Lifetime, the TV network with the victim-of-the-week TV movies, is remaking The Blue Lagoon. Realizing that Lifetime will not show any nudity whatsoever, what in the hell is the point of this remake? I doubt that anyone watched the Brooke Shields version for the outstanding dialogue or gripping storyline.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/09/idUS210906695320111209
Maybe they’ll put Pirates in it.
It’s been done. Sorta.
And if you are interested in the purely prurient, the above film features the young miss Phoebe Cates at her prime in loving detail and great frequency. Also Eight is Enough’s Willie Aames, if you swing that way. As attractive the young Milla Jovovich also was, it also easily trumps Return to the Blue Lagoon at that gutter level.
It is in all other respects a steaming pile of crap film. However since I think Miss Cates ( and Mrs. Kline, props to her talented husband ) is a vision of feminine perfection, I’ve suffered through it more than once on cable ;).
Male viewers may have been watching it to see Brooke Shields naked. But I’d assume many female viewers probably watched it as a romantic love story. You could cut out the nudity and still have the love story. And Lifetime targets a mostly female demographic.
I remember when Brooke was a very controversial figure, wow it’s like teen Brooke is going to have sex in a movie! A lot of publicity and prurient interest which amounted to absolutely nothing. I remember Ebert’s review, “every third shot is a parrot’s reaction to something”. Remember Pretty Baby, they would be arrested now days.
I can confidently say that absolutely NO ONE swings that way. Not even Charles in Charge.
Actually, the 1980 Blue Lagoon was a remake, of a 1949 movie (same name) starring Jean Simmons. We were told the story in 8th grad English class, and the teacher described how “Mrs. L-- and I just floated out of that theater.” So figure romance was the initial intention.