Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register

WATCH: New Blue Lagoon Comes To Lifetime With Fresh Nubile Bodies

At a screening of Prometheus on Saturday, we caught the extended trailer for Lifetime’s reboot of the Chris Atkins/Brooke Shields classic, Blue Lagoon. Premiering Saturday, June 16, Blue Lagoon: The Awakening is a more softcore update of the lovers-in-paradise flick, with Brenton Thwaites and Indiana Jones as the genetically blessed teens whose hormones start racing on a deserted island. Tabloid fixture Denise Richards co-stars as Jones’ mom, desperately looking for her daughter. (Well, it is Lifetime—they’re required to have a desperate mom in every movie.)

Check Thwaites, 23, out in the trailer above, and scope him out in some sweet screen shots below. If you like what you seen, you’ll be happy to know the Australian actor is slated to play the young prince in the upcoming live-action adaptation of the Sleeping Beauty story, Maleficent.  


Source: Square Hippies


On:           Jun 13, 2012
Tagged: , , , ,
    • dee-dee

      Her name is Indiana Jones?

      Jun 13, 2012 at 6:51 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • chris

      Stop it with the remakes. They are NEVER as good as the original.

      Jun 13, 2012 at 7:34 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Snownova


      Well with science fiction and fantasy movies remakes can take advantage of advances in special effects, robotics and CGI technology (I’m talking remakes, not the star wars abominations), but I agree that for a movie like the blue lagoon a remake can’t really add anything.

      Jun 13, 2012 at 7:59 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Daez

      Where remakes shine is that they bring the story to a new generation. Many in the new generation never look twice at the older film, but will watch a remake of the film.

      Jun 13, 2012 at 8:59 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Chris

      Her name is Indiana EVANS.

      Jun 13, 2012 at 9:06 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Danny

      How can anything top Christopher Atkins in a soggy diaper?

      Jun 13, 2012 at 9:23 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Aven

      @Danny: Brenton Thwaites in a soggy diaper :)

      Jun 13, 2012 at 9:59 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • doug105

      @Aven: Not on his best day.

      Jun 13, 2012 at 10:43 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • randy

      I’d love to be stuck on an island with this guy!

      Jun 13, 2012 at 10:50 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mr. Enemabag Jones

      The original was crap, we didn’t need a remake.

      Jun 13, 2012 at 11:06 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Christopher

      Great face/hair, but body is nowhere near as hot as Christopher Atkins. Atkins had a tight, ripped set of abs, and narrow waist. Still, this guy is admittedly very nice to look at.

      Jun 13, 2012 at 11:30 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DANN



      Jun 13, 2012 at 11:59 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • SebX

      Yeah, guy is hot, but NOWHERE near Atkins, IMO. No only was he hot, he was truly BEAUTIFUL.

      Jun 13, 2012 at 12:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • The Real Mike in Asheville

      @chris: In this case, that is not possible — not possible because the remake could not possibly be worse than the original. Equally bad, probably, but worse, I don’t that is possible.

      Jun 13, 2012 at 1:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ncstud

      There is no place for this story to go but up. The original is dumb and Atkins is like what–85 today? Get over it, cuz this new babe is hot. Total masculine face, great hair, hot body and Im in luv with his tiny nipples! I luv a stud with small headlites like his.

      Jun 13, 2012 at 3:11 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bailey

      photo #2: Got his red wings!

      Jun 13, 2012 at 3:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DavidW

      Danny said>>

      How can anything top Christopher Atkins in a soggy diaper?

      No diaper at all…

      Jun 13, 2012 at 4:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jakey

      Did the world really need a fourth ‘Blue Lagoon’ movie? (Well, no.)

      Jun 13, 2012 at 4:21 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Aeiou

      What I like is how no matter how long they will be on the island, his hair will never grow nor get greasy and matted.

      Jun 13, 2012 at 6:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • The Real Mike in Asheville

      @ncstud: FUCK YOU stud — Atkins was 19 when he made Blue Lagoon. And some day, stud, if you’re lucky, you too will reach 51 and look as handsome as Atkins does at that age.

      Jun 13, 2012 at 6:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DavidW

      @ncstud – it must be that new math your playin with- As of 2012 Atkins is 51 years old.

      And @The Real Mike in Asheville your promising too much to the little ncstud.

      Jun 13, 2012 at 6:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mike1987

      Twinks are a dime a dozen.

      Jun 13, 2012 at 7:27 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • D P

      What I want to know is which one’s the vampire?

      Jun 13, 2012 at 7:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • KyleW

      Personally I loved the original, but not for the stunning story-telling. The script was bloated, and it could have done away with the first half hour. It was super soft core in the first place, so if they’ve softened it more, it will lose the one element that made it watchable. But I suppose they could could tighten the script a million notches and turn it into a rollicking adventure. But I imagine they’ll turn it into a tedious love-story.

      Jun 13, 2012 at 8:10 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • KyleW

      Couldn’t get the trailer in my country – just found a viewable one. It looks utterly shit. Just a stupid teen romance movie. By starting with the characters as bratty teens, you lose that whole innocence thing that made the original work. Now it’s just a dumb castaway romance. Bullshit bullshit.

      Jun 13, 2012 at 8:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • kevininbuffalo

      Looks like the Blue Lagoon meets Gilligan’s Island. “Just sit right back and you’ll hear a tale a tale of a fateful trip…” This kid is nothing, you’ll see dozens just like him in any mall on the weekend. Chris Atkins was special, just gorgeous, couldn’t act worth shit but hell
      who cared!

      Jun 13, 2012 at 10:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dirty Ole Man

      Actually, the Atkins/Shields 1980 version was the first remake of Blue Lagoon’s original in 1949. Atkin’s version was proof positive that remakes can be better than the first.

      Jun 13, 2012 at 11:41 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • D P

      @chris: – I agree with @Dirty Ole Man: ; and as well, there’s the Star Trek franchise. The second movie was definitely better than the first, not to mention that the of The Wrath of Khan storyline built upon one of the original episode’s storyline.

      Jun 14, 2012 at 3:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • D P

      [Queerty’s comment utility thinks that I’ve already submitted this, but it’s not there. Thus, this line.] @chris: – I agree with @Dirty Ole Man: ; and as well, there’s the Star Trek franchise. The second movie was definitely better than the first, not to mention that the of The Wrath of Khan storyline built upon one of the original episode’s storyline.

      Jun 14, 2012 at 3:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • D P

      @D P: — great! now it shows up……

      Jun 14, 2012 at 3:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • somebody

      Hi! Is it just me or has anyone else noticed that he has a big bulge

      Jun 16, 2012 at 10:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JoJo

      I enjoyed the original film …which was a silent film made in the 1920s! The one made in the 80s was NOT the original version. I’m so tired of seeing that. There were several versions before the 80s one. Oh, also …ORIGINALLY …there was this thing. You kids probably don’t remember them but it was called …A BOOK (which had several sequels in the series)! So, it’s had many versions since THE BOOK came out. All of them were different in some way. Films, plays, books, folk tales, fairy tales, campfire stories …as long as there have been talking humans there was ever changing stories being told over and over and over. Get past the whole “remake” thing.

      Jun 17, 2012 at 2:17 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Catherine

      Watching it, and not getting it! What’s the point of this remake? It defeats the purpose of what the original movie was about.

      Jun 19, 2012 at 1:47 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DavidW

      The remake was like watching the sinking of the titanic, with no ship. I thought the story was supposed to be about the kids dealing with growing up. I found the parents crises a big distraction.

      Jun 20, 2012 at 1:40 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • KyleW

      @DavidW: I’ve not seen it yet, but like you say, the whole point about the movie was the “discovering themselves” bit. Otherwise it’s just another tedious teen movie.

      Jun 20, 2012 at 5:13 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.

  • Copyright 2016 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.