Thunderbird 6 - Reception

Reception

A metaphor for Thunderbirds's decline may be found in the fact that in the very first episode, we see a supersonic, atomic aircraft hurtling along a runway, and in the final outing for International Rescue, we watch a biplane chugging along a motorway.

Underperforming at the box office on its general release, Thunderbird 6 went on to become a commercial failure and spoilt chances for the production of a potential third Thunderbirds film. In his review published in the Daily Mail, critic Barry Norman described the sequel to Thunderbirds Are Go as child-orientated but still a showcase of "technical excellence". In what he termed a "class-conscious" side to the film, Norman also discussed the characterisation of Parker, a manservant, as a butt of jokes, such as being the one unfortunate character to find himself stuck upside-down in a tree as the Tiger Moth crash-lands.

La Rivière theorises that the commercial failure of the film is attributable to the facts that ITC financier Lew Grade had cancelled Thunderbirds as a television series in 1966, and that, by July 1968, 18 months had passed since the screening of the final episode ("Give or Take a Million"), resulting in a loss of public interest in the franchise. He praises Thunderbird 6 for its visual work, and holds the model Tiger Moth effects in particularly high regard, writing that it represents "some of the best effects work Century 21 would ever create. It is a testament to their skill and ingenuity that, in the motorway sequence, the model shots are indistinguishable from the original." However, he questions whether the sparseness of the action sequences is a disappointment to child viewers, suggesting that the film "feels like an extended puppet version of holiday magazine programme Wish You Were Here...?" Adding to the "unfamiliar air" of the film are the characters, who La Rivière argues sound more mature than before in a development which he partly attributes to the new casting of Gary Files and Keith Alexander. He also asserts that the film intentionally avoids iconic elements from the original Thunderbirds episodes, such as the Thunderbird launch sequences and the "Thunderbirds March" theme music.

La Rivière argues that the use of the Tiger Moth as the star vehicle, and the pun on the Esso promotional banner of "Put a Tiger in Your Tank", are more suited to an adult audience. Meanwhile, children "had spent the entire 90 minutes eagerly waiting for the most fantastic piece of hardware to arrive. They got an old plane." Thunderbirds historian John Marriott voices similar criticism of the Tiger Moth, writing that "the big screen was an unsuitable place for the gentle irony of steam-age technology scoring triumphantly over an array of fantasy machines." Science-fiction author John Peel is dismissive of the film in general and compares it pessimistically to the "well-made fun" of Thunderbirds Are Go. He summarises it as a "big mistake" and "a feeble last fling for a brilliant series", with a long and illogical plot, poor jokes and little action during the final rescue sequences. Responding to claims that the tone of Thunderbird 6 differs significantly from that of its predecessor, Gerry Anderson maintains that the time that had elapsed since the airing of the final television episode meant that "we were much more aware with the second one that it wasn't just a question of making a longer episode, but it was, indeed, to make something special for the cinema."

The second Thunderbirds movie is not that different from the original 1966 offering — bald bad guy The Hood's up to no good, lots of stuff gets blown up, the Tracy brothers scramble to save the world and, yet again, we don't get to see anywhere near enough of the very cool Thunderbird 2.

A BBC Online review suggests that the sequel to Thunderbirds Are Go is "a weak and perhaps too padded adventure" which is an underwhelming experience as a feature-length film. Despite summarising it as having more "the extended feel of a special TV episode", and describing the plot as substandard in comparison to the original episodes, Thunderbird 6 is awarded a rating of three out of five stars. In contrast, Jim Schembri of Australian newspaper The Age asserts that the plotting is strong (and superior to that of Thunderbirds Are Go), and that the film also boasts "a snappier pace, with an action climax leaps ahead of anything in the latest Bond epic." Writing in the same newspaper, Philippa Hawker notes an increase in humour, stating of Thunderbird 6 that it is "more self-consciously light-hearted but it's also more suspenseful." The Film4 website offers a three-star rating to match BBC Online, praising the production team's decision to introduce more naturally proportioned puppets and comparing Thunderbird 6 favourably to Jonathan Frakes's 2004 adaptation, which is considered a "live-action bomb". Described as "great fun" and "entertaining if antiquated", the film is also referred to as "a slice of kid-friendly cinema made for a far more innocent age."