rk79 🇺🇸 2011-10-02 13:58
It could be a cloth diaper? It's hard to tell, but I'd agree definitely not just regular panties. How old is this girl in the film supposed to be? I guess 10-12? I've never seen this movie and had no desire to as the previews looked REALLY stupid -- but perhaps now I will rent it on BluRay just to get a better look. After further examination of these stills -- I'm thinking maybe it was some form of protection but not quite a full blown diaper... but then, maybe it's just really thick underwear to cover up the... gaps in the leg holes of those short shorts... so you can't see her...privates? Not sure why they wouldn't just have the girl wear something a little bit less *revealing* then, for that scene at least. Perhaps we will never know. Maybe there's something about it on the "special features" on the DVD, LOL.
It could be a cloth diaper? It's hard to tell, but I'd agree definitely not just regular panties. How old is this girl in the film supposed to be? I guess 10-12? I've never seen this movie and had no desire to as the previews looked REALLY stupid -- but perhaps now I will rent it on BluRay just to get a better look. After further examination of these stills -- I'm thinking maybe it was some form of protection but not quite a full blown diaper... but then, maybe it's just really thick underwear to cover up the... gaps in the leg holes of those short shorts... so you can't see her...privates? Not sure why they wouldn't just have the girl wear something a little bit less *revealing* then, for that scene at least. Perhaps we will never know. Maybe there's something about it on the "special features" on the DVD, LOL.
rk79 🇺🇸 2011-10-02 14:05
Wow I didn't notice this before but in this shot it really does look like a diaper. Maybe cloth without plastic pants? Because as you can see it pokes up over her shorts on her waist. Very interesting... OK now we all know that in TV shows such as Full House, the Olsen Twins were apparently in diapers on the set until they were 8 (that mystery is still yet to be solved) but this girl looks to be about 10 or 11?? Why would she need to wear diapers unless she also has issues "holding it." I'm tempted to go rent this at Redbox tomorrow and examine ALL the scenes with her in it to see if her bottom looks padded... or is it just for this scene to hide the gaps in-between her legs? If I find anything -- I will post more stills here!
Wow I didn't notice this before but in this shot it really does look like a diaper. Maybe cloth without plastic pants? Because as you can see it pokes up over her shorts on her waist. Very interesting... OK now we all know that in TV shows such as Full House, the Olsen Twins were apparently in diapers on the set until they were 8 (that mystery is still yet to be solved) but this girl looks to be about 10 or 11?? Why would she need to wear diapers unless she also has issues "holding it." I'm tempted to go rent this at Redbox tomorrow and examine ALL the scenes with her in it to see if her bottom looks padded... or is it just for this scene to hide the gaps in-between her legs? If I find anything -- I will post more stills here!
rk79 🇺🇸 2011-10-05 11:24
OK a little update. I got the movie and just finished watching it. First of all, my original opinion was right. What a STUPID movie. The only good parts were the one with this girl. Her name is Brooklynn Proulx. She's the same little girl that was in The Time Travelor's wife. At the time this was filmed she was about 9 years old. Now, the scene these captures are from are towards the end of the movie. I watched it carefully at least 5 times in a row. I'm almost certain she had some kind of diaper on. I tried to see if there were any clues of her wearing in any other scenes of the movie... Sadly, she doesn't have a big enough part in this film for there to be any other give-aways. One thing I DID notice, though... is after she crosses the wire and is standing up on the boat -- there is a split second where they show her standing up and the camera is zoomed in pretty close to the front of her shorts. If you really look carefully, it looks as if there is a little bulge in the front that to me looks like a pull-up. I guess we will never know for sure why this girl was wearing a diaper... but I'm pretty certain she was.
OK a little update. I got the movie and just finished watching it. First of all, my original opinion was right. What a STUPID movie. The only good parts were the one with this girl. Her name is Brooklynn Proulx. She's the same little girl that was in The Time Travelor's wife. At the time this was filmed she was about 9 years old. Now, the scene these captures are from are towards the end of the movie. I watched it carefully at least 5 times in a row. I'm almost certain she had some kind of diaper on. I tried to see if there were any clues of her wearing in any other scenes of the movie... Sadly, she doesn't have a big enough part in this film for there to be any other give-aways. One thing I DID notice, though... is after she crosses the wire and is standing up on the boat -- there is a split second where they show her standing up and the camera is zoomed in pretty close to the front of her shorts. If you really look carefully, it looks as if there is a little bulge in the front that to me looks like a pull-up. I guess we will never know for sure why this girl was wearing a diaper... but I'm pretty certain she was.
nathalie26 🇨🇭 2012-03-16 17:30
Hmmm, I definitifely do not know what type of undergarment could look like this - incuding diapers. Sorry. The only idea I have is, that this might be oart of a harness securing her from falling into the water / on the boat. The supporting straps might have been removed by editing, the part in teh crotch might habe been to hard to do - or the person editing was a DL.... I think they often do such things.
Hmmm, I definitifely do not know what type of undergarment could look like this - incuding diapers. Sorry. The only idea I have is, that this might be oart of a harness securing her from falling into the water / on the boat. The supporting straps might have been removed by editing, the part in teh crotch might habe been to hard to do - or the person editing was a DL.... I think they often do such things.
iul703 🇺🇸 2014-05-02 06:25
its a diaper its common for child actors to wear a diaper under their clothing because of long shooting hours. potty breaks cost time and that = money, this film was shot on a very tight schedule the actress is nine when the film was shot. Olson twins also wore diapers on set as well as other on full house.
its a diaper its common for child actors to wear a diaper under their clothing because of long shooting hours. potty breaks cost time and that = money, this film was shot on a very tight schedule the actress is nine when the film was shot. Olson twins also wore diapers on set as well as other on full house.
colios1 🇩🇪 2023-01-29 15:55
I wonder why no one noticed that the other girl in Full house was diaperd too;). Theres even a shot where she doesnt wears a diaper but a fully soaked short pant ;)
I wonder why no one noticed that the other girl in Full house was diaperd too;). Theres even a shot where she doesnt wears a diaper but a fully soaked short pant ;)