Post

Marilyn Monroe **** Film Is to Auction - But It's Not Marilyn!

All the buzz about an old **** film that investors are publicizing as Marilyn Monroe, I suspect, is a pathetic attempt in duping someone out of $500,000.00 while again, victimizing Monroe,  the legend who is not here to defend herself.

Huffington Post Article states~ (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/21/marilyn-monroe-****-film-alleged-auction_n_905427.html)

"
BUENOS AIRES, Argentina -- A Spanish collector plans to auction what he claims is a newly discovered 8-mm version of a film purportedly showing Marilyn Monroe having sex when she was still an underage actress known as Norma Jean Baker.

A Marilyn Monroe expert, however, says the actress in the film is someone else, considerably heavier and less feminine than the legendary film star. "That's not Marilyn. The chin is not the same, the lips are not the same, the teeth are not the same," said Scott Fortner, who has a sizeable collection of Monroe memorabilia, including a belt he said proves how much more petite she was. "Marilyn was a tiny little thing. And I know that for a fact. I own her clothing."

Collector Mikel Barsa said in an interview that he wants at least $500,000.00.  Barsa says he plans to auction the film himself Aug. 7,2011 at a memorabilia collectors fair that he has organized in Buenos Aires"

The Film: 
A 6 1/2-minute, grainy black-and-white film,  he says was made before 1947, when Monroe was not yet 21."  

He said it's an exact copy of a 16-mm film that he brokered the sale of the film to a European magazine in 1997, which he said in turn sold some 600,000 copies before a collector bought the original 16-mm reel for $1.2 million.  

-----------------------------------


The people behind peddling this pathetic ploy of a Marilyn Monroe **** film are really stretching their luck.   How did this even become a story?  
Did the owner of this film pay to bring attention to his **** film in the attempt to lure potential investors?  Many articles link readers directly to **** sites displaying a video clip of this film.   Is this a ruse, to drive traffic to **** sites? 
It certainly appears that way.

Now Huffington Post has placed a video clip with the **** actress in a freeze frame showing her partial face next to a photo of Marilyn.    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/21/marilyn-monroe-****-film-alleged-auction_n_905427.html

Photo Comparison Problem - Age of Faces
The grainy black and white photo of the **** actress's face resembles the equally grainy black and white photo of Marilyn placed next to it.  
Although the owner of the film states Marilyn was under 21 when the film was made, it appears the picture of Marilyn chosen in his side by side photo comparison to the **** actress appears to be a photo of Marilyn in her late 30's.  Marilyn's photo clearly shows an older Marilyn post Rhinoplasty (nose job). So if the owner states Marilyn was under 21 when this **** was filmed, why is he comparing the film actress image with a picture of Marilyn when she was approx. 35-36?        
        
Also, if you view the section of the film where you can actually see a full frontal close-up of the face of this **** actress, It seems obvious she is not Marilyn.  Her hair is not as thick, the wrong color, as well as, other notable characteristic misgivings..in her nose, eyes etc.  Any person viewing pictures of Marilyn before 1947 would be able to readily distinguish Marilyn is still a very young girl at this time and the woman in this **** film is - well.... a woman.

Marilyn Monroe was born June 1, 1926.   Marilyn was 5' foot 5 1/2 inches tall, was petite with a very full curvy figure.   

Height, Weight and Age Discrepency:
The article states the movie was made before 1947 but no specific date.  If you view photos of Marilyn before and at 1947, she is not only still a young lady but looks her age or younger than her age.  The **** film actress looks to be at least five inches taller and at least 10 years older than Marilyn at the estimated time this film was made.

Time-Line Problem.
Also I don't believe the time-line corresponds with Marilyn's life.   Marilyn was already a Movie Starlet in 1947, perhaps that is why the owner of the film speculated the film was  made "sometime before 1947", citing  Marilyn was under 21 and  still known as Norma Jean Baker.   The problem with that statement is that  Marilyn Monroe was using her Marilyn Monroe name as early as 1946 (although did not legally change it until 1956).   If, according to the films owner, she went by her former Norma Jean name, then the film had to be made prior to 1946.  Also In 1946, Marilyn was already working as a successful model and making a name for herself -therefore, it's hard to fathom that she would have had to resort to participating in a **** film.  In fact, on August 26, 1946 Marilyn signed a film contract with Twentieth Century Fox for her first film!

This means, for this **** film to have the remote possibility of being Marilyn,  it would have had to be filmed BEFORE 1946.   Before any sign of success.  In 1945 we know Marilyn was working as a model but I don't know how successful she was and if she was able to support herself with her earnigs.   In 1945, Marilyn was only 19 years old and at 19 she looked more like a 15-16 year old, a very young looking girl.   This image does not match the image of the woman on the film.  Also Marilyn was not yet blonde at this time. Below are pictures of Marilyn at 15, 19, 20 and 21.  Take a look at  Marilyn's modeling pictures from 1945 at 19 years old - no way is that Marilyn in the **** film at 19.

OOPS, Titled Film with Wrong Year! 
And lastly, if you go to the film and pull the name of the clip, it's categorized as Marilyn Monroe 1948 hardcore -Vintage ****.
So, the owners state the film was made prior 1947, yet the title on the film states the year 1948.  You don't have to smell a scam....you can literally see it. 

http://www­.slutload.­com/watch/­9q9YZym1uA­2/Marilyn-­Monroe-194­8-Hardcore­-Original-­Vintage-Po­rn-Video.h­tml

View from 3.7 to 3.15 her face is clearly visible - and this is NOT Marilyn!

-----------------------------------------
The seller is counter-attacking people who argue the legitimacy of this film, making statement that people just refuse to believe Marilyn would make such films. I know Marilyn made films.  About 20 years ago, during a conversation with someone about Marilyn Monroe, a former coworker stated he had an old film of Marilyn semi-naked.  A few days later he gave me a VCR tape with a short clip of Marilyn.   At the time, I wasn't sure if it was Marilyn because  she was so young - probably 17-19 years (before turning blonde) and  I had never seen pictures of her that young , so I wasn't sure if it was actually Marilyn.   Years later, after viewing her younger images, It does appear to be Marilyn.   I probably still have the clip somewhere.  It's a copy so I'm sure this is not something rare, never seen before material.   However, this **** film they are currently trying to pedal as Marilyn, doesn't pass.
------------------------------------------------
August 5,1962-Date of Death-36 years old
1946 - 20 years old.
1945- 19 years
1941- 15 years

s







DreamWizard DreamWizard 41-45, F 5 Responses Jul 23, 2011

Your Response

Cancel

NOT THIS TIME! MARILYN WINS!



BUENOS AIRES, Argentina (AP) — Sunday August 7, 2011 There were no buyers at the auction bidding for the 1940s **** film purported by it's promoter to star an underage Norma Jean before she became the Marilyn Monroe Star we all know.



The auction was a flop.



Not one person came forward willing to pay Mikel Barsa’s film which starting at a bidding price of about $480,000 (2 million Argentine pesos).



In the past the hundreds of thousands of copies sold and the original sold for 1.2 million.

These thieves may have fooled the public before but this time, fans were viligent to expose the discrepancies of the actress in the film to Marilyn and to spread the word.

-------------------------------------------------

Excerpt from above story:

He said it's an exact copy of a 16-mm film that he brokered the sale of the film to a European magazine in 1997, which he said in turn sold some 600,000 copies before a collector bought the original 16-mm reel for $1.2 million.

here is a link to the memorial of stanley gifford, supposedly marlyns father, there are pics etc....... i do see a resemblance.............. you can write a quick note on his memorial site.......... http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=dfl&GRid=9866&FLsr=1

Me too!

i soooooooooooo love her...... she is my soul sister

I don't know how many agencies are behind selling this film as a Monroe but it seems many media outlets now will not allow posts.



Also, I see posts made with people attempting to persuade readers that this is indeed Marilyn Monroe.

Please - speak up for Marilyn and demand for more experts to validate this film!

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/node/41474/comment-page-1#comment-168089



Another site that outlines the many distinctions between the film actress and Marilyn can be viewed at:

http://themarilynmonroecollection.blogspot.com/2011/08/alleged-marilyn-monroe-*****-flops-at.html