I read on this message board that Katherine Heigl was 14 years old when she did this movie. She had to wear a thong on a movie released across the US while she was 14! I can't imagine anything more embarrassing for a 14 year old girl than to have millions of people watching her bare butt while she still had school and stuff like that. I wonder how her classmates acted...
shareyeah but not as bad as brooke shields. she was photographed nude at ten and then was nude in film at 12. that kid was seriously messed up...
share"yeah but not as bad as brooke shields. she was photographed nude at ten and then was nude in film at 12. that kid was seriously messed up..."
Ok now THAT is just sick... seriously, her mom has to be like evil...
Brook wasn't messed up though! It was her mom who was messed up. Brook was just a kid.
The thong thing... it was just a revealing bathing suit, while still being less revealing than a bikini in other areas. Nothing wrong about it, plus she was 14, people like to think you're a baby when you're 14, but you're not. You're innocent (hopefully) and everything, but also becoming a woman.
Edit: Ok now I just heard she was 16 when playing the part... so it really wasn't anything at all.
[b]
Question: What's so horrible about the human body?
Answer: Nothing. Even Pope John Paul II (god rest his soul) stated that there's nothing sinful about God's creation. The human body is sacred and to be admired for the masterpiece that it is.
Go into a European church. Look around. You see naked paintings & statues all over the place. Most famous examples are the Sistene Chapel or Michaelango's David.
I think mean the Sistine Chapel and Michelangelo's David?
shareOk now I just heard she was 16 when playing the part... so it really wasn't anything at all.
Hi who knows888,
FYI Brooke Shields and the guy she acted with (I forget and can't be bothered to look up his name) both chose not to do the nude scenes in Blue Lagoon. They're doubles in all the nude scenes.
P.S. Apart from Civilization, what else have I missed?
"Pretty Baby"
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0078111/?ref_=nv_sr_1
that kid was seriously messed up...
_________________________________________________
Your value judgement
not that it's the biggest difference, but she was 16. and If you read her biography you'd know that she was really mature and started acting/modeling extremely early.
sharehaha yeah and i saw and interview w/ Leto or something and she said she was mortified cause her whole school saw it..
shareWhat difference would it make? Katherine Heigl was already a model at that point. Her arse cheeks being on display is no different than being photographed in a bikini.
Plus.. if you look that good at 14 and have grown men still ogling over that scene today.. why would you be embarrassed?
----------
STEPH ¤§º
www.myspace.com/j20a
BURNING BRIDGES DAY! Dec. 4th!
i haven't seen the interview but i do hote people who complain years later with things in the scripts they were conthractly obligathed to do. she was 14 and peole mentioned they saw her almost bare backside. my comment to that is get over it. if you are that unconftable then she shouldn't have taken the part in the first place
Thunderbirds Aren't Slow
freefall79, what are you talking about? She didn't complain about anything. Someone just said that in an interview she said she was embarased, which is normal... actors get embarased during kissing scenes! She wasn't complaining, so chill out.
share<i>"if you are that unco[mfor]table then she shouldn't have taken the part in the first place."</i>
I don't think that's a fair statement as youths have not developed foresight. They don't think as much about the potential consequences of their actions. Making those kinds of mistakes are partially part of the learning process, but parents do have a responsibility to protect their kids from some mistakes. This is why parents must be involved in the choice of roles, remain on set, etc. It is Katherine Heigl's mother (and, to an extent, her agent at the time) who is responsible for her taking the part.
Besides, Katherine Heigl has a point: she was 14! There is something gross about grown men drooling over a fourteen year old body. You can say she looks developed, but she's not (at that point). And her body has surely changed from that point.
While I'm on the topic, side-track, when did "@ss of a ten-year-old boy" become a complement? Or be considered attractive? I realize it is suppose to be about size, and possibly fitness, but it's a comparison to the wrong gender and a child! Whenever I hear that "expression," I just cringe and think pedophilia.
I have the @ss of a 25-year-old woman (not that I get the ten-year-old boy "compliment"). Jamie Lee Curtis had the ass of a fit 35-year-old in True Lies. All women should comment on this when they get these comparisons.
And kudos to Heigl for pointing out that men are commenting on her 14-year-old @ss. It wouldn't hurt for her to throw in the words "statutory rape" during those times, in case they need a stronger reminder.
[deleted]
Born in November 1978. Filmed in 1993. That puts her at 14. Released in 1994. Puts her at 15 when it was released. And that's acording to the imdb biography and her page on wikipedia. Math. It's taught at grade school....
shareI'm sure she got a lot of possitive feedback from her classmates lol... Think about it...
But really, what is so embarasing? She was acting, and that was the riskiest thing in the movie for her to do, I'm sure it wasn't that bad. She was 14 which isn't that bad... And it's just acting, it wasn't all that racey. Thoguh I think she was 16 when playing the part, so it's really nothing at all.
Plus, she looked great lol. So all together, I'm sure it wasn't a big deal.
No she was 14.
"There are still men who come up to me today and say, 'You were really hot in that film!' I was 14, for God's sake!" - on her role in My Father the Hero (1994).
It could be a body double. Isnt it forbidden for minors to strip in a movie?
I'm not sure on those laws but I do remember Alicia Silverstone was 16 or 17 when she did The Crush.
shareKeira Knightley was 15 when she bared her breasts in "The Hole" (15 when filmed, 16 when it was released), completely legal, her mother was required to be on set, forms had to be signed and Keira had no problem with it (neither did I for that matter, being that I was 15 at the time I saw the movie). So theres nothing illegal or unproper about showing a 14 year olds ass in a swim suit, especially if theres nothing sexually explicit about it, it's not like she was rubbing her ass sensually or anything.
shareThat wasn't Alicia's butt. That was a body double. Alicia said so herself.
shareOh, for God's sake, I doubt wearing a thong was a problem for Heigl. Looks lioke it got her that much further in her "career". BTW, her acting s u c k s.
shareGet a life over a teenager in a thong....what's with being such a prude?
Anyone been to a European beach recently???
(I speak as a European woman with kids of 18 and 20)
If you have seen her ass in the thong, she had nothing what so ever to be embarrassed about.
shareI think it is a bit weird that it seems the men were looking at her rear. She is under age in the film whether she is 12, 14, 16 or 17.5 she is under age. That is what makes it weird. It doesn't make it ok that Brooke Shields or Kiera Knightly or anyone did it.
To tweedlepixie, I speak as someone who has lived in Europe most of my life and spent plenty of time of beaches. No there aren't that many 14 year old girls running around in thongs. They might wear barely there bikinis, as do young girls in USA, but it is still rare to see young girls in thongs. More often girls go without tops, but not neccesarily thongs. Unless they are little tiny 5 yr old girls (or boys)who often go completely naked. I don't think I am any sort of prude for not wanting to see an underage bottom in a thong portrayed as a sex object.
I feel the movie would have been just as good/point would have been made if she had on a small bikini. Thongs show much more of the cheeks than tiny bikinis.
Its not wierd for guys to stare at a girl/woman in a bikini or thong! I don't care how young or old or what country you live in. People gonna stare.
Lets be honest, the #1 reason women wear bikinis/thongs is to be notice!
I remember the scene and I was in my twenties and honestly I enjoy looking at her booty! Is that preverted? Realistically I didn't make her wear it. If she feels embarrassed than she should blame her parents.
I wonder in some states would it be consider child porn?
She isn't really that underage in Europe though - in plenty of European countries the age of consent is 14, in France it's 15, UK is 16 etc. 18 is the highest age of sexual consent in the world, in most places it is lower.
So it isn't that weird at all that young men were looking at her rear. When I was 14 plenty of older men hit on me and I wasn't emotionally scarred or anything. As long as no one does anything violent or anything that would amount to assault - for me it was mostly people looking or commenting or striking up conversation.
What is weird that the US has such a high age of consent - humans reach sexual maturity way before 18 - it's wrong in my opinion to legislate against something so natural. What's needed is proper education so that teens know how to protect themselves, stick up for themselves, understand issues of consent etc. Teens under 18 are going to do it anyway, but outlawing it means they're just going to hide it and will be less likely to receive the support they need.
Having such a high age of consent also makes older people feel weird or perverted for finding 17 year olds attractive, when it's completely natural to find young people attractive. But society acts as though a man is a paedophile for being attracted to a fully developed teenage girl, which is wrong in my opinion. At the same time, I think it is wrong for much older men to pursue teenagers due to the balance of power etc, but in terms of just looking at a teenager in a thong, I don't think there's anything wrong with that!
The age of consent in the USA is not 18. Every state has its own laws reguarding that. I think a lot of parents tell their kids its 18 and then hope they don't bother to check up on it.
The difference in the US to Europe is there are laws governing sexual contact between minors and people over the age of 18, which is a better approach. It allows kids of the same age to form relationships but protects 16 and 17 year olds from getting involved with older partners.
In the UK a 42 year old can legally have sex with a 16 year old, if it was one day before her 16th birthday, that makes him a sex offender. In most states a person over the age of 18 can have sex with someone under the age of 18, if there are less than 2 years age difference between them.