Experts on Monroe's life, however, said it's highly unlikely that the smiling young blonde in the film is her.

然而，夢露生平的研究專家們說，影片中那個微笑的年輕金發女郎極不可能為夢露本人。

Comparing the film with known Monroe images leaves ample room for doubt. And several documents Barsa said proved his argument — a letter from the American Film Institute and what looks like a declassified FBI file that mentions a 1965 attempt to sell an alleged Marilyn Monroe sex film — are inconclusive.

將這部影片與為世人所熟知的夢露形象相對比，也留下許多疑問。而巴薩提到的可以證明他觀點的若干份文件不夠有說服力，包括一封美國電影學院的信，以及一份疑似聯邦調查局的解密文件，其中提到1965年有人出售據稱是夢露拍攝的性愛短片。

Monroe's image and estate is protected by the brand development and licensing company Authentic Brands Group. Its spokeswoman, Carlson, said a sale of the film would invite legal action for "perpetrating a fraud on the public, violating the Monroe estate's exclusive rights to her image and other claims of intellectual property infringement."

夢露的形象和遺產一直受品牌發展及許可公司“正宗品牌公司”保護。該公司女發言人卡爾遜說，如果有人出售該影片，他們將起訴，控告其“欺詐大眾，侵犯夢露遺產公司的形象專屬權及其它知識產權。”

"To me personally, it doesn't even resemble her," Carlson said.

卡爾遜說：“我個人覺得，根本連像都不像。”