Twisters is not the typical sequel or legacy sequel. Since 2015, every studio has tried to capture the same nostalgic feeling of Star Wars: The Force Awakens. The formula usually starts with duplicating the same movie almost beat for beat, but differently, in hopes the audience will not realize they’re just watching the same movie over again. Twisters, for the most part, has almost the same story structure as the original. But there is a twist (pun intended).
Instead of trying to replicate the ideas of J.J. Abrams, the new film takes more advice from filmmakers like Robert Zemeckis. Zemeckis believed when making a sequel, one had to make the same movie again, only better. This was his philosophy when making Back to the Future Part II. And one can debate whether he was successful. Twisters has much more in common with that sequel than any recently released sequels. It’s doing many of the same things; sometimes it’s doing them better than the 1996 movie, and sometimes it’s doing worse. The familiar aspects will bother some viewers, but there is a lot to love about the new Twister sequel.
What is Twisters about?
The new sequel, directed by Lee Isaac Chung (Minari), is written by Overlord and The Revenant writer Mark L. Smith, with a story credit by Top Gun: Maverick filmmaker Joseph Kosinski. The screenplay begins on a very intense note. We will not divulge what happens in the opening act. However, for those who remember how the 1996 film begins, Jo’s (Helen Hunt) father dies by being sucked through a cellar door, the sequel starts on a similar harrowing note, and it tops the opening 1996 sequence. The theater was quiet when it concluded, and this writer’s jaw was on the floor.
The movie centers on a character named Kate (Daisy Edgar-Jones), who, in this movie, plays the Bill Paxton persona. Kate is intuitive with weather patterns and can visualize the potential weather behavior. After taking a hiatus, an old friend of Kate’s from her storm-chasing days named Javi (Anthony Ramos) hopes to bring her back into the fold. Javi’s team, called Storm Par, has found a way to map a tornado’s infrastructure using satellite technology.
Kate leaves her life in New York City and heads to Tornado Alley, where she joins Javi’s team of elite stormchasers. The team members resemble the Geek Squad at Best Buy, but they are passionate about the weather. One of Javi’s team members is Scott, a disgruntled scientist played by David Corenswet, the actor who will portray the next Superman. This is an intriguing introduction, as Corenswet is not a likable character here, but has to portray a hopeful figure in James Gunn’s next project.
Adding to the character roster is Glen Powell as Tyler, a YouTuber and self-proclaimed “tornado wrangler.” Tyler’s team of scrappy storm chasers play the rivals of Storm Par. It’s another familiar dynamic, duplicating the rivalry between Dr. Jonas Miller and Jo and Bill’s team from the first movie. The most significant difference is that screenwriter Smith incorporates flaws in both groups. Tyler is a little impulsive with his storm chasing, and Storm Par might have some unethical practices.
Kate, however, dreams of making a tornado disappear using a scientific method involving shooting the same type of material in diapers into the weather monster. However, Kate carries some trauma that might prevent her from achieving her goal.
Mixed visuals and bold choices for Twisters
The one noticeable aspect of revisiting the 1996 movie is that the visual effects hold up after 30 years. Filmmaker Jan de Bont made everything feel grounded, even when the cows flew in the air; it was the right amount of CGI silliness to keep the universe genuine. Not to mention, all the F5 sequences remain as compelling as they did in 1996. Twisters is a mixed bag in this regard. The visual effects work, but are less crisp than the original. Unlike the 1996 film, the visuals probably will not hold up well over time.
For example, Twisters relies far less on mixing practical and computer-generated elements. The finale from the original utilized practical tricks to showcase the spectacle; for instance, Helen Hunt and Bill Paxton drive into a house that randomly falls in front of their truck. The coverage of how the action is framed is also more robust in the original. Bont knew precisely how to photograph action and had a strong sense of shooting the threatening environment. Chung orchestrates some highly intense sequences, but a few action beats suffer from the same issues as Transformers. Various scenes are too up close and shaky, so when things are falling around characters, it can feel overwhelming to the eye.
However, when the sequences work, they are highly effective. The opening for this film is ten times as intense as the original. Adding to this, the stakes feel higher because this movie has teeth. Unlike the original, anyone and everyone can die, giving the sequel a more dreadful feeling when one of the tornadoes appears. The movie makes a bold choice that might surprise everyone, and right after this happens, nothing feels safe in the film ever again. The moment we are vaguely talking about is debatably the film’s best part, and the movie never reaches the same heights again. But the decision puts the audience off balance for the rest of the film.
A movie that rages against the lega-sequel
The best aspect of Twisters is that it does not worry about connecting to canonic characters. The sequel’s only direct connection to the original is Dorothy, the invention of Bill and Jo, a famous and iconic device in the universe. They never refer to Bill or Jo, nor do they spend any time trying to make anything tie into the original story. What makes it so remarkable is that it gives the impression of a world bigger than that of Jo and Bill. A lesser story writer and filmmaker would have made Kate the daughter of Bill and Jo. The same goes for Tyler. If this were a J.J. Abrams movie, Tyler would be one of the children of the storm chasers from the first movie.
The decision to isolate Tyler and Kate from everyone and everything in the first movie is a valuable lesson that the Star Wars Universe can learn. We know Jo and Bill exist in this world, but we don’t necessarily need to see them or have their children in the sequel to understand that. This makes the entire experience feel more significant and makes the characters from the first movie feel larger. Their presence is felt, and as a filmmaker, Lee Isaac Chung respects the audience’s intelligence enough for them to connect everything.
Twisters is an entertaining rehash
Twisters mostly follows the original to a fault. It’s not a direct copy, but instead follows the example of ’90s movies such as Home Alone: Lost in New York or Back to the Future: Part II. It takes the example of those sequels where the attempt is to accomplish the same thing but better than the first time. And for the most part, there are moments when they genuinely pull it off. And then there are moments where they stumble. That said, the moments of success genuinely hit the mark.
In addition, Daisy Edgar-Jones and Glenn Powell are outstanding here. Their chemistry shines throughout the movie, and just like Paxton and Hunt, their dynamic keeps everything grounded. Edgar-Jones is especially tremendous, portraying someone struggling with trauma, much like Hunt did in the first movie. As for Glen Powell, his performance in this film will cement his role as a movie star.
As long as viewers understand Twisters is a rehash, they should leave satisfied. The sequel already had so many things against it, considering most of the original creative team has passed away. The original writer Michael Crichton’s absence will always be felt. But given the loss, it’s a miracle the movie is half as good. It’s a rehash, but it’s a thrilling one.
Twisters is now playing in theaters. Are you planning to see it this weekend? Let us know what you think on social media @mycosmiccircus! You can check out my YouTube discussion with Vin below, or find out more about Brian’s ScreenX experience for Twisters here!
