um dude, why isn't the little girl wearing a shirt? - Return to the Blue Lagoon (1991) Discussion

[–] pandorasbox 18 years ago

Actually, there are a few states where grown women can walk around topless. The thinking there is if men can, it's only fair.

reply

[–] FaydeToBlak 17 years ago

"I will agree that topless girls were more acceptable 20 years ago than it is now because all this mis-leading hysteria!"

THis is sad. I'm 33 and I remember as a kid going swimming with my cousins and friends while wearing just my underwear. American is so obsessed with sex it's pitiful.

reply

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] flipyjoe 17 years ago

To the few people who are so bothered by this I have a question and an opinion for you. The question what is so wrong with a child that shirtless she isn't sexualised and the boys is dressed the same way but that doesn't bother you despite the fact there is only one physical difference with them at this time in life? If this bothers you so much seek help.

reply

[–] Ushers_Passing 9 years ago

As I said before, it there were a "like" button, I would push it. Very well said.

reply

[–] sterrekooi 17 years ago

Why would you care? She was only eight or so, and she's been living on that island for almost all her life...you could be disturbed by it, but well...so be it :P.

reply

[–] Anjie98 17 years ago

I agree, of all the things that disturbed you in this film, the fact that a CHILD wasnt wearing a shirt is the most distrubing??

I'd rather have the answer to who and HOW did they deliver the baby?? LOL!!!

reply

[–] RaceHorseLegondAlydar 17 years ago

i think it's retarded all ppl are thinking these days... i mean a little girl not wearing a shirt i mean come on it's not like she was developed or anything yet she looked like a little boy no big deal..I'm glad i don't think that that I'm 18 and i think if i thought like that i would be in trouble in the future

reply

[–] Ushers_Passing 9 years ago

Agree with the last poster, but I'm sure the baby was delivered in the same manner as it has since the dawn of human times. You know that child birth without complications happens pretty naturally even if there isn't a doctor or midwife there. Even with complications, it still happens pretty naturally...Just not usually with happy endings.

reply

[–] johnp879 17 years ago

uhhh dude they were on an island what were they sopposed to wear with no
clothing!! duhhh!! later in the movie i think she finds cloth!! so dude common sense!!!

hope that helps

love ya

Breana

reply

[–] Wish_Phoenix 17 years ago

Think about it.

Why do you wear clothes?

We wear clothes because society says that it is not socially acceptable for people to walk around naked.

On the island there was only the 2 kids and the mother, later only the 2 kids.
They had to make up their own rules, and I dont think the mother had any problem with letting the 2 kids wander around topless.
She probably would have had a problem with it in later years though.

If you are not given rules to abide by, then you have to make your own rules.

Personally, I have no problem with the girl running around topless at that age. I bet that island was extremely hot, and it was more comfortable for her to not wear a shirt.

I agree that the USA is getting to paraniod about sex

reply

[–] Wish_Phoenix 17 years ago

apparently no one else agrees or disagrees.

reply

[–] weilandzgirl 15 years ago

BECAUSE THE LITTLE GIRL HAS NO BOOBS NOR "MOSQUITO BITES" YET. I WENT TOPLESS AT THAT AGE AROUND FAMILY. IT'S HARMLESS.

reply

[–] froggym 15 years ago

She is just a child, when they were getting out of the little pond thing it took me a second to tell them apart and that was only because the girl had longer hair. My old neighbour used to run around the street with no shirt on and she was about the same age, no one cared cause she was just a kid.

reply

[–] cheez_it_2004 15 years ago

Umm, it's a little girl, and if any one finds that erotic...they have some SERIOUS issues! Little girls don't have anything that a grown man should even want to think about!

"All my friends are dead
All my friends are dead"
Turbonegro

reply

[–] von_karolinas 15 years ago

I'm lost. Everyone keeps saying she was a little girl, someone even said specifically under the age of 8 and that she had no breasts. Milla was like 16, and her breasts were very evident in the topless scenes. Or did I miss something?

reply

[–] TheFatDruidofNacyl 15 years ago

There is a scene where the Mom explains that she takes a bath with clothes because its proper. She then explains that she gave up on trying to keep clothes on the kids because they kept taking them off. It was designed to show how hot the island was, and how the two kids growing up without the modern societies dress code. There was no sexual interest between the two kids until they grew up and the girl was considered a woman.

I also agree it is normal for girls that age to not want to wear clothes when its hot. My younger sister was the same way.

The movie in itself is not disturbing, but I do agree that anyone that would be classified as a pedophile or a sex offender should not watch it.

A man can change his stars

reply

[–] timothycward 15 years ago

I remember some years ago seeing a biography documentary on television of Hayley Mills. It included a picture of her wearing only a bikini bottom about 10 years old or so. I was not shocked the picture was taken particularly since it was almost 50 years ago and there was nothing sexual about it. I was surprised that they showed it unedited on American tv. She was just out playing and obviously her parents did not think it was necessary for their young children to wear very muchclothing and i do not see anything wrong with that.

reply

[–] kellycastlebridge 15 years ago

Oh my god....grow up! The girl is only topless. This is non-genital nudity and she doesn't even have breasts yet! Plus, the nudity is completely non-sexual.

As for the legality of the situation, actually "child porn" laws only apply to full genitalia being shown in a sexual context. Nudist videos can legally be sold in both Canada and the USA that show full nudity of minors, since it is in a non-sexual context. The Supreme Courts in both the USA and Canada have ruled that simple nudity does NOT constitute pornography.

Furthermore, even sexualized nudity or sexual content involving minors IS LEGAL, provided that the work has bonafide "artistic merit or a medical, scientific, or educational purpose". This ruling was handed down by the Supreme Court in the USA. ALL "child porn" charges must be thrown out if the work, as a whole, has any of these merits.Since Return to the Blue Lagoon has legetimate artistic merit, any charges of "child porn" would be thrown out or quashed by any higher court. They could have had the girl completely nude and crawling around on the beach, with her butt and pussy pointed at the camera, and no "child porn" charges would have held up. In fact, the controversy would have generated millions in free publicity.

At Play in The Fields of the Lord shows a young boy completely nude with his penis fully visible for an extended time. No charges of "child porn" were even filed, since they would never hold up and the studio has lots of money to hire good legal help. The film 1900 showed a boy completely naked an touching his ERECT penis. It was released by a major studio and shown in theaters. The movie Pretty Baby shows a 12 year old Brooke Shields fully naked several times, including her hairless vagina. It was non-sexual nudity, so of course there were no "child porn" charges laid. There are numerous examples in cinema...

reply

[–] blocherd 14 years ago

A few other examples to add:

The Mission
Love is a Splendor of Many Things
Mixed Company
One Good Cop
Innocents (French film)

reply

[–] v_entura 15 years ago

GOD! Stop with this subject!| she's 8, EIGHT YEARS! She doesn't even have breasts yet, she as a flat chest like boys! why should they cover her? if you go to the beach you won't see girls much 8 little girls with their FLAT CHEST covered

I didn't eat for three days so I could be lovely.

reply

[–] robbieouzts 14 years ago

I would like to make several points about young Lili being topless first off as the mother is likely in her early 20's or 30's and the kids were both infants so it is likely the only clothes for those ages were in that trunk so probably most of clothes didn't fit either of the kids when they were older. Also in addition to the heat on the island Richard's parent rarely made him wear anything so probably when they were both still young he casually stripped most if not all the way and she probably thought it looked more comfortable so she decided to do the same thing. It has also been pointed out on many posts that children are naturally immodest and that many children walk around half or fully naked around family, at some beaches, or in some cases any place they are allowed to. America probably has the dirtiest minds when it comes to children being less than fully clothed and probably most other countries have a more relaxed view on sex and nudity in general and likely have fewer sex crimes as a result.

reply