Scarlett Johansson (or her body double) nude in Asteroid City (2023)

The 2160 clip does nothing to clarify the matter. In fact, it is blurry AF. This may be the first case where the CAM was better than the UHD version.

The only new details we got from this version is that the woman, whoever she may be, is starting to get varicose veins.

Mr. Skin says this is a body double named Katy Heffernan-Smith, but that woman seems to have a completely different body shape.


image host image host

7 thoughts on “Scarlett Johansson (or her body double) nude in Asteroid City (2023)

  1. I remember being sort of surprised by the lack of perkiness in Johansson’s breasts in the scene from Under The Skin. In my opinion… these are the same breasts.

    1. The lack of perkiness is understandable, as she had just come off filming The Avengers, and the training she underwent would have reduced the body’s fat content – especially the boobs.
      I think the prime time for a naked Scarlett was around 2004-2006 with films such as A Love Song for Bobby Long, A good Woman and The Island.

  2. 1. The nudity is one cut. That is, bookended by cuts. We don’t see either the mirror or any other rear view of whoever it is, other than that one cut with the nudity.

    We can’t even tell if the front view in the mirror is the mirror image of the body in rear view. Either or both could be Scarlett or a BD, but there’s no face in either to adjudicate which permutation is the fact.

    To me, the known likeness of Scarlett’s legs to the rear view legs is far more convincing than what we see in the mirror.

    2. I don’t care if the non-nude rear view is Scarlett or not.

    Any likeness or discrepancy of any ostensible BD with whoever that non-nude person may be is immaterial.

    Conversely, the unidentified naked body… Don’t we need to know what the alleged BD’s body shape looks like *now*?

  3. I think the identity can be determined by those varicose veins. I wouldn’t trust anything put out by mrskin. They’ve been wrong so many times and they usually don’t even bother to fix it.

    1. Agreed. But, is there any reason you’re putting effort into identifying the non-nude body? Do you have some way to link those non-nude legs to the nude body in the mirror? So far, I’m not aware what links them.

      1. Same person, I think. They move in perfect synch, including the position of the script and the towel.

        1. I’ve seen mirror images faked, including synched movement. One I remember was Geena Davis, but I don’t recall offhand what in. Anyway, we saw the back of a head & in the mirror, Geena’s face. I mean, along with most of the torso & arms.

          The foreground & reflection were nearly side-by-side. Whereas here, the images are far apart, & at slightly different angles. We don’t get common views of anything that’s in motion. Your “perfect” is practically laughable. Wishful thinking! Sez me.

          Your assumption simplifies the analysis. Citing Einstein, “A theory should be as simple as possible… But no simpler.”

Comments are closed.