Judge throws out second lawsuit from “Romeo and Juliet” stars over underage nude scene in 1968 movie

A Superior Court judge found no significant change in the Criterion re-release of the film to depart from 2023's first ruling.

Olivia Hussey and Leonard Whiting's second lawsuit against Paramount over an underage nude scene shot for their 1968 film Romeo and Juliet was dismissed today by a Superior Court judge.

After an initial lawsuit alleging exploitation, sexual harassment, fraud, sexual abuse, negligence, and the distribution of nude images of children was dismissed in May 2023, Hussey and Whiting filed again Feb. 2024, focusing on The Criterion Collection, which recently released a remastered edition of the film.

In a ruling reviewed by Entertainment Weekly, Superior Court Judge Holly J. Fujie tossed the second suit out, claiming that Criterion did not meaningfully alter the presentation of the nude scene enough to warrant a departure from the initial ruling on the case, as the plaintiffs' suit claimed.

Representatives for Paramount and The Criterion Collection could not be reached for comment.

In the original complaint, Hussey and Whiting noted that consent was obtained from their guardians prior to filming, but to that point a nude scene had not yet been discussed. They claimed that director Franco Zeffirelli convinced them to shoot a nude scene, but none of that footage would make it into the final cut of the film. That promise was broken, as Romeo and Juliet contains a scene in which the then 16-year-old Hussey and 17-year-old Whiting lie naked in bed, recovering from an implied sexual act. The scene contains a glimpse of Hussey's breasts and Whiting's rear.

Paramount was able to get the case dismissed in short order via an anti-SLAPP motion, a legal motion designed to dismiss suits that restrict or otherwise have a chilling effect on First Amendment-protected activities.

Related: Garth Brooks accused of rape and battery in lawsuit filed by former hair-and-makeup artist

The follow-up lawsuit shifted the focus from Paramount to Criterion, claiming that the re-release "created, among other things, digitally enhanced photographs of Whiting and Hussey lying together in the nude in a bed simulating a newly married couple luxuriating after a session of marital coitus. It also contained computer created, digitally enhanced photographs of the aureoles and nipples on Hussey’s naked breasts" which "rendered, in extremely high definition detail, the contents of several analog color photographs taken in the private studio in the presence only of key photography personnel while Hussey and Whiting were minors."

Judge Fujie ruled that “a comparison of the 2023 release with the prior versions shows no significant visible improvement in the film, particularly in the Bedroom Scene, to the naked eye."

William A. Romaine, the lawyer representing Hussey and Whiting, told to EW that Hussey continues to feel "embarrassed" by Criterion's apparent alterations to the scene, which she describes as "prurient." As for the actors' consent to film the scene, Judge Fujie interprets Hussey and Whiting's participation in anniversary screenings and other events tied to the film over the years acts as a kind of continuous affirmation of consent. It's an interpretation Romaine disagrees with, noting that "there is a difference between acquiescence and consent," and there is "nothing like overwhelming evidence that they consented to the scene."

Related: Angelina Jolie asks Brad Pitt to 'stop the fighting' and drop winery lawsuit

Hussey stated in a written declaration, "I was convinced - and remain convinced - that Paramount engineered [the Criterion] release to embarrass me in retaliation for my participating in the 2022 lawsuit against them."

In their second anti-SLAPP motion in response to the 2024 lawsuit, lawyers for Paramount wrote that the succesful first dismissal "should have been the end of this nonsense," and claimed that "plaintiffs’ theory that the Criterion release of the film exceeds the resolution of all prior iterations of the film is simply wrong."

Romaine noted that "we are going to be recommending to our clients that this should be appealed. The judge's order, we think it was outside the law, beyond the power of the judge to grant the motion."

Read the original article on Entertainment Weekly.