How would you make a sequel to the 1980 version of "The Blue Lagoon"? Well, my view is that the world needs a sequel to "The Blue Lagoon" like it needs a hole in the head, but if I were commissioned to write such a sequel and could not get out of the commission, it would go something like this. Richard and Emmeline are found alive, rescued and are taken back to civilisation, where they discover that they are heirs to a fortune. Their wealth, good looks and the remarkable tale of their survival on a desert island make them the most famous couple in America and they are in great demand everywhere in high society. They, however, hate their new lifestyle and find high society superficial, hypocritical and cruel. They quietly abandon their new life and return to their tropical island with their son to live out the rest of their days there.
In the sequel that we actually have, Richard and Emmeline are found dead, even though the ending of the original film implies that they were found unconscious but alive. Their baby son (called Paddy in the original film but Richard here) has survived, however, and is rescued by the ship's crew. An outbreak of cholera on board leads to young Richard being cast adrift along with a widow named Sarah Hargrave and her baby daughter Lilli. Eventually the three end up back on the same tropical island where Richard's parents grew up. Sarah (whose husband was a missionary) does her best to bring the two children up as good civilised Christians, but when she dies a few years later they are left on their own, just as the elder Richard and Emmeline were.
From this point onwards, the scriptwriter of "Return to the Blue Lagoon" seems to have abandoned any pretence that he was writing a sequel and to have decided that it was easier to write the script for a remake instead. The adventures of Richard II and Lilli closely parallel those of Richard I and Emmeline, scene for scene and at times almost word for word. The leading actors, Milla Jovovich and Brian Krause, seem to have been cast on the basis of their physical resemblance to Brooke Shields and Christopher Atkins. Only towards the end does the plot start to differ from that of its predecessor.
I have never been a fan of the 1980 "Blue Lagoon", which I found just another sentimental teenage romance movie with an exotic setting and with wooden performances from its two young stars. Here Krause is perhaps rather less wooden than Atkins, but Jovovich is just as bad as Shields was. Shields had the dubious distinction of becoming the first-ever winner of the Razzie Award for "Worst Actress". The 1991 film was nominated for five Razzies, including "Worst Picture", "Worst Director" for William Graham, "Worst Screenplay" for Leslie Stevens and "Worst New Star" for both Krause and Jovovich. Surprisingly, it lost out in each category, generally to "Hudson Hawk". I have never seen that film, but if it is even worse than "Return to the Blue Lagoon" I cannot say that I am in any hurry to do so. 3/10. (Objectively speaking, the film is no worse than the 1980 version which I awarded 4/10, but an extra mark is docked for the sequel's lack of originality).
In the sequel that we actually have, Richard and Emmeline are found dead, even though the ending of the original film implies that they were found unconscious but alive. Their baby son (called Paddy in the original film but Richard here) has survived, however, and is rescued by the ship's crew. An outbreak of cholera on board leads to young Richard being cast adrift along with a widow named Sarah Hargrave and her baby daughter Lilli. Eventually the three end up back on the same tropical island where Richard's parents grew up. Sarah (whose husband was a missionary) does her best to bring the two children up as good civilised Christians, but when she dies a few years later they are left on their own, just as the elder Richard and Emmeline were.
From this point onwards, the scriptwriter of "Return to the Blue Lagoon" seems to have abandoned any pretence that he was writing a sequel and to have decided that it was easier to write the script for a remake instead. The adventures of Richard II and Lilli closely parallel those of Richard I and Emmeline, scene for scene and at times almost word for word. The leading actors, Milla Jovovich and Brian Krause, seem to have been cast on the basis of their physical resemblance to Brooke Shields and Christopher Atkins. Only towards the end does the plot start to differ from that of its predecessor.
I have never been a fan of the 1980 "Blue Lagoon", which I found just another sentimental teenage romance movie with an exotic setting and with wooden performances from its two young stars. Here Krause is perhaps rather less wooden than Atkins, but Jovovich is just as bad as Shields was. Shields had the dubious distinction of becoming the first-ever winner of the Razzie Award for "Worst Actress". The 1991 film was nominated for five Razzies, including "Worst Picture", "Worst Director" for William Graham, "Worst Screenplay" for Leslie Stevens and "Worst New Star" for both Krause and Jovovich. Surprisingly, it lost out in each category, generally to "Hudson Hawk". I have never seen that film, but if it is even worse than "Return to the Blue Lagoon" I cannot say that I am in any hurry to do so. 3/10. (Objectively speaking, the film is no worse than the 1980 version which I awarded 4/10, but an extra mark is docked for the sequel's lack of originality).