Too Long; Didn’t Read: Andrew Clements and I are making a very, very long video about the 2004 Thunderbirds movie, and we released the trailer today which you should definitely watch.
Too Long; Okay I Guess I’ll Read It Anyway:
Of course the most successful blog post on the Security Hazard site is the only one I didn’t write. I’m not bitter about it. Honest.
Yes, Andrew Clements’ thorough review of the live-action 2004 Thunderbirds movie is the most read article on my blog. When I asked Andrew to contribute to Security Hazard in 2017, I knew he had a wealth of knowledge on the movie that I couldn’t possibly match.
Andrew’s perspective on the Jonathan Frakes-directed film has always been refreshing to me. For the last 20 years, consensus in the Anderson fan community has been pretty much dominated by the opinion that the 2004 movie doesn’t cut the mustard. Comments usually range from negative to pure, visceral hatred. I have also been guilty in the past of getting swept up in this movement without really pausing to consider why that might be. However, Andrew’s approach to analysing the strengths and weaknesses of the movie has been founded on re-watching the film and intensely researching its production, which allows him to understand of the craftsmanship that goes into any film, and the motivations of those craftsman when they make a choice that is later screened in thousands of cinemas across the world.
With this guiding principle, Andrew seemingly achieved the impossible with his review of the movie back in 2017 – he got some people on the internet to change their minds. Yes. I was blown away by the number of fair and measured comments that we received from critics who appreciated the positive points raised in Andrew’s analysis, and admitted that maybe their prior views on the production had been ill-informed or one-sided.
Now, that isn’t to say that Andrew’s article was 100% agreeable to everyone. And indeed he will also admit that the movie isn’t perfect. At the end of the day, the movie’s budget was $57 million, and it only made back $28.3 million at the box office. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that something didn’t go entirely right here. He simply offered a point of view that suggested, maybe, just maybe, Jonathan Frakes didn’t set out to make a movie that destroyed the legacy of Thunderbirds, as so many internet commenters would have you believe. The real situation was, unsurprisngly, much more complicated.
I have found that there’s been a generational shift in the discourse related to the Thunderbirds movie in the last 20 years since its release. In general, many diehard fans of the original series, who were already adults in 2004, rejected the piece outright at the time and have rarely revisited it. They were vocal in their disgust and that opinion really dominated. The same can be said of the reaction from the critics and the general public. It wasn’t an invalid opinion by any means, but consider that it perhaps didn’t wholly represent the diverse audience, or indeed the audience that the film was targeted at in the first place – specifically, children (as a nine-year-old at the time, I would place myself in that category.)
Now, said children had the likes of Shrek 2 ($150m budget – 3x Thunderbirds) or Spider-Man 2 ($200m budget – 4x Thunderbirds) to keep them occupied at the cinema around the same time. So already the competition is pretty much impossible to beat. But the children who even managed to see the much lower-profile Thunderbirds movie also had to contend with the fact that, well, they were children, and by-and-large, the children of 2004 weren’t invited to publish reviews in the press, so we never really got to hear what they thought of it at the time. The Millenials and Gen-Z crowd that the movie was primarily aimed at wouldn’t get their say until years later when nostalgia and easy access to the movie on streaming services became a factor for them.
I’m not claiming that there has been a day-and-night shift in the public opinion of the 2004 Thunderbirds movie, but the passage of time has allowed the true audiences of the time to speak in a more balanced way about their experiences with the film. I’ve noticed that where Anderson-fan discourse was once entirely in the camp of despising the film, there is now an even spread of those who dislike it, those who love it, and many in the middle who admire certain aspects of it and criticise others.
Having observed this more balanced spectrum of voices coming to the surface, Andrew Clements approached me a few months ago (picture the dark alleyway from the opening of Captain Scarlet) and asked if we at Security Hazard could do something to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the Thunderbirds movie. Andrew not only wanted to share new insights he’d gained in the eight years since writing his review, but I also felt it was an ideal opporunity to explore the more diverse views held by other fans, and perhaps even the people who made the movie. With a goal in mind, Andrew and I began to develop an outline for a video retrospective covering numerous aspects of the movie. We wanted to educate and entertain viewers looking to learn more about Thunderbirds‘ development, production, and release – whether they loved the film or loathed it.
It’s fair to say that work on this project has surpassed our wildest expectations. So many of our collaborators were enthused by the possibility of sharing their thoughts about the movie – more than we had anticipated. Regular Security Hazard readers will know that I like to indulge. I’d be an editor’s nightmare if I dared to let one anywhere near my writing. The format of this blog, and the eager readership it attracts, allows me to publish without considering boring things like a sensible word limit. Side note: there’s this fancy thing called search engine optimization which I’m repeatedly assured by marketers is quite important, and apparently it’s the opposite of what I’m doing right now. Sure, a snappy review full of Google-friendly keywords might be more palatable and widely popular, but there are other outlets who want to compete for that attention. I see it as Security Hazard’s job to provide information, and humour where possible, while trusting the reader to decide whether or not I’ve waffled on too much for their tastes. Andrew fully embraced this spirit in 2017 when his review of Thunderbirds (2004) ran to over 30,000 words. So, we both agreed that there would be no limit to how much stuff we would include in this new 20th Anniversary project about the movie. At the time of writing this article, I’m not actually sure how long the finished video will be, but you’re probably going to want to carve out an afternoon for it, or schedule multiple sessions to take it all in. Don’t worry, we’ll clearly mark the chapter points like a dependable DVD release.
The point, after that typically on-brand length of wordage, is that today I am delighted to share a quick teaser for what we are calling: Thunderbirds: The Movie | A 20th Anniversary Retrospective
For this bumper-length YouTube video, we are incredibly lucky to have already recorded interviews with Dominic Colenso who played Virgil Tracy, and John Beard, the movie’s production designer.




Andrew and I will also be chatting to our friends and regular collaborators about their opinions on the movie. And trust me, just because they’re our friends does not mean we think exactly alike. Conversations will range from chatting to Chris Thompson about the vehicle redesigns, to Willow Lambden-Smith and Olivia M. Grant diving into the movie’s characters, to Ben Page joining us to consider the movie’s fascinating development process, and many more.
There will also be a special deep-dive into Andrew’s expansive collection of props, costumes, and pieces of set from the movie.

Oh, and we’re still in the process of arranging more chats and features, so that may not even be all. It’s also why I can’t dish out an exact release date or running time yet. Sorry. We’re aiming for late summer, so it won’t be far off, and if we don’t get it done by the end of 2024 we’ll be too late for the 20th anniversary! So I guess “some time between August and December but more likely August” is the best I can give you right now. I know, I’m a cheeky so-and-so. Fortunately, you can stay up to date by following Security Hazard on Facebook or X (formerly Twitter) and I promise to let you know a release date as soon as we stop trying to sneak extra goodies into the running order.
In the meantime, get in touch and share your thoughts on the Thunderbirds movie. If you haven’t seen it for years, now is a good time to try it again! We’re inviting all opinions from all walks of life and the more informed they are the better. Of course, if you’re resilient to watching the movie again, we want to hear about that too.
Please share the trailer for this project with your friends! Security Hazard is a scrappy little blog, powered by my unique brand of blind cheeriness and not a lot else. The wider we spread the word about his project, the greater potential there is for us to interview more people involved with the movie. Andrew and I have called in many, many favours to boost the participation of this project and we couldn’t be more thrilled with how many people are already involved. If you or someone you know has a connection with the 2004 Thunderbirds movie and would be interested in talking to us, don’t hestitate to get in touch via our contact form or by commenting below. To quote Jeff Tracy, “the world needs Thunderbirds, and the Thunderbirds need you!”

You and Andrew look to be cooking up something F.A.B. for fans for the 2004 movie! I was about eight years old when it came out, and it’s still one of my favorite movie theater memories. Being an American fan of the original series (and consequently alienated from all of my peers), seeing Thunderbirds up on the big screen—in a form that was undeniably different, but still absolutely recognizable—was a joyous experience, and I list it among my favorite movies to this day. It’s not high cinema, but it’s a dang fun time, and the fact there are people out there who appreciate it enough to put so much work into a retrospective of this magnitude for its 20th anniversary warms my heart.
LikeLike
With the video coming soon. I have something to say of the vehicles that have been built in the movie.
VEHICLES
FAB 1 – Taken care of in FAB 1 More than a car featurette.
TB4 – I read in the making of the movie that the sub is going to be built for real but instead only the 1/3 scale and the cockpit have been built. I think that if the TB4 real size had been built, someone went through the door of the airlock and it’s a tight squeeze getting in there. In the airlock, it’s a bit crammed and then you lie on your stomach at the controls.
Firefly – I noticed that the black rubber on the wheels falls off in the shed and Birmingham motor show. When the filming of Fermat at the controls is finished. The Hidden Driver drives the machine.
Thunderizer – Hidden at the back where Alan sits, The cannon turns 360 degrees.
Mole – This is the biggest machine built. I think it’s difficult to move this machine without wheels as it’s the size of the steam train. I saw 2 photos of the Mole on the lorry, (probably going to the motor show) When the Mole got moved to the Bank of London set, it needed to have a dirty look like it came out of the ground, when the Bank of London filming has been completed, The Mole had a washdown. I saw some scene of the Mole drill moving, that was done having the drill taken off to let the CGI take over, shown in Creating the Action.
COCKPITS AND INTERIORS
TB1 – Nose Cone is the only part built.
TB2 – Cockpit and back legs built.
TB3 – Cockpit built
TB5 – Interior built
Hood’s Submarine – Interior built
Monorail – Interior built
There are some scenes that never made it in the movie which is Motorbike Race and Alan, Tintin and Fermat look up in the rain. Shown in Trailers.
LikeLike
Turns out, that was wrong (I saw some scene of the Mole drill moving, that was done having the drill taken off to let the CGI take over, shown in Creating the Action.) The drill was on and CGI drill was made, next, they edit the real drill out, shaded and lightened the CGI drill.
LikeLike