans, you’re meant for eachother

• bumblebee
  Mar 16, 2007 at 2:50 pm

  libra, why don´t you answer the question:

  What makes you so convinced all the stories on your beloved Brangelina are lies made up every day.. and yet you eat up all the rumours on TomKat in the same tabloids with a big spoon as truth? Aren´t you getting tired of being proven wrong with pretty much all your claims?

  Don´t think it goes by unnoticed that you keep avoiding that.

• LIBRAESQUE
  Mar 16, 2007 at 4:22 pm

  bumblebrain, please refrain from using direct quotes by me to you, you’re just embarassing yourself
  I have not ONCE been proven “wrong” on this board by anyone regarding anything. You get your information from the tabloids. I worked in entertainment law for 8 years and a friend of mine work at CAA for almost 10 years, and has branched off into her own business, so I infact DO have information that is first hand. YOU however can NOT say the same
  Also, this is a TOMKAT thread, NOT a BP/AJ thread.
  You and the other lunatics MUST STOP bringing them into this thread.
  Also, they are not my beloved anything, I speak in favor of AJ on other threads because I admire her as a humanitarian
  GET A GRIP

• Helen
  Mar 16, 2007 at 4:37 pm

  Well we speak in favor of Tom because we admire his acting!!! You’ve been proven wrong so many time but you just don’t want to accept it like a bad loser. You’re worse than the tabloid because you expect us to believe what you say is true with all the bs you come up with like “my friend works for CAA”…ya we believe you because?? Look,the way you try to discreadit Tom’s achievements and good news by using the same tabloid that bashes AJ but you swear they are facts when you apply the gossips to Tom Cruise, that is just being a hypocrite and no one will take you seriously.

• bumblebee
  Mar 16, 2007 at 5:22 pm

  “You get your information from the tabloids. I worked in entertainment law for 8 years and a friend of mine work at CAA for almost 10 years, and has branched off into her own business, so I infact DO have information that is first hand.”

  And yet you missed so many facts from reliable sources (inside CAA, MGM, Paramount and Wall Street) that this is just NOT true. If your friend is no longer working for CAA, then she´s or he´s no longer IN the know at CAA. What about the fact you didn´t know ANYTHING about Tom´s shooting of “Lions for Lambs”?, that you didn´t know ANYTHING about Katie making her quotes re the wedding and why she wanted to wait? You know NOTHING from first hand about Tom and Katie as is proven by your ignorant ramblings every day and you´re the one who keeps embarrassing herself by coming up with DEBUNKED TABLOID rumours as fact.

  Why is Redstone backtracking now by saying he had nothing to do with Toms departure from Paramount? Tell me that! And don´t use the Gray story.. it´s a lie. Just as Pitt taking over Mission Impossible has been denied by HIM and by Paramount as “complete fabrications” (which you should know since you “know an insider”).

  For somebody who claims to have firsthand knowledge, you know an awful tiny amount of stuff regarding TomKat that´s actually NOT coming from tabloids. Unlike you, I get my info from Hollywood insiders and business journals like Wall Street Journal, MGM spokespersons and Variety as well as several other big shots in Hollywood siding with TC, incl Jerry Bruckheimer (producer of Pirates of the Caribbean etc.). You however, have been quoting more than once “In Touch”, “Us Weekly” and “Life & Style”. You and Redstone would make a great couple: you´re both great in backtracking and twisting your former comments.

  If you have such a big problem with meeting TomKat fans, then don´t visit THEIR fansites. Must be a tough task.

• bumblebee
  Mar 16, 2007 at 5:41 pm

  by the way, leperloser. what makes you so sure that I have no first hand knowledge from anyone in the business? Us fans have provided more facts on Toms career (with links from non-gossip sites to back them up) than you have. Which was what? ZERO! Closing your eyes on that and block that from your memory doesn´t change that.

• bumblebee
  Mar 16, 2007 at 6:23 pm

  Oh, and as for Redstone not working “in the near future” with Tom, Paramount Vantage (also a Viacom group) is co-financing “the Eye” THIS YEAR, a Cruise/Wagner production, meaning they ARE already working together RIGHT NOW.

  I guess your insider didn´t sing that little fact to you, huh?

  Actors have ‘Eye’ on roles
  Nivola, Alba join Cruise/Wagner production
  By PAMELA MCCLINTOCK Alessandro Nivola (”Grace Is Gone”) has been cast opposite Jessica Alba in the English-language remake of Hong Kong thriller “The Eye.”
  Parker Posey also has boarded the project, which Cruise/Wagner Prods. is producing for Lionsgate.

  Another newcomer is Paramount Vantage, which has signed on as a co-financing partner.

  French helmers David Moreau and Xavier Palud are set to direct.

  Storyline revolves around a woman who, after a cornea transplant, begins seeing disturbing images that send her on a quest to find out what happened to the eye’s original owner. Thai brothers Danny and Oxide Pang directed the original.

  Tom Cruise and Paula Wagner persuaded Paramount to buy the remake rights in 2002. Lionsgate picked up the project out of turnaround from Par not long before Cruise and Wagner left the Melrose lot and set up shop at United Artists.

  Producers are Cruise, Wagner and Don Granger.

  http://www.variety.com/article/VR111795851…=1&nid=2562

• LIBRAESQUE
  Mar 17, 2007 at 10:15 am

  OH MY GOD, you’re SO pathetic, HOW in any way does Paramount Vantage co-financing a project from 2002 mean Redstone and Cruise are working together?????????
  You’re so sad grasping at those straws, GIVE IT UP, you’re not convincing ANYONE with any brain. Mere weeks ago Redstone said AND I QUOTE he’d like to work with Cruise again BUT NOT IN THE NEAR FUTURE
  so please just stop embarassing yourself!!!

• Anna
  Mar 17, 2007 at 4:01 pm

  Libra-loser, you said it your self.
  ”Mere weeks ago Redstone said AND I QUOTE he’d like to work with Cruise again BUT NOT IN THE NEAR FUTURE”

  Notice that he used the words he ‘would like’ not consider’ but ‘like’. Meaning he is begging. . I know it is judicial notice that you are ignorant and st***d but that is no excuse. If you are gonna hate Cruise, at least read recent news about him! And yes, ‘the Eye’ is a paramount picture not of 2002 but due for shooting in 2007-2008 Go Google it. Tom is fighting illiteracy and he should start with you. LOL

  You are the one grasping at straws and really show casing your ignorance. Every one in the industry is buzzing with the ‘Cruise come back’. UA’s initial successes in securing funds and how things are looking up for Cruise. Where do you live? In a cave in Afghanistan? or Baghdad?

  Thank you for heeding my advice to stop rambling about spellings

• bumblebee
  Mar 17, 2007 at 5:03 pm

  “The Eye” is already filming since February! Please, libra, SHUT UP! I´m actually starting to feel sorry for you!!

• bumblebee
  Mar 17, 2007 at 5:13 pm

  and you avoided the question again! WHY is Redstone backtracking?? Any word on THAT from your “insider”??

• bumblebee
  Mar 17, 2007 at 5:31 pm

  How are they working together? Redstone owns Viacom which owns Paramount Vantage. There is NOTHING going on without Redstones blessing, so Paramount Vantage PUTTING MONEY into a Cruise/Wagner production which started filming in February 2007 and has a release date for October 12th 2007 means Cruise/Wagner and Paramount Vantage (Viacom (Redstone) group) IS working together. The project was bought for Paramount in 2002 and is STILL a Cruise/Wagner property after the split but is produced there and by C/W (now UA) and was NOT given to any other production unit located at Paramount.

  It would help you to actually READ the article before commenting, gal.

  Who´s pathetic now? Gosh, this is really starting to get funny ;-)))))))

• Stella
  Mar 18, 2007 at 5:26 pm

  Having friends in the business, they know that TC is gay, sterile and short. Katie had her baby, with TC, to boost her career, and TC had it with her to boost his. He is NOT the father, and they bed down in separate bedrooms.

• LIBRAESQUE
  Mar 19, 2007 at 9:39 am

  Bumble, once again, do you even realize what you’re saying?
  You keep beating this Redstone thing to death.
  Here you’ve got a guy who months ago said in VF that he fired the guy
  Now he’s saying he didn’t
  Then he says he’d work with him but not in the near future
  Now your saying some project from 2002 that’s filming now MUST have his blessing

  SO basically he’s either LYING about working “with” TC right now because of this deal….or he doesn’t “know” about it and isn’t involved at all and it never had his “blessing

  Right?/???

• Anna
  Mar 19, 2007 at 6:47 pm

  Losergal, of course your friend Redstone is a liar since he said he never sacked cruise and his words were taken out of context when we all know what he did in the first place. He knows he is working with Cruise/Wagner on ‘the eye’ and indeed he wants a picture with Cruise in the future that is why he is licking cruise’s ass.

  Stella, I have deliberately not answered you beause you and Miapocca are similar and are more pathetic than libraesque and I can only go as low as libraesque. At least her stupidity is funny. I am glad Bumblebee has come to see the funny side to losersque’s posts. I was starting to think am the only one with a sense of humour.

  Some times I just come to see if she got any more stupid. Mind you, whenever I leave the site, I can swear that she cannot get worse than this, but the gal surprises me all the time.

• Anna
  Mar 19, 2007 at 6:50 pm

  Just watched Collateral again. Tom Cruise is a GOD! NO one, and I mean, no one can act like that!!!!!!!!!!!!! He is the absolute best.

• Helen
  Mar 20, 2007 at 5:20 am

  He was great in Collateral. I love that movie!!!

• LIBRAESQUE
  Mar 20, 2007 at 10:57 am

  Anna, you’re the pot calling the kettle black honey, your stupidity astounds.
  So what you’re saying is Redstone KNOWS he’s “working” with TC on the Eye???
  So can you , Einstein, explain WHY he said he’d work with him but not in the near future???? Why would he lie about that?
  Please….explain, and something coherant this time if that’s at all possible for you

• Helen
  Mar 20, 2007 at 2:04 pm

  knock knock…any body there Libraesque in your little brain? Of course Redstone knows HIS company is working with Cruise/W production. Maybe in the near future for someone like Redstone who sounds like he has short term memory about criticizing Cruise to Wall street Journal and tries to blame the media for “treating it explosively”, near future might be a few weeks.

  I’m really doubting your IQ is anywhere near 40 or 50.

  You think Redstone couldn’t be working or knows that he is working with Tom because he said he will not be working with him in the near future??? This is a guy who lied about firing Cruise and tried to blame the media about what he said and you’re surprised he might be lying or changed his mind?

  Let me make it simple for you Paramount Vantage is working with Cruise for the remake of THE EYE and Paramount Vantage is owned by Redstone and he might not have made the decision to work with cruise but his company is working with him and when he said he won’t be working with him in the near future that means his company, but now his company is working with TOM CRUISE. What is it that you don’t understand?

• bumblebee
  Mar 20, 2007 at 2:08 pm

  Quote:

  “So can you , Einstein, explain WHY he said he’d work with him but not in the near future???? Why would he lie about that?”

  ———–

  Probably same reason why he said he had fired him and later said he didn´t. Or why he at first said his wife had nothing to do with it and later said she did convince him. Or why he said “we all agreed” and later admitted he hadn´t told anyone prior, pissing off his own staff for putting them in trouble with the talent and throwing Paramount in a very unprofessional light, even pissing off CAA (Creative Artits Agency), and Jerry Bruckheimer (the most successful producer in the world!) saying that “many still want to work with Cruise, including me”.

  = Old man suffering from mouth diarrhea

• libraesque
  Mar 20, 2007 at 2:10 pm

  If that’s the case you two, then he’s lying about extending the olive branch too right????
  you can’t pick and choose what’s a lie and what’s the truth

  HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA you guys just hung yourselves
  hahahahahahahaha
  GAME OVER!!!

• libraesque
  Mar 20, 2007 at 2:15 pm

  and bumble you never disappoint in the dumbass comment category
  “even pissing off CAA”
  hahahahahaha, you mean the same CAA that handles TC?????
  hahahahhahahaha

• Helen
  Mar 20, 2007 at 2:17 pm

  OMG this guy is really something else!!! Are acting stupid or just plain stupid?

• libraesque
  Mar 20, 2007 at 2:19 pm

  Helen, what “guy” are you talking about

• Helen
  Mar 20, 2007 at 2:20 pm

  YOU!!!!!!!!!!

• Helen
  Mar 20, 2007 at 2:21 pm

  *correction* OMG this girl is really something else!!! Are acting stupid or just plain stupid?

• libraesque
  Mar 20, 2007 at 2:25 pm

  it would appear the dumbass here is you, can’t take it that I just put the smack down on you two?
  wahhhhh!!!

• bumblebee
  Mar 20, 2007 at 2:35 pm

  You should save all your money and buy a brain. you obviously missed EVERYTHING reported during the Par/Cruise/Wagner split

• Helen
  Mar 20, 2007 at 2:38 pm

  What smack down? Doesn’t matter if he was lying about the olive branch. His company Paramount is working with Tom again!!! get over it! Tom is still hot in Hollywood even young talented director Bryan Singer is working with him at UA giving him first look to his next project.

• libraesque
  Mar 20, 2007 at 2:43 pm

  no seriously bumblebrain, is it the SAME CAA that represents Tom?
  Imagine that……….one of their biggest clients get shit canned and they got upset with the people who did it?

  how ODD!!!

  uuuuhh, you people are no longer an amusing way to waste a boring work day
  bu-bye

• bumblebee
  Mar 20, 2007 at 2:46 pm

  The olive branch was added by the press not by Redstone. All that Redstone said was

  1) I probably work together with him again but not immediately - get the quote right dumbass libra!!

  2) he is a great great actor, one of the best. And he was a good friend. I look forwards to being his friend again.

  Pick your favorite. Redstone gives you plenty to choose from.

  And you´re great at it again: copying Redstone. YOU were the one who called Redstone trustfull NOT us!! WE always !! said he´s lying. “The Eye” wasn´t announced by Redstone you twit.

  Again: you prove how braindead you are hahahahaaha and you don´t even know it! hahahaaa

• bumblebee
  Mar 20, 2007 at 2:49 pm

  ooooh, libra is loosing her argument so she takes her ball home…. awwww, I will miss you, honey!!

• bumblebee
  Mar 20, 2007 at 2:54 pm

  just a last one:
  same CAA that represents HALF OF HOLLYWOOD - did NOT get “upset” but PISSED at the libel against a client. And now Redstone lost his balls and is seriously backtracking …

  How … interesting!! ;-)))

• Anna
  Mar 20, 2007 at 5:27 pm

  Please do not leave Librealoser we really enjoy your company. Atleast it is a good break from work and all the brainy people there. You on the other hand make me feel bright, educated and well informed. Please don’t go * cry*

• LIBRAESQUE
  Mar 21, 2007 at 10:47 am

  OH poor Anna, please don’t cry, just go DIE for Tom Cruise instead

  HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
  HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
  HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
  HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
  HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
  HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
  HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
  HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
  HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

• Helen
  Mar 21, 2007 at 12:17 pm

  I guess Librloser run out of something to say…

• LIBRAESQUE
  Mar 21, 2007 at 12:32 pm

  Helen….WHAT? Put the crack pipe down honey you’re not making ANY sense

• Anna
  Mar 21, 2007 at 8:42 pm

  Why do I imagine that Libra laughter is manic with no humor? I wonder. I am still dying for TC.

• Amelia
  Mar 22, 2007 at 4:00 pm

  You know I used to wonder what Tom Cruise’s biological children looked like. Suri’s eyes are so like Toms. She is a doll!

• LIBRAESQUE
  Mar 22, 2007 at 4:12 pm

  you know what I wonder? How a sterile man can HAVE biological children

• Stella
  Mar 27, 2007 at 6:59 pm

  The question still remains: WHO is the father?

Have an opinion? Leave a comment:

• Use this area to discover new blogs and content in the b5media network.
• Beauty & Style
• Business
• Entertainment
• Health & Wellness
• Lifestyles
• Music
• Sports
• Team Blogs
• Technology
• Travel & Culture