Quantcast

Ex-Model Sues Over Couples Retreat Favreau Porn Prop Scene

031210model.jpg Remember that hilaaairious scene in Couples Retreat when horndog Jon Favreau rubs one out while leering at a bikini model on the cover of a brochure? Probably not, because you most likely didn't see it, but anyway that tree did fall in the woods, and now we have one of our beloved tabloid lawsuit stories, because the model in the photo is suing NBC Universal for $10 million in damages for her "great humiliation, embarrassment, emotional distress, shame, mortification and injury to her reputation and career."

Irina Krupnik, originally from Russia, left the modeling biz seven years ago and is now a successful makeup artist. But back when she was 21, she was doing modeling shoots in the Bahamas, and once signed a release allowing commercial use of some images through stock photo agencies. But Krupnik never dreamed she'd make her motion picture debut years later, when, according to the lawsuit, Favreau's "much older, dessicated and overweight character" uses the photo to "pleasure himself." Her attorneys also claim the incident "would be a crime if Mr. Favreau attempted it on a New York City subway." The lawsuit reads like it was written by a nasty blogger who almost got cast in Swingers:

Favreau, playing a character at least twice the age of Ms. Krupnik in the photo, waits until his wife leaves their hotel room before lifting his sleeveless T-shirt over his prominent belly. He then liberally lubricates himself while leering at the image of the youthful Ms. Krupnik on a beach, a scenario apparently intended to be humorous. [Krupnik] found out about her movie debut from clients and acquaintances who viewed the movie, recognized her and notified her that her picture was being used in this tawdry and shocking context.

In other words, it would have been one thing if it had been somebody like that Ryan Gosling doing the self-pleasuring in a legitimately funny movie, but not that fat old Favreau. Ew. Krupnik's lawyer concedes that she did sign a "general release" (heh) allowing the photo's use, but she never dreamed it would be used in a "quasi-pornographic context." Now her "wholesome" image is forever tarnished by Couples Retreat and the ten people who remember that scene. Her lawyer declares, "At the very least, common decency means you should ask somebody before you put them into a scene that's essentially pornography."

Contact the author of this article or email tips@gothamist.com with further questions, comments or tips.

Comments [rss]

  • NannyState

    They should sue her for harming box-office receipts with her lack of chemistry and screen presence.

  • They DID ask. Seven years ago. When they bought the picture.

  • Stephenson Billings

    How pathetic. She agreed to sell herself in the first place, whether it was for beach bikini shoots or pornography (is there really much difference between the two?). I'm sure if they had paid her $10k in the first place she wouldn't have complained. So basically, she accepted the fact that she needs to sell her body for cash. Now she's just trying to negotiate a higher price. Well, all this lawsuit is doing is bringing attention to the fact that she's a skank.

  • The Edge

    Yes, there's a big difference between bikini modeling and porn.

    Since you had to ask.. no, you're not going to get an explanation.

    I'll give you a hint: one involves sex with the model, on the shoot, and the other doesn't.

  • Spirit of 76

    Interesting definition of porn you have there. So basically, you're saying that a solo layout in Playboy, Penthouse, Hustler or any of the other skin mags would not be porn because there were no sexual acts either during the shoot or in the photos.

  • babyhitler

    I'm still amazed that in this day of dynamic motion easily accesible internet pornography that people can still jerk off to static mostly clothed images. I haven't done that since grade school.

  • laisla

    Some people like to use a little imagination sometimes. Not everyone gets off on the same things...

  • JenChungsBaby

    Last month I stole a Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue from the bottom of the pile of misdirected mail that every apartment building has in its lobby. Major score, right? Not really. That issue used to be the highlight of my entire adolescent year but how can it compete these days?

  • hotstepper

    oh yes, i have fond memories of the ladies undergarment section in the Sears catalog as well...

  • handsomedevil

    "before you put them into a scene that's essentially pornography."

    Actually, the essence of pornography is that it is intended to arouse. The scene was sort of ABOUT pornography but it isn't porn.

  • laisla

    Exactly.

  • schadenfreudian mensch

    In Soviet Russia, picture sue you!

  • HBHB

    Her face should become the universal stock jerk-off photo for all movies now.

  • Spirit of 76

    Nah, she's a little bit of a butterface. Her figure isn't that great, either. That push-up bra helped a lot. I've known a few Russian girls and some of them were a lot hotter than she is.

  • butterbutter

    She signed a release.

    Case closed.



    Stop wasting tax payer money.

  • billybob

    sorry lady if it was a full on ron jeremy style porn movie your photo can still be used.

  • fishfryin

    it would be a crime if he jerked it to her photo on the nyc subway. yeah, and it would also be a crime if i walked into the street and shot someone. WTF

  • thewildpansy

    So annoying, right? They do this kind of bullshit all the time in their writing. I don't fucking understand it. It's really annoying.

  • jaycjay

    "They do this kind of bullshit all the time in their writing"

    That line's from the suit, so I guess by "they," you mean lawyers? I disagree; lawyers rarely include a statement like that in a suit, because it's completely irrelevant. Characters in movies are routinely depicted doing things that would be illegal if they were done in places like the NYC subway.

  • Mr. Know-It-All

    How is it possible to be at once overweight and "dessicated"? Bloated, maybe. Pinguid, perhaps. Chubby, chunky, blubbery, beefy, roly-poly, porky, pot-bellied and paunchy. But never "dessicated." SHE looks a little dessicated.

blog comments powered by Disqus

send a tip

tips@gothamist.com