After watching the movie, I realized that Kate Beckinsale was never shown nude in the film. It was obviously a body double. I thought the scene where she was being painted by her brother could have been her, but looking at it closely you can see her hair in the close up shots did not exactly match her hair from the wide angle shots. Anyone else catch that?
shareIt was obvious. You can even catch face of the double: http://img292.imageshack.us/my.php?image=doubleyp2.jpg.
shareI take back my original post. There is a scene where you can see her nude, but very briefly. When she and David are in bed, her nipple is exposed at one point. It is definitely her, as you can see her face and her nipple at the same time.
It lasts for about 2 seconds though. I am sure it was a mistake.
"Leave the gun. Take the cannoli's"
Yeah the body double is really obvious in this movie. The skinny-dipping scene is blatantly not her, and the weird camera angles/cutting of both the painting scene and the sex scene (when she is on top of him) confirm any doubt you may have had.
There may be a brief flash from Kate herself but it's very dark.
I find the body double so distracting that I wish the film would be re-edited without the nudity. I'm no prude (in any way!) but the nudity feels excessive, especially because it's so obviously not Kate (or Aidan Quinn, in the bedroom scene). It really is such a classically restrained ghost story that the nudity ends up cheapening it a bit, mostly because it's clearly "patched in" using body doubles, as if the producers felt they had to spice things up after the fact.
share