Thunderbird Are ... Not Very Good

[vin_petrol]

It took me a while to work out what the difference was, and how two things "made for kids" could be so different. Then it struck me: original Thunderbirds was a Techno-fetish show. (Very simplistically) Anderson programs were all about great big chunks of metal flying around, with humans involved to give him an excuse to show this, and to blow things up. This Thunderbirds has kids in it, running away a lot, falling in water a lot, and almost nothing exploding. It's often been likened to "Spy Kids", and that seems accurate. So I think the issue here is that the little Vin loved rockets and things exploding, and still loves rockets and things exploding. This film is about kids running around a lot, and saving the day when the grown-ups can't. So if that's your thing you'll enjoy it. It wasn't my thing when I was 6 and it isn't now. If you want to see Thunderbirds doing rescues it's not for you.
Thinking some more, it occurs to me that modern, big budget film versions of old British series just can't be made now, that would appeal in the same way. Their quirkiness has no place in modern film production, with its focus groups and multiple script-writers.
Every so often I hear there's going to be a film version of The Prisoner, and it fills me with horror. I can see it now, with a Hollywood Happy Ending :-(
Still, this means I can watch old British SF and be far less bothered about creaky sets and dubious special effects, knowing that if it was re-made now it would look much nicer, but the story and script would be utter shite.

Comments

[steer.livejournal.com]

I think there's also the fact that... actually much as it pains me to say it, by modern standards, Thunderbirds is just remarkably crap.

Things are terribly slow... there's some disaster, 10 minutes of discussion, a solution pushed around and implemented, a problem arising, a dramatic moment and a technical bug fix to the issues with the original solution. It's not, in any sense, great television and only looked good coz of quite how pants everything else in the 70s was.

[kneeshooter]

Mainly because for many of us it is our jobs. It's just the disasters are on a smaller scale and we are technology-rich in our everyday lives. Oh, and it's less dramatic, fewer evil masterminds etc.

[steer.livejournal.com]

And nowadays we know that International Rescue were involved in systematic abuse of prisoners, gun running and the international drugs trade -- I mean in the 70s nobody asked "How do they finance that island paradise with tilting palm trees?"

[vin_petrol]

I mean in the 70s nobody asked "How do they finance that island paradise with tilting palm trees?"

But we didn't need to, 'cos we all knew Jeff Tracy was a billionaire ex-astronaut. What more explanation did we need? :-)

[steer.livejournal.com]

You do know that they didn't pay astronauts that much?

[vin_petrol]

Oh yes, I realised that astronauts didn't earn that much. He obviously made his billions somewhere else, somehow. I'm sure it's explained in one of the annuals, somewhere...

[steer.livejournal.com]

I'm sure he has teams of crooked accountants who can explain exactly where his money comes from... and write off space vehicles and tunnelling machines as a legitimate expense.

But you know, a huge tunnel boring device which travels dead fast or a VTOL aircraft (wasn't one of the thunderbirds a high cargo capacity VTOL thing?) would be excellent for, say, smuggling huge quantities of crack.

[vin_petrol]

smuggling huge quantities of crack

Well, there's a variation on usual slash fiction themes!

Hmmm. The Hood lives out in the jungle. I'm sure he could clear fields there and cultivate various plants that could be harvested for drug use. He could then get the Thunderbirds to distribute them for him...

Ah! Stop it! You're polluting my mind with these thoughts! :-)

[vin_petrol]

It's not, in any sense, great television and only looked good coz of quite how pants everything else in the 70s was.

Well, yes, Anderson stuff always looked much nicer than anything else.

What I do think happens in a lot of TV SF is that they try not to emphasise the special effects, as clearly this is the "kiddy" bit of the program. Now, I happen to like mighty starships plying their way between exotic stars.

Given the state of tech now, I'm sure some people must have done little CGI movies of just this. I should hunt them out. A huge star cruiser swooping into land, accompanied by some nice music would be really cool to watch.

[andyguest.livejournal.com]

Much as I hate to admit it the kids were way too kiddy for THunderbirds to be a great film. Still, I did enjoy it, the bits around the kids were great. Lady P was excellent and seeing Parker kick ass rocked. The opening credits wre really good, very stylised animation of the Thunderbirds carrying out assorted rescue missions, probably all from the original series though I wouldn't swear to that. Lots of little jokes and things in the background made me laugh out loud. I can't say as I'd recommend people paying to see the film but I don't regret that I did.

Gender stereotyping is go!

[miss-wonderly.livejournal.com]

Oddly enough, I was thinking along very similar lines when I saw a bit of Old Thunderbirds on TV at the weekend. The whole thing has that weird model-railway feel to it - obsessively detailed but with no human interest. It's a quality I associate only with men, specifically only with Men Who Like Gadgets. I suppose you could call that Techno-Fetish if you wanted to sex it up a bit...
I always found Thunderbirds too excruciatingly slow to watch, but then I have the attention span of a girlie gnat.

[angelic-angie.livejournal.com]

For the love of all that we hold sacred, do not let the yanks near The Prisoner. *horror*