So did Stone flash on purpose or not?
Sharon Stone has always said she didn’t know her vag was visible onscreen during her interrogation scene until she saw the footage during dailies.
But Paul Verhoeven says that’s BS.
What do you think?
She says she was tricked, but considering how smart she supposedly is (according to her) I find that hard to believe.
Why would she agree not to wear underwear during that scene, unless she knew her nether-regions were going to be caught on camera? Obviously, she knew the implication was that she wasn't wearing undies for that scene (esp. since a previous scene had shown her putting on the white dress, without first putting on panties), but if Stone is telling the truth about being tricked, surely she would have assumed she could wear undies during the shoot. What did she think? That she'd have to go Method in order to imagine what it was like not to be wearing underwear? Once again, a smart and talented actor would surely have known better.
So, at the risk of being labelled a 'misogynist,' either Sharon Stone is a liar or she's way less intelligent than she claims to be.
Always thought a misogynist was a single female gynecologist. 🤔
shareShe claimed that she was told her genital region would be covered in shadow, not made explicitly visible. She says she was told to remove her underwear otherwise it would ruin the shot.
share🙄🤦♂️
And supposedly this woman has a Mensa level IQ...Jesus...
If that's what she was told, then I understand why she felt betrayed.
shareI don't shame, belittle, demean or objectify women, and I've called some posters, on in particular, for their disturbingly misogynist opinions, but I also don't simp, and I'm sorry, but Sharon is either not very bright or a complete fucking liar. If she was somehow *made* to remove her underwear on the threat of being fired/never working in Hollywood again, that would be one thing, and I'd 100% sympathise with her, but actually agreeing to take her underwear off and then being told her vag wouldn't be on screen just strikes me as either bullshit or an example of gross stupidity/naivety.
shareI agree that it was naivety, but we were all naive at one point.
shareFair enough.
She wasn't a naif/ingenue though. She was about 33 years old, and had been working in the industry for over a decade (once already with Paul Verhoeven on Total Recall). She still looked great, of course (maybe better than she had in her youth), but she wasn't a kid.
She was told her white underwear reflected the lights. She was also told that since she was wearing white she couldn't wear another color.
Personally, I do think she got scammed though.
I think she is bullshitting. She knew exactly that this single shot would make her one of the hottest actresses of the decade. It wasn't really her talent the audience was looking for. 🙄
shareI think she got scammed, and she knew by then what they were doing, but she just did not say anything.
So she later could claim she was scammed.