“Twisters” recaptures that feeling of thrills from natural-disaster movies in the waning days of the flickering-projector, catch-it-in-the-dollar-theater era. We get pseudo-science delivered with a straight face, people from different walks of life teaming up in the face of impending doom, and the best of what special effects technology has to offer.
Although the story structure is much the same as 1996’s “Twister” – my favorite movie with Michael Crichton’s name attached except for “Jurassic Park” – this legacy sequel delivers new set pieces, more instances of the most directly terrifying aspect of a tornado (getting swept away into oblivion), and an organic love triangle that moves the chess pieces in different ways.
Swept away by Edgar-Jones again
OK, so no one can match Bill Paxton and Helen Hunt, who were not A-list choices for “Twister” but who turned out to have amazing chemistry. But Daisy Edgar-Jones, in addition to being great in these earthy roles, is good at picking parts even in what could be big-franchise product.
“Twisters” (2024)
Director: Lee Isaac Chung
Writers: Mark L. Smith (screenplay); Joseph Kosinski (story); Michael Crichton, Anne-Marie Martin (original concept)
Stars: Daisy Edgar-Jones, Glen Powell, Anthony Ramos
Glen Powell (as Tyler, a YouTube “tornado wrangler” with hidden depths) and Anthony Ramos (as Javi, Kate’s old friend with a new secret) are good as the potential love interests. Each maneuvers through his own rocky relationship with Edgar-Jones’ Kate, a weather geek who loves Oklahoma as much as Kevin Costner’s “Field of Dreams” character loves Iowa. I may have chortled a bit when Kate first expresses love for weather and Oklahoma (and Oklahoma weather!), but Edgar-Jones sells it.
So does director Lee Isaac Chung when showing off spectacular but plausible imagery, starting with an emotional cold-open that riffs on the tragic shattered-innocence moment from “Twister” in a robust way.
This is not groundbreaking (cloud-breaking?) the way the 1996 movie was; it can’t be. But writers Mark L. Smith and Joseph Kosinski smartly expand on the concept from Crichton and Anne-Marie Martin. Sci-fi movies like this are an exercise in building up goodwill. “Twister” won me over with storms of verisimilitude and lovable characters, to the point that I bought into the science chatter (at least while watching).
Along with “Over the Top” for arm wrestling and “Road House” for bouncing, “Twister” invented a world where tornado-chasing is a thriving profession. “Twisters” takes the next step with Tyler’s celebrity status. People – including foreign tourists — drive to the edge of brewing storms to buy merch and get it autographed. “Twisters” knows it’s silly, but it also knows when to get (slightly more) serious.
New storm paths
What starts as an overly familiar almost-remake spins in fresh directions. “Twisters” says “Hear me out: What if we could control storms and save lives?” After all, “seeding” the air to create rain is a real thing.
“Twisters” makes the saving of lives quite direct for the sake of cinematic flair, so the believability that our heroes are at the scene of every tornado is shakier than a trailer home in an F5. We’re asked to believe Oklahoma residents don’t know what to do in tornadoes. As such, these scientists abandon their missions to zip over to recently wiped-out towns to see if anyone needs rescuing. In real life, they probably could not save any lives immediately. They’d save more lives in the long run by sticking with their project.
But, hey, I was sucked in by that point. Chung directs the action pieces as effectively as Jan de Bont did. What’s especially worth a tip of the cap is that he doesn’t slather the movie with ’memberberries. He goes bigger and … well, not better, because he’s following a pre-plowed path … but he goes further.
Another supporting character is journalist Ben (Harry Hadden-Paton) – providing the sane-person POV like Jami Gertz in the original – and we see his magazine report about tornado scientists over the closing credits. OK, so maybe in real life it’s disappointing that we can’t protect people from tornadoes much more than we could in 1996.
But maybe the sort-of-science will be fascinating enough to inspire a real-life Kate, Javi or Tyler. Yeah, “Twisters” is an old-school disaster flick. But when it’s done this well, my cynicism is yanked away like a Sooner State farmhouse roof.