2004 Film- Story Rumours

[ray gower]

Your titbits of rumour over the new Frakes lead Thunderbirds film will always be gratefully disected here!

Note for the squeamish.
There will almost certainly be spoilers included in this section

[ray gower]

So far it is known that the story will revolve around a young Alan Tracy (aged 12 years)
from http://www.ascifi.com/forums/showthr...1&pagenumber=2 posted by Dave.

"The story revolves around a young Alan Tracy, his friend Fermat (the son of Brains - I don't really know how he came about, Brains doesn't have a wife or girlfriend in the script) and the young Tintin.

"The kids are left stranded on the island when Jeff and the older boys Scott, Virgil and Gordon (main characters in the TV show, who seem to have about 15 minutes screentime in the whole movie!) fly up into space in Thunderbird 3 in a panic after an explosion on TB5, (leaving the island somewhat stupidly deserted), and are then are stranded, floating about on the station in outer space for pretty much the whole movie...

"Of course, it's all a trap by a ridiculously camp bad guy - 'super criminal' Aristotle Spode and his stupid henchmen who wants to steal the Thunderbirds machines to commit super crimes."

Other alleged details include some snatches of dialogue which read as if they've been made up on the spot so there's every possibility that the posted 'review' is nothing more than a hoax. But you never can tell...

A lot of this seems to be confirmed by a report today on Fanderson

Unfortunately, recent revelations about the plot and focus of the film (generally dispensing with the format elements that made the television series so popular in favour of much more juvenile characters in an attempt to follow in the footsteps of the Spy Kids and Harry Potter films) have been generally greeted with derision by both hardcore fans and ordinary members of the public alike. This reaction has not been encouraged by reports from studio insiders that the project has turkey written all over it before a frame of film has even been shot, placing it firmly in the same camp of ill-advised TV-series-to-movie reworkings as The Avengers (1998), The Saint (1997), Lost In Space (1997) and Holiday On The Buses (1973). Clearly Frakes and the producers have an uphill battle on their hands to persuade movie-goers that such speculation is unfounded.

Fanderson also have an excerpt from the alledged script http://www.fanderson.org.uk/moviescript.html . Please don't grind your teeth too hard!

[ray gower]

If the general goal of films from TV series is to ensure that anything that made the original series good must be left out, then from the rumours so far available Thunderbirds is going to reach new hieghts of perfection.
Where as the much maligned New Battlestar Galactica has only been re-imaged, with everybody and thing restyled, they do appear to have left the basic idea alone.
Here, alas, they appear to have not only thrown out the characters, but any trace of the original concept of TBirds and replaced it with something akin to Home Alone!

Come on chaps, Thunderbirds means daring do adventure, rescuing people from certain death. It doesn't need flour bombs at the OK Corral to make it exciting. Make it Towering Inferno or When Krakatoa Blew Up, not something Rosie and Jim would throw out for being silly.

I wonder who they are really aiming this turkey at and if it is set parson's nose outwards for maximum destructive effect?
Certainly not any child I know or their parents.

They also appear to have thrown out anything approaching 'canon'.
According to the Carlton Thunderbirds Online site (and they should know as they own TBirds):-
There is only five years seperating the five brothers, so if we accept that Alan Tracy is only 12, then Scott is 17 and hasn't had his famous Air Force career yet and Gordon Tracy is at best 13. Surely Social Services would be interested in why his 14 year old brother, John, is left alone aboard a space station for 3 month periods?

If it comes to that, International Rescue as an organisation did not exist then, because Jeff Tracy hasn't secured his millions yet either!

[Dave]

Originally posted by ray gower
There is only five years seperating the five brothers, so if we accept that Alan Tracy is only 12, then Scott is 17 and hasn't had his famous Air Force career yet and Gordon Tracy is at best 13. Surely Social Services would be interested in why his 14 year old brother, John, is left alone aboard a space station for 3 month periods?

LOL

There is some disagreement over the birth dates, but not about the differences between them.

I personally don't think this is ever going to get made.

[Dave]

I could be wrong: this is from Ain't it cool news.

from AICN: Cool News 20/03/03
Hey Harry [Knowles],

I was sat on a train from London to Birmingham today opposite from a couple of suits from one of the London studios, and couldn't help but overhear some of their conversation.

They were discussing the new Thunderbirds movie ("directed by the guy who was number 2 in Star Trek") [Number One ie. William Riker aka Jonathan Frakes] and about the locations that were being booked and scouted at the moment.

Apparently, there will be car chases and a helicopter chase filmed by the South Bank of London, possibly involving Grand Prix cars (for which they are attempting to get professional drivers to do cameos). This is to be done to scale as a sort of go-cart race - I don't know whether this is to be a nod to the origins of the series or not.

Also, Lady Penelope's pink car is being redesigned for the film by Ford as a concept car.

Hope you can use some of that.

Ta ta.

Simon

The pink Rolls Royce re-imaged as a Ford!

That's worse than changing the lead roles in Battlestar Galactica into female parts.

[ray gower]

This gets worse!

Alan was the racing car driver as I recall. At 13 what has he got to do with a Grand Prix?

Comes to that, if it is based on Tracy Island, what has a GP got to do with it?

Based on the picture found of the proposed Ford Fab, we are looking inflatable beach ball field of creative thinking. So I suspect TB5 will look like a Star Wars Death Star.

[Dave]

from scifi wire

Bill Paxton, who will portray patriarch Jeff Tracy in the live-action adaptation of Thunderbirds, told SCI FI Wire that the film will be more of an action movie than an homage to the 1960s marionette series. "They've retooled it as a live-action action-adventure, with some comedy for the Harry Potter crowd," Paxton said in an interview. "Most of the story revolves around the youngest son of my character. He wants to be a Thunderbird."

Paxton said that he begins filming in one month and has already adopted some of Tracy's characteristics. "I'm already starting to evolve into him," he said. "The haircut's getting shorter. I don't know if I'm up for the big eyebrows."

Paxton added that his only worry is that critics will make puns comparing his acting to the marionette animation of the original series. "I think they're going to say they haven't seen a performance this wooden since the original," he joked. Thunderbirds also stars Ben Kingsley as the Hood and Anthony Edwards as Brains. Jonathan Frakes directs, with an anticipated July 2004 release.

I've lost all interest in this now. I will probably still go and see it, because I think my son might like it.

Actually, he probably has better taste!

But it won't be a homage to Thunderbirds, it will be a travesty!

[ray gower]

I know I am old and senile and things. But I always classed T/Birds as an action/adventure?
Okay I can see them not wanting to make it too great a homage- they would all be walking funny. But not to respect something that works well and replace it with something to cheer the HP crowd is beyond the pale.
I thoroughly enjoy the Harry Potter films for what they are, cracking adventures. But T/Birds is not Harry Potter with machinery.

Perhaps there may be some good news on the horizon. Although Gerry Anderson does not have a hand in the physical production. It appears that Frakes is at least talking to him. Perhaps he can be guided in the right direction?
Fanderson 5 April

Although Thunderbirds creator Gerry Anderson has previously had no involvement in the feature film project, as he reveals in the latest issue of FAB magazine, Anderson has recently had a number of meetings at Pinewood with the film's director Jonathan Frakes and the two have become firm friends. Anderson told FAB magazine, "I heard some of his ideas and, of course, it will be a different picture from the series we made in 1965 because, like any major movie that is made, when you do a sequel, you almost always have a different director with new ideas and that's what's happening here. But I'm getting the feeling that it's going to be a very, very nice picture.

"Because of my friendship with Jonathan Frakes and discussions with Universal, I'm becoming more and more involved with the picture, although I have to make it clear that it is Jonathan Frakes's picture and I wouldn't dream of poking my nose in or making suggestions that might throw him. But certainly if he wants to talk about anything, I will help him out if I can. It's a very nice situtation to be in, and I'm certainly looking forward to seeing the finished picture. I am currently in discussion with Universal about what my role on the movie will actually be, but everything seems very positive at the moment."

The original Thunderbirds Supermarionation series was scheduled to begin a new British network screening run on BBC2 at 1.25pm on Saturday, April 5th, with the series' opening episode Trapped In The Sky. However, the programme was cancelled in favour of further coverage of the war in Iraq.

Perhaps if the Beeb is going to repeat the series Frakes and co. could watch it and play spot the difference?

[ray gower]

More from Fanderson

The film's marketing department recently invited a number of members of the press and prospective merchandise licensees to visit the sets and meet the members of the cast during filming at Pinewood Studios. Many of these visitors appear to have been impressed by the scale of the production and the quality of the sets and full-size vehicles constructed for the film. They also report that the film's versions of Thunderbirds 1, 2 and 3 remain relatively faithful to their original television appearance while Thunderbirds 4 and 5 are almost completely different.

So Dave gets his wish. TB1 to 3 are more or less like they ought to be. Whilst TB4 and 5 are now totally different!
And we can get the junk afterwards to prove it all

At the recent 'An Evening with Gerry Anderson' event at The Barbican Centre in London, Gerry Anderson updated fans on his involvement with the film. Anderson confirmed that the film's producers had offered him "a fantastic amount of money" to endorse the project by being photographed on the set and speaking positively about the movie in interviews. However, on sight of the vehicle created to be the film's version of Lady Penelope's FAB 1, he felt that he was unable to accept the producers' offer as this would compromise his integrity.

So it looks as if Gerry is trying to wash his hands of it too!

[Dave]

How can you make a 'Thunderbirds' film without Gerry Anderson as an executive producer anyway?

It's like making 'Dr Who' without a 'Tardis' or the radiophonic workshop signature tune..... or more controversially 'Battlestar Galactica' without Starbuck..... or maybe even 'Star Trek' without Gene Rodenberry

Just a thought!

[ray gower]

I think it all comes down to what are the recogniseable and lasting 'signatures' of and for the show.

Doctor Who without the TARDIS would not be Doctor Who, period. It is the fundamental signature of the whole show. It would be like taking the crew of Starship Enterprise and putting them on the number 66 bus 'To Boldly Go To See Who Lives At The Next Bus Stop', not even the B3's would try that! (though it almost did with some episodes of TNG)
The Doctor Who theme tune is another signature, though they may get away with updating it over the years.

BG without Starbuck? Well they haven't physically removed him, he's merely changed sex. A physically obvious change, but by no means disastrous to BG. How about if Galactica was deleted, or the Cylons were replaced by rampaging Flower Power Hippies?

What are the signatures for Thunderbirds?
Marionettes- We are on a bit of a loser here for a film! (subject to seeing the end result)?
The Machines- Comfortable shapes, tremendous inventive flare and solid engineering concepts.?
NO kids!
But IMHO is that the biggest feature, was the style of story itself. They are ripping 'daring do' adult adventure stories told for kids of all ages, without the condescension that everything else uses that insults the intelligence of six year olds. As a feature, it has to be said that they have almost always been present in Gerry Anderson productions ever since Fireball. So perhaps he is an indelible signature for TB?
If they can find somebody who can present the story that well, excellent.
TB, however, faces the big cut off. It has a new crew, with no experience of the original show and professes no understanding of it either

"It was this wacky kids show back in the sixties"

As for Roddenberry!
Arguably one could point to Enterprise and say, "Look at what has happened to it without him? Even when they go back to fundamentals they get it wrong!"
I'm not entirely of that state of mind... yet
Star Trek is about exploration and space. It had the fortune to be able to ease Roddenberry out of its producers rosters. Consequently not everything about the original shows concept has been lost (yet). But the new shows are not as good as they once were.

[Dave]

Originally posted by ray gower
TB, however, faces the big cut off. It has a new crew, with no experience of the original show and professes no understanding of it either.

I know nothing about how TV and Film deals work, but if I was someone with enough spare cash to make a little 'Thunderbirds' film, I would have gone first to Gerry Anderson and asked his advice on staff and on plotlines, or at least for one of those 'Character Bibles' that TV series use, and then offered him a position of some kind.

I may be wrong, but it seems like they bought the title, made a film, then after a few complaints, tried to buy Gerry Anderson as well. If it flops then it deserves to. But I'll reserve my judgement until I see the final product.

There is more to a faithful adaptation than recognisable signatures too. The americanised Dr Who movie had all of the necessary 'whistles and bells' in it, but somehow it wasn't quite right. There was something wrong. Some atmosphere was missing. A je ne sais quoi.

You can only have that when people understand the product. That is something that Star Trek has (arguably) still got right.

The new Red Dwarf film ought to be faithful because it will be British made, by a team that understands the programme. They says that as the British-style jokes still get laughs in the US, Japan and Australia, there is no need to alter the format for the film. Unfortunately, that means that you also suffer a lack of funding and an interminable wait for it to be made.

[Dave]

This is more that leads me to agree that Americans think they do, but quite obviously still don't understand 'Thunderbirds':

from SCIFI WIRE
The big-screen version of the '60s British TV series is much more than a live-action makeover. "I think this is ultimately going to become this kind of great, quintessential British import to the world," Paxton said at a press conference during a break in filming at Pinewood Studios near London. "It's going to celebrate the style, the charm, of England in the '60s - but it's not your parents' Thunderbirds."

Although updated for today's audiences, the film still carries a 1960s influence, Paxton said. "I think it would be a complete fiasco if you try to go out for an Austin Powers kind of thing," he said. "It's more than that. When I grew up in the '60s, it was about vocation. It wasn't about making money. It was about doing things for other people, finding something you wanted to do. There's a message of integrity and ethics all through this thing. It celebrates technology as benefiting mankind, using these machines to try to actually help people, instead of decimating them. I feel that's what's going to make it great: It goes beyond this campy '60s puppet show." The Working Title film, directed by Jonathan Frakes, is slated for a summer 2004 release.

[ray gower]

Had to read that several times to make sense of it. And I still get visions of the fiasco that was Avengers floating in my mind.

Why can't it be the parents Thunderbirds. My grandkids love it and are still sitting through them all on video?

I think an American definition of 'Camp' might be helpful? Because to me 'Camp' is something verging on the silly and played for the gags.
The original Avengers series was mildly Camp, (but nowhere near the film, which was plain ridiculous!) and showed Britain at its eccentric best. Thunderbirds was anything but with its strong stories.
'Camp' in the US film industry seems to mean anything from the 60's, so Mission Impossible was Camp (which it wasn't), as was Lost in Space (which it really was). In 40 years X-Files will be described as Camp.

Think the second half made more sense though

[Dave]

from SciFi Wire
Jonathan Frakes, the former Star Trek helmer who is now directing a live-action Thunderbirds movie, told the Empire Online Web site that the film will try to please both diehard fans and newcomers to the franchise. "It is part of the blessing and part of the curse," Frakes told the site about adapting the beloved 1960s marionette TV series. "It's the same thing with Star Trek: There is an audience of [fans] who are passionate about the show who would be offended if it was different from the original, and yet there's a huge audience of people who know nothing about Thunderbirds."

But Frakes promised that the film will have some familiar elements. "You have the palm trees folding down, and Thunderbird 2 taking off, and the swimming pool sliding back, so all the good bits are in," he said. He added: "It's big ships and loud music. It's going to be a big movie. It's a prequel. The kids are about 10 years younger than when the show takes place [as] shown in the '60s. So our little heroes are 12, 13, 14 years old."

Frakes, who played Cmdr. Ryker [sic] in Star Trek: The Next Generation, also said that he'll appear in Thunderbirds in a cameo role. "If you watch closely, you might [see me]," he said. "That's all I can tell you."

Whoever wrote that never watched 'The Next Generation' then!

BBC Breakfast TV showed a 2-3 minute unfinished cgi segment of T3 taking off through the swimming pool last week.

What I found unbelievable was that it apparently took six months to produce that 2-3 minutes. With a model it was probably done in a day or two. Is it really worth it?

BTW T3 now has windows!