Thunderbirds Are GO

Thunderbirds Are GO

Zero-X, a manned exploration mission crashes during lift-off on its maiden flight. Two years later an investigative committee finally concludes sabotage, and decides to call on the services of International Rescue to oversee security at the impending second launch. The second Zero-X successfully reaches its destination, but encounters unexpected hazards, ultimately leading to another call for assistance on its return to Earth. International Rescue respond, and once again Thunderbirds are GO!

Zero-X, a manned exploration mission crashes during lift-off on its maiden flight. Two years later an investigative committee finally concludes sabotage, and decides to call on the services... . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki


Thunderbirds Are GO torrent reviews

Luise Grace K (mx) wrote: Fantastic performance by Jessica Chastain! Love the suspence throughout the story.

Tanya W (us) wrote: The only thing good about this was Katt Williams.

Kym c my community profile R (de) wrote: not sure if its an actual rob zombie film but at least one of the guys usually in his movies plays the mastr vamp in this BORING, maybe somewhat confusing movie. They Toss back & forth between scenes from 'yesterday' & today etc. The fangs on a few of them.. look like chewed up gum formed to look like fangs. The ONLY amusement I had in watching it was for 'Wyatt' (wes Ramsey) from Charmed. A surprise to see. (& yet more proof to the folklore.. you play in the craft & you earn your fangs!) Although he's not in it enough. I think he would have made a better master vamp than that Rob Zombie movie loser. (not believable, although Wes has some English accent in it (which I think wasn't all that good, but then again it could have just been a 'basic' type,) D

Bryan W (mx) wrote: W: 1. Amazingly well done. Great writing, directing, acting. Goldblum, yes. Not one of those films I want to watch repeatedly however.

Linda E (fr) wrote: A very heartfelt movie with true, honest and skillful performances from the cast. I will buy the DVD. It will be one that I watch many times over.

Alexander C (fr) wrote: Imaginative, yet slow to get going, was captivated by the effects and creatures. A 15-year-old girl named Helena falls into a dream world where two queens are fighting in a bizarre land of fantastical creatures and masked inhabitants. Helena is charged with retrieving the MirrorMask to revive the sickly White Queen.

Stefanie L (gb) wrote: jskskkskZsjnnqnnsnnkkakmsmakakall12qq1 fan jsjsmsmamajmmznhdjdjdj HB gm hdn MA m JM JM dhejej

Jens T (au) wrote: Mike Van Diem's Character delivers exactly what the title says: Character or Characters in plural, because this picture has full of interesting characters. We also watch one of the most tensive father and son relationship since Darth Vader and Luke Skywalker. The story begins with Jakob Williem Katadreuffe who's is arrested, charged with murder of the bailiff Dreverhaven, whom he have hated all his life. Katadreuffe starts by telling the police cheifs his life story about him being raised only by his mother. He had to live with being a bastard child, which is no easy. He one day founds out that his father is Dreverhaven, the man that everybody hates. Katadreuffe tries to get his thoughts elsewhere by reading books and later apply for a career as a banker, but he founds out that even Dreverhaven is the cheif of it all. As I said, the characters are the most interesting theme in this picture. The one and only Jan Decleir (as we first see him) as the evil bailiff: Dreverhaven. Decleir steals the whole movie, with his inhuman behavior, he's a tall and wide and doesn't talk much. He's more machine than man, just like Darth Vader. But also like Vader, he shows his human sides, but it's mainly to late for him. He could been an oscar contender. Other thing in this movie besides Decleir, is the love between Katadreuffe and a female co-worker named Ms. Te George. Their love is never expressed, because Katadreuffe do not get any of her signals. We as an audience, always get the signals, His always saying the wrong thing at the wrong time. This is the most sad part of the film.

Richard M (gb) wrote: The second movie, and not as good as the first, but still a great comedy.

Karsh D (de) wrote: Poor Aussie horror film. A disused military bunker has been used for scientific experiments which has its drawbacks

Katya E (us) wrote: This movie didn't make a lot of sense to me: I seldom understood the characters' motivations. I don't know if this is because they were based on '50s mores that I'm unfamiliar with, or if the characters were supposed to be a little bit nuts, or both. Either way it was just confusing, and the dresses weren't as exciting as I was hoping they would be.

Trine L (us) wrote: English is not my first language, and I have always found Shakespeare difficult, ancient and inaccessible. That has changed for me with David Tennant's portrayal of Hamlet. The old lines make sense to me in this interpretation, all the different plot lines come together and the story becomes relevant and feels very contemporary. Patrick Stewart as Claudius is extremely scary and gives a feeling of exceeding evil and lust for power. Peter De Jersey is simply heart warming as Hamlets friend Horatio, and all the exchanges by these two marvelous actors are spectacular. In general, the cast is very good, and even characters such as Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, who are usually somewhere between dull and annoying, are engaging, it is even possible to sympathize with them, when Hamlet puts them through the wringer. I am less impressed with Ophelia, when she acts opposite Hamlet, however the scenes of madness are very strong.The Hamlet we meet in this production is very clearly defined, and moves delicately and beautifully in and out of the realms of mourning, sanity, madness and feigned madness, and does it with a dramatic and comedic grace rarely seen anywhere. I had not seen David Tennant in anything before, but I was completely blown away by his performance and have been a slave of his genious ever since. For me, his is a seminal Hamlet.

Preston L (nl) wrote: This version of Hamlet is a filmed version of the 2008 cast of the Royal Shakespeare Company production. It stars David Tennant as Hamlet and Sir Patrick Stewart as both Claudius and the ghost of King Hamlet. The plot, for those of you who at this point have somehow missed it is this. Hamlet's father Hamlet, King of Denmark, is found dead. Hamlet returns from school in Wittenberg for Hamlet's funeral and discovers that Hamlet's Wife has remarried Hamlet's brother Claudius making him Hamlet's step-father. Hamlet then sees the ghost of Hamlet who tells Hamlet that Hamlet was murdered by Claudius. Hamlet seeks to avenge Hamlet's death by murdering dear old uncle-dad. Did you follow all that?Things I Liked:David Tennant. Now this is a Hamlet I can get behind! Tennant soars as Hamlet playing a quirky and interesting dynamic between Hamlet's "madness" and his more lucid moments, the speeches and soliloquies are thoughtful yet not overdone and he really stands out without trying to be a leading man in a film. David Tennant is spectacular in this version and I can only imagine what seeing him live must have been like.Patrick Stewart. Sir Patrick Stewart is a legend and he reminds us of why here. His portrayal of both Claudius and Hamlet's Ghost are distinct and interesting and each have their own power. They take control of scenes and they harness a lot of moments that really soar sometimes even above Tennant's performance. The work Stewart does is a magnificent array of emotion and expressions, some subtle some broad and all interesting.The Tone. While it has it's darker and it's more depressing moments, this Hamlet plays a lot with the humorous moments. Polonius is a great source of comic relief and Tennant's madness is not overdone and is a bit clownish which really helps to keep you interested as opposed to many grim and troublesome variations of Hamlet. I was so delighted that this one allowed humor in and quite a bit. It made the movie much more enjoyable.Things I Didn't Like:Ophelia. Mariah Gale as Ophelia fell a little short in this one. She wasn't very memorable or interesting and fell by the wayside and when she finally has her tragic fall into madness, it isn't something that grabs at your heartstrings because you find you do not care about her the way you should.The setting. The way the film is set up feels like too many different places. It feels like the world is disjointed from itself and never appears cohesive. It has a very stylistic approach which makes sense with it being adapted from a play. But overall there are moments that seen a little out of place and it can be distracting at times.Overall. Overall this version is my favorite so far. Tennant and Stewart carry a film that I feel captured the tone of the play very well and the script's cuts make it feel as though nothing is missing. There are issues with the star power overshadowing the other characters, most notably Ophelia and the setting seems odd and sometimes distracting. But the story is the true star and the actors bring it out in a wonderful way.

Diego Andrs Q (jp) wrote: Just belive in love...