68 things wrong with the film Twister

While weeding through my old papers I found an old correspondence between myself, Tim Marshall, and David Hoadley:

Critique of the Film Twister (Hoadley, 1997)

I don't recall this article ever making it into the paper publication (or online for that matter). It lists in exquisite detail at least 68 errors spotted in the 1996 film Twister. I checked with David and he gave a thumbs up to posting it (belatedly) on our website. Interestingly enough this topic still seems to surface regularly after eight years, so it's none too late.

Enjoy!

Tim Vasquez
 
Interesting, Tim...

Does anyone care to make one about the movies on PAX...LOL Particularly the lightning movie where the young man launches a rocket into the meso, saving the whole town. aye carumba :roll:
 
OBJECTION !!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

There is a error in your errors' report :lol:

31. Jonas' crew says that \"Upper level winds are veering.\" Jonas says \"Uh, huh. It might dissipate.\" Hardly! If upper-level winds veer with height, this is exactly what they need to produce tornadoes.

WRONG: Jonas did say that, but in the immediately following frame the NWS says exactly that the tornado will intensify during to the veering and hook appearance. The contrast between the two sentences makes Jonas appear like a stupid bad guy :lol: :lol: , which I guess is what the Director want :roll:

:wink: :wink:
 
Twister is a movie???

I think a friend of mine put it succinctly when he said that movie was just a two-hour commercial for Dodge pick-up trucks.
 
I think i will watch Twister again.. only with a printing of your list so that I can check them off. This might be a decent drinking game... Spot something on the list... take a drink. But I think after awhile no one will be paying attention to the list and just drinking when they see something fly through the air. ONE away opening cellar door...... TWO lack of OK morning sunlight...... THREE 7am "breaking cap"...... FLOOR (Warning: Dont Drink Taquila with this game)
 
68 errors isn't too bad. Big Hollywood movies tend to have way more than that.

I think a friend of mine put it succinctly when he said that movie was just a two-hour commercial for Dodge pick-up trucks.

What about Pepsi? Ever notice when they look at the doppler velocities it looks just like the Pepsi ensignia. And the loop they show is almost always the same. Not to mention they only use Pepsi cans in the end to help make Dorothy "fly."
 
I just read that article and now I am a little mad. First of all, its a fictional movie, not a documentary. Some of the mistakes pointed out are based on assumptions and averages. True the cap usually doesn't break at 7am (#3) but that doesn't mean it can't. I could take about half of those mistakes pointed out and defend them. Those mammatus clouds they filmed may not have been the most intense but they were the real thing, actual footage.

Another point of praise, most of the movie was filmed outside, in the midwest...not on a set. "On location" as they like to say.

Have you ever heard of the term "suspend you disbelief." Whenever I watch a movie set before 1900 I don't mention how white and straight everybody's teeth are or how tall all the actors are. I didn't expect Mel Gibson to have his real teeth smashed out and stained in "Braveheart" because people back then had very few teeth.

On a lighter note I had a run in with the pervibial "evil" corporate chaser in Texas. Ok, they weren't evil but it made me think of Twister. Check out the last picture, they even have a black truck.

http://home.earthlink.net/~greenrange/Texas/
 
Haha - I didn't notice that but I do have the movie at the house so I think I will watch it again tonight. Me and my roommate are doing a chick's night at home watching flicks with pizza and pepsi.
By the way, irregardless of the film's inaccuracies, I have to say, Jo's position on feeling like tornadoe's make things personal is the way I have often felt at times - I think that's why I like the movie.
 
Originally posted by B Ozanne
I just read that article and now I am a little mad. %First of all, its a fictional movie, not a documentary. %Some of the mistakes pointed out are based on assumptions and averages. %

Have you ever heard of the term \"suspend you disbelief.\"
The discussion at the time of the movie release that I recall concerned the fact that many of these lesser "mistakes" could have been corrected *without* significantly affecting the movie's outcome (except perhaps the Aunt Meg dinner and shower scene :) ). Had they listened to their technical advisor a little more closely there might have been fewer of these small mistakes.

BTW - you'd think after 8 years they'd get some of this done better with the Day After Tomorrow! The hail was still "chunks of ice" (albiet larger) and the tornadoes still came from flat stratoCu decks (even though radar showed huge supercell cores). Also notice that all the tornadoes in that film appeared to be rotating way too slow to cause the indicated damage.


greg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Watching a movie or tv show for the general public about something you are an expert in is always very frustrating. I used to cringe at the thought of what was going to happen next, now I just lower my expectations so much I am usually pleasantly surprised.

The hail was still \"chunks of ice\" (albiet larger)

I'm sure they know their hail looks bad, it's got to be a cost issue. Making and storing randomly shaped hail stores is considerably harder than chopping up ice blocks as needed. You've got to consider how many shots they do on just one scene.

Another thing about Aunt Meg's wind vanes. It is possible that they just started to turn, maybe it wasn't that windy in town, maybe they were shielded by her house. Most likely though the director used what is called "artistic license." He wanted to make a point, to express non-verbally that change was coming.
 
I had just finished my chase trip and went the day I got back to see Twister. There I was in a packed theatre laughing my head off while everyone else in the place was oooing and ahhhhing. Boy did I get some funny looks.

I realize the need to suspend disbelief, but it is not that hard to get it right if they can work so hard to get it wrong. :?:
 
Lightning and thunder realism is seriously wanting. Lightning in the movie looks more like spurts of Tesla coil sparks with an instantaneous sound like an arc welder.

Not that this is unique to Twister, or Hollywood for that matter - I have yet to see even a serious storm documentary that accurately portrays a real lightning-thunder event. (Distant bolts, real or fake, always have instantaneous thunder, etc.)

I've never understood why lightning/thunder realism has always been downplayed - the real thing is so much more dramatic and impressive. For once I'd like to see them show a close CG with that ripping peal from the branches followed by the boom from the main channel. Even if the lightning's not close, there's something hair-raising about the bright flash that you cringe at, waiting for the big sound that is inevitable. Now *that's* dramatic!
 
I was watching Twister during a real thunderstorm and I couldn't tell what was coming from the movie and what was real. I think most of it was real and it complimented the movie very well. I'm pretty confident that a home theater will NEVER be able to portray a close strike, in terms of an accurate sound output. I wonder what real thunder is in terms of decibels or watts. Anybody know?
 
I'm not sure if it's possible to reproduce the decibel level of thunder, although I would like to hear high-quality thunder recordings played back on the biggest audio system out there, just to see what it would sound like :)

For now I'd just like to see a movie or documentary that uses actual recordings of thunder (or at least realistic reproductions) and places a believable delay between flash-thunder. Even most close strikes have at least a half second to one second delay before the sound reaches the observer.

It just seems, IMO, that lightning and thunder special effects have never enjoyed even a remote attention to realism like other natural phenomena has.
 
I admit I watch this movie every once in a while when I am really bored but there is nothing in this movie that is realistic about chasing. The sound of the tornado drives me nuts. the special effect they used to get the wind noise was squealing pigs at different decible levels. Now a tornado may sound that way in the oklahoma panhanlde where there are a ton of pig farms but otherwise it is very unrealistic. the lightning/thunder issue is beyond mention since it is a problem in all movies not just twister. The editing mistakes and bad science make this nothing but a B movie. For a major hollywood production it has an overabundance of correctable errors. I enjoy the story line but lets at least do enough research or listen to technical advisors to get at least a few things right before spending that much $ on a movie.

I cant defend anybody that buys anything in this movie or actually thinks its more than a editing nightmare and look at all the grief it has caused with all the locals coming out with kids in tow to see the twister and be like Jo and Bill.

I am not being elitist in the least. Everybody has the right to chase. I just think it is moronic and dangerous to bring the kiddies along, especially when you dont know anything yourself.
 
It just seems, IMO, that lightning and thunder special effects have never enjoyed even a remote attention to realism like other natural phenomena has.

Pretty bad considering most people have heard/seen this in real life. You would think people would complain more. On the other hand most people don't understand the physics of light travelling faster than sound. In fact, at the fireworks the other night I heard two people arguing about which travelled faster. As it stands now they think sound wins. On top of that, most people think heat lightning is entirely different than regular lightning, and that you can only stand an egg on its end during the equinox. Should I go on or have I made my point?
 
I'm not gonna lie, I like the movie Twister. I think it is an enjoyable, fictional movie. It's fun to watch, I like the action, etc. I don't think it is the greatest movie ever made, it is rather corny, but I still like it. I know some of you also like it. Almost everyone in this forum has seen it, and most of you have seen it more than once. I don't watch it to gain insight into storm chasing or learn tips, I watch it because it is entertaining.

there is nothing in this movie that is realistic about chasing.

Isn't that what everyone thinks because everyone else says it? There is at least ONE thing in this movie that is realistic and in fact more things are realistic than not. Except the occasional error happens to stand out in the minds of the experts on this forum. Yes, chasing F3 tornadoes at 7am never happens and seeing that many tornadoes is extremely unlikely. (If the Super Outbreak happened today the events in "Twister" would seem pretty tame) That's why its a movie though, the story doesn't work if we have to follow around those geeks for two months, it's much better over two days.

Again, it's not a documentary nor is it based on a true story. Those kind of errors would be unacceptable in a movie like "Apollo 13" but "Twister" is completely fictional. I guarantee that 999 out of 1000 people in this country (maybe more) have never even heard of backing or veering winds let alone the other jargon they use.
 
I was out to see Van Halen Saturday last (good show, but cemented the end of indoor shows for me...just not the same as an outdoor venue). They did a rendition of Humans Being from the Twister soundtrack and you get one guess as to what sorts of images where on the vid screen during the tune. :wink: They did have some very kewl tornado images however on a really biiiig screen. Prolly the closest I'm going to get this year :lol:

Be well, TR
 
They did a rendition of Humans Being from the Twister soundtrack and you get one guess as to what sorts of images where on the vid screen during the tune. They did have some very kewl tornado images however on a really biiiig screen. Prolly the closest I'm going to get this year

Heh...that's hilarious!

Anyways, I think the article writer made stated the reason for 99.9% of the errors in the movie in Blooper #66 or 67, when he talked about the scene adding more drama. It's all about keeping people intersted to make the benjamins.
 
Twister

The movie does have a lot of errors in it, but I still like it. I watch it for entertainment not its accuracy. While storm chasing my dad and I have said many times that storm chasing is much different then it is in Twister.
 
I just found something great in this “Making of Twister†thing I have on tape — the director is talking about the computer generated tornadoes in the film and says, “Sometimes, I feel like we need to be making mistakes in what we’re doing, because it’s — it’s like it’s too perfect.†I suppose I’d want to talk up the movie if I were him then, but now it’s just funny.
 
I just found something great in this “Making of Twister†thing I have on tape — the director is talking about the computer generated tornadoes in the film and says, “Sometimes, I feel like we need to be making mistakes in what we’re doing, because it’s — it’s like it’s too perfect.†I suppose I’d want to talk up the movie if I were him then, but now it’s just funny.

That is pretty funny.. :lol:
 
Eh, it was a movie; I took it for one. Sorta like Animal House; how many times does that actually happen in colleges without serious consequences? Like Animal House is a cult classic for college generations, Twister is a cult classic for many weather people. It's fun entertainment.
 
I actually enjoy the movie Twister. It may not be the most accurate, but its still good entertainment as Caleb suggests. Seems like some people bash Twister just because everyone else is doing it, and they believe they will be looked down upon by other chasers if they don't...
 
Back
Top