I have re-checked my DVD, and I still do not see Leanne. If she is shown in some scenes it is very brief.
Indeed, the mystery deepens. If you go back you will see that when the children are first being put in the van Leanne has her case-what we Americans call a lunch box I guess. But Sue the younger girl does not, and she tries to go back for it, but the baddies stop her. Then later when they are first in the cave, when the children begin to eat their lunches Leanne opens her case, but Sue still does not have one. So it is especially strange that when they are then first beside the pool, Sally Jones, the teacher, tells Sue-not Leanne!- to open her case. This despite the fact that the movie earlier has twice made clear that Sue does not have a case.
Later when the girls begin swimming out you see Sue in only her underpants swimming. Indeed, all the other 8 kids are clearly shown swimming out, some more than once. EXCEPT Leanne.
Again, I cannot see Leanne anywhere. If you do and are correct, they can be only very brief headshots. It does not vitiate my point that Leanne plays no part in the escape. But when they all emerge from the cave fully dressed Leanne is in the group again and carrying a case. And strangely Sue is also now carrying a case as well.
All the other children are plainly visible in the escape from the cave and indeed are shown clearly several times. The other 3 girls-Norelle, Sue and Sarah are shown several times as are the 5 boys. All are clearly visible, except Leanne.
Blaine in Seattle
She is there (by looking at the picture in my previous reply). But she can really be seen only in brief headshots...All the kids are shown swimming out except her....but I really don't know why...
That was exactly my point. You never see Leanne in her underwear. At most, brief shots of her fully clothed when they are in the tunnel and first emerge beside the pool. BUT never undressed.
Blaine in Seattle
Yes, she is hardly seen in the water sequence as you have accurately described. But, she is there hidden in the background of the kids waiting to cross the water. If you need to, then pause the movie and look in the places I described above. Leanne definitely has bare shoulders visible. Perhaps adjusting the bright setting on your screen and turning off the lights would help?
It's up to the actress, editor or director to fill in more blanks whether it's a timing, modesty, water fear, or something else that kept the actress away from the foreground for so long.
I think more was filmed than we saw and it was cut down for time more than content. It's possible all the kids & teacher swimming, reaching the other side, and getting dresses was filmed. We have no way of knowing. The teacher trapped with the young girl is harrowing and memorable, so justifiably took up the longest time.
Let's say for argument's sake that Leanne was filmed swimming in between the younger blonde girl and the last group of three. It's too repetitive and not necessary to show the same thing three times as they swim to safety.
Obviously the water sequence is well remembered, but it's only a tiny part of the movie and it's handled well by the moviemakers.
At this point, it doesn't matter who is right or wrong. What should disturb the readers is the OP's obsession with trying to see a prepubescent actress in her underwear, and sounding disappointed that he can't.
Let's assume that the scenes were filmed, and then edited in post-production for reasons that should be obvious after reading this thread!