Basic Instinct director Paul Verhoeven has denied Sharon Stone's claim that she was tricked into baring her nether regions for the 1992 film, stating that her account of the shoot is "impossible."
Speaking with Variety, the filmmaker denied misleading Stone into frontal nudity, explaining that the actor knew full well that she would be baring her genitals on film, as it was written into the scene.
"My memory is radically different from Sharon's memory," Verhoeven said. "That does not stand in the way and has nothing to do with the wonderful way that she portrayed Catherine Tramell. She is absolutely phenomenal. We still have a pleasant relationship and exchange text messages. But her version is impossible. She knew exactly what we were doing."
He continued: "I told her it was based on a story of a woman that I knew when I was a student who did the crossing of her legs without panties regularly at parties. When my friend told her we could see her vagina, she said, 'Of course, that's why I do it.' Then Sharon and I decided to do a similar sequence."
In Stone's memoir, The Beauty of Living Twice, the actor claimed that she was told she needed to remove her underwear for the scene because of a lighting issue, and that her genitals were not going to be visible in the shot.
"That was how I saw my vagina-shot for the first time, long after I'd been told, 'We can't see anything — I just need you to remove your panties, as the white is reflecting the light, so we know you have panties on,'" Stone wrote. "Now, here is the issue. It didn't matter anymore. It was me and my parts up there. I had decisions to make."
Stone said she later confronted Verhoeven about the scene and hit him in the face for including it. She said she later consulted her lawyer Marty Singer about the legality of what happened.
"Marty said, per the Screen Actors Guild, my union, it wasn't legal to shoot up my dress in this fashion. Whew, I thought," Stone wrote. "Well, that was my first thought. Then I thought some more. What if I were the director? What if I had gotten that shot? What if I had gotten it on purpose? Or by accident? What if it just existed? That was a lot to think about. I knew what film I was doing. For heaven's sake, I fought for that part, and all that time, only this director had stood up for me."
Last week, the actor paid homage to the film in an Instagram post. See that below.
Speaking with Variety, the filmmaker denied misleading Stone into frontal nudity, explaining that the actor knew full well that she would be baring her genitals on film, as it was written into the scene.
"My memory is radically different from Sharon's memory," Verhoeven said. "That does not stand in the way and has nothing to do with the wonderful way that she portrayed Catherine Tramell. She is absolutely phenomenal. We still have a pleasant relationship and exchange text messages. But her version is impossible. She knew exactly what we were doing."
He continued: "I told her it was based on a story of a woman that I knew when I was a student who did the crossing of her legs without panties regularly at parties. When my friend told her we could see her vagina, she said, 'Of course, that's why I do it.' Then Sharon and I decided to do a similar sequence."
In Stone's memoir, The Beauty of Living Twice, the actor claimed that she was told she needed to remove her underwear for the scene because of a lighting issue, and that her genitals were not going to be visible in the shot.
"That was how I saw my vagina-shot for the first time, long after I'd been told, 'We can't see anything — I just need you to remove your panties, as the white is reflecting the light, so we know you have panties on,'" Stone wrote. "Now, here is the issue. It didn't matter anymore. It was me and my parts up there. I had decisions to make."
Stone said she later confronted Verhoeven about the scene and hit him in the face for including it. She said she later consulted her lawyer Marty Singer about the legality of what happened.
"Marty said, per the Screen Actors Guild, my union, it wasn't legal to shoot up my dress in this fashion. Whew, I thought," Stone wrote. "Well, that was my first thought. Then I thought some more. What if I were the director? What if I had gotten that shot? What if I had gotten it on purpose? Or by accident? What if it just existed? That was a lot to think about. I knew what film I was doing. For heaven's sake, I fought for that part, and all that time, only this director had stood up for me."
Last week, the actor paid homage to the film in an Instagram post. See that below.
