"Twisters" discussion

Bill Hark

EF5
Joined
Jan 13, 2004
Messages
1,348
Location
Richmond Virginia
CNN article discussing various aspects of "Twisters" release, including the impact on the admissions rates of students into meteorology programs following the release of "Twister" in 1996.

CNN article
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I’ll say that it’s helpful for me in high school with my friends; they’ve seen the trailers and don’t think my weather obsession is as lame anymore🤣 In general, I think it paints a positive light for chasers, showing them helping out afterwords and generally being cool, although most chasers irl aren’t nearly as extreme as the protagonists. I’m going to see the movie in IMAX with my dad tomorrow; I’ll post again with my thoughts on it.
 
Without giving away to much, which may have already been done, avid chasers and meteorologists probably won't think very highly of Twisters. It's not very realistic, the special effects are way over done, and the first tornado encounter made me shake my head. There are some twists (pun intended) in the story ,and beautiful shots of the plains and sky that added enough enjoyment for me to realize its just a movie! It was not made for accuracy but for the average persons entertainment.
 
This is my in-depth, spoiler-free review of the movie Twisters that I shared on social media. I watched the movie in IMAX.



Right off the top, GO SEE TWISTERS! This movie lives up to the hype. The OG Twister has become one of the most beloved disaster flicks of all time. It inspired new generations (me included) of storm chasers and meteorologists, taking storm chasing to the mainstream. “Twisters” had big shoes to fill, and it filled them and then some, without ever trying to be the original. Incredibly, “Twisters” re-captures a lot of the magic of the first movie, while blazing its own path with new characters, a reimagined story, and a breakthrough in tornado CGI.



The movie flows seamlessly between the incredible edge of your seat action, to the slower moments where we get to explore rather dynamic characters, something that seems to be quite rare in modern disaster flicks. I found the storyline to be quite engaging. Sure, the plot is straight forward, but director Lee Isaac Chung did a great job of creating depth to the overall story that gives the characters layers that get peeled back over the course of the film. The cinematography was on point and had some incredible action sequences. Chung did a great job capturing the beauty and spirit of Oklahoma.



You find yourself invested in the characters, rooting for them. The ensemble cast meshed well together, much like the first film. The casting was spot on. Though I must admit, the absence of Dusty (played by the late Phillip Seymour Hoffman) just leaves a void that will never be replaced. Boone (played by Brandon Perea) was a fun and memorable character with the already famous line, “We’ve got twins!” Still, the magic that Hoffman brought with Dusty created this unique fun energy that made the OG film so incredibly enjoyable to watch. Hoffman’s genius will never be replicated, and “Twisters” doesn’t really let Boone’s character shine like Dusty. Still, the rag-tag team that is the Tornado Wranglers are a joy to watch, and you find yourself rooting for them throughout the movie.



Daisy Edgar Jones, Glen Powell and Anthony Ramos nailed the lead roles. They anchor this film, and Chung did a fantastic job handling the “love triangle” between the three. Kate (Edgar Jones) has a whit and confidence about her that makes her a worthy female lead comparable to Jo Harding (Helen Hunt) from the first film. Edgar Jones brings a certain charm and intrigue that creates a dynamic and memorable role. You really see her vulnerability and her resolve as she encounters all these intense tornado intercepts while still working through PTSD and guilt from the opening sequence of the film. No spoilers! Tyler Owens (Glen Powell) is such a likeable character. I’m sure the ladies will agree. This character is based loosely off the real-life storm chaser, Reed Timmer (who is a national treasure btw) and his Dominator, where he has a large social media following and has a knack for successfully “zero metering” tornadoes. In fact, Owens, one liner, “If you feel it, chase it” echoes Timmer’s “Never stop chasing” mantra. Tyler Owens is introduced in a way that feels a lot like Hangman from Top Gun: Maverick, where Powell plays the whole “I am good. I’m very good” type. But as you get deeper into the story, you discover there’s real substance to Tyler and you discover his humanity. Powell hits this role out of the park, and his performance would have made the late Bill Paxton proud. Anthony Ramos plays Javi, and I have to say, I really found myself rooting for him in the movie. I love the moral conflict he is faced with, and his resolve. Also, the scene with he and Kate driving in reverse while fleeing a tornado that is overtaking them, is my favorite of the whole movie, and they both absolutely killed that part. Everything about that scene feels authentic and looks realistic. It is my single all-time favorite tornado scene.



Speaking of tornadoes, I must talk about the CGI and special effects. Something that always bothered me about the original Twister was the tornadoes were not very realistic looking, and they blew debris away from them, instead of sucking things up. When I met with someone working on the film, I stressed this point. I am sure other chasers and meteorologists who also consulted with the filmmakers also emphasized this point, and that the tornadoes should be occurring with supercell storms, and not randomly forming under stratus clouds. If you’re going to talk about the “suck zone”, well, your tornadoes better suck! Thankfully, the VFX team listened, and they basically hit a walk off grand slam to win the World Series with the CGI tornado sequences they came up with. There were times when I was sitting there in awe at how realistic the tornadoes felt. Their movement, cloud motion and appearance all felt genuine. Now there are some silly scenes with some rather outlandish things happening, like an oil pump jack flying overhead, while the buildings below remain completely intact. If the wind is strong enough to hurl a pump jack through the air, its strong enough to rip the buildings to shreds and suck our beloved stars into oblivion. But this is a Hollywood action flick, so you are required to suspend disbelief to fully enjoy the ride. Again, the CGI in this movie is incredible, and the way they seamlessly paired that with the live action sequences should have Twisters lined up for some awards for visual effects.



The sound effects were solid, other than the pulsing sound that comes with the tornadoes. I’m not sure how the sound FX team thought that particular sound effect would add to the realism of the tornado, because it had an opposite effect. Still, the tornado sound effects in “Twisters” easily tops the ridiculous growling sounds with the tornadoes in “Twister.”



The only real disappointment with this movie was the musical score. Honestly, going into it, I knew that the OG Twister score composed by Mark Mancina will always remain undefeated. Mancina masterfully composed a score that harkened to the frontier days and classic Americana and perfectly combined that with the energy and sounds of Van Halen. The score flawlessly guides the film, setting the tone throughout. And any hardcore Twister fan knows that ominous bass glissando motif that is the film’s calling card for impending doom. Dusty’s “It’s the Wonder of Nature” scene with the mashup of “Child in Time/William Tell Overture/Oklahoma” is a soundtrack masterclass.

The score in Twisters was largely a miss. It’s the only aspect of the movie that felt more like “Into the Storm” vs. “Twister.” It had no real soul or identity. Unlike the OG score that guided the 1996’s “Twister”, the “Twisters” score seems lost. There were no memorable overtures or motifs. The songs that make up the “Twisters” soundtrack were solid and worked, but no Van Halen is a miss. I particularly liked “Out of Oklahoma” by Lainey Wilson. While I’m not a big fan of post 90’s country music, this song gets you in the feels and was well-placed in a moment of moral conflict in the movie and transitions into the next act as Kate goes back to her roots.



Twisters is the classic summer blockbuster we hoped it would be, and storm chasers and the weather community should be able to relate to a much more accurate meteorological representation of the storms, albeit not perfect. “Twisters” made a solid attempt to capture the storm chasing culture, but with an already 2-hour runtime, there wasn’t much room left to really explore the nuances of intercepting tornadoes. “Twisters” still gives a false perception that supercells and tornadoes just magically and instantly appear out of nowhere, because, well, time constraints. In reality, storm chasing is mostly waiting, followed by disappointment, and then, more disappointment. But make no mistake, if you go see “Twisters”, you will not be disappointed.
 
Last edited:
When writing your review of Twisters . PLEASE ALSO MENTION THE WAY YOU VIEWED THE PICTURE Eg. ( IMAX, RPX, 4D, SCREENX, REGULAR )
Didnt want to start a different thread for this. MODS move this if appropriate.
I think it is as important as the review when viewing .Thanks
 
Saw it in regular theaters last night. I had low expectations, admittedly, but they were exceeded. They did a pretty good job with character development, and the action sequences/CGI were fun and what you'd expect. Yet I thought the climax and ending left a bit to be desired. Overall, I'd give it a 7/10. Not as good as the original, but not bad either, in my opinion.

If you are looking for a realistic, science-driven film, this obviously isn't it. But it's not designed to be. It's designed to be a fun take on the genre, and they accomplished that for the most part, in my opinion. And Glen Powell appears to be a loose, comedic amalgamation of some of the more aggressive chasers out there who dominate social media. 😝
 
You shouldn’t go into this movie thinking it’s going to be super accurate. It’s not. But I think I speak for all of us when I say a movie about driving all week for a blue sky bust, crappy outflow-dominant storms, then a wimpy rope that lasts for two minutes wouldn’t be much fun. But that’s one thing this movie has a lot of. Above all else, this movie is a fun ride. Lots of intense action packed scenes with incredible CGI that had me questioning whether it was real or not. The chemistry between the characters is amazing, and the interactions feel genuine, especially between Tyler and Kate. The soundtrack is amazing, but I have to agree with @Greg McLaughlin, the score leaves a lot to be desired, especially considering how iconic the original’s was. A lot of the deaths were pretty goody, but the tornado aftermath scenes felt very real. The damage, the first responders driving on to the scene and people walking out of their homes beginning to pick up the pieces was a pretty emotional moment. Overall, I think this movie is pretty good and not terribly over the top. I think some of the weather jargon felt clunky, but most of the actual chasing scenes felt fairly accurate, albeit very extreme. Overall, I’d give this movie an 8.5/10, it’s a really fun watch and you shouldn’t pass up the opportunity to see our shared passion of weather on the big screen. It’ll probably be a long while before we get a big-production tornado/storm chasing movie.
 
I'm glad many have enjoyed & reviewed the film! I kinda enjoyed it too in a regular theater, so I won't repeat what's already been said. But...
The first Warner Bros. offering in 1996 showed individuals gathering data. This new release starts with the idea that they now have the answer:
"Use quicker-lifter-upper funnel-powder, you know, the kind that dehydrates & desiccates tornadoes while saving lives!":rolleyes:
As a scientist, chaser, yeh, it was a tough start for me, one that even the addition of silver iodide at the end of the story couldn't cure.
At the end of the day though, what is this movie? Fiction, pure & simple. So have some fun with it if you can suspend disbelief long enough.
 
Last edited:
I saw it in IMAX tonight. I know as said by others "this isn't a documentary" but the science was too far out there for me. Far enough that it took me out of the film. The original took liberties, sometimes for the sake of the media of film but there's a difference between stretching things, and just coming up with something stupid. I admit, I'm no meteorologist, but the idea of stopping a tornado with some powder and rockets launched from a vehicle seems patently ridiculous. To balance this a little, I'll provide some examples of liberties I'm ok with in this film. The "armored" truck and its little augers. Compared to the real life Dominator and TIV, it's ridiculous, but as a set piece and plot device? Cool. Self-contained phased array radars the size of a folding table that you just pull out, pop up and go? Cool, and one day, maybe we'll even get there (unlikely based on what I know of thermodynamics and RF electronics, but I'm not an expert). Honestly, the PARs in this film are comparable to their real life counterparts in the way that the little dish on top of the van in the first movie is comparable to the Doppler on Wheels.

I also didn't like the characterization of Tyler in the first half. I'm not Reed Timmer so I don't exactly have a dog in this fight, but to me, he was more an insulting chariacture than a bit of a silly parody. I loved his character in the second half though. I'll have to go lookup what Dr. Timmer himself thinks about the character. If he's ok with it, who am I to complain?

I'm also not fond of setting the finale in El Reno. We all know what happened there in 2013. While the character of Tyler improved by that point, I still feel like it's a bit of an insult to the finest, most professional team of real-life storm chasers there ever was. Who unlike this film, were very much NOT trying to get into the tornado themselves. But again, I'm not their families or colleague so maybe I'm being over-sensitive.

The other big element that distracted me was the whole buying property plot. Why does that property shark need the ultra-accurate phased array radar data? A GPS drone flying overhead right behind a tornado would give him everything he needs for his scheme. This just didn't make sense narratively, ignoring the tornadoes entirely.

Overall, I have to give it a D-, maybe a D at best because I did ultimately like the main characters by the end, but I still didn't feel the connection to them that I developed with the characters from the first one. I also know nothing of the secondary characters, they all seemed pretty flat to me. Jo had a compelling story I could personally relate to to a degree (tornado hit my house when I was young, no one got hurt, but still terrified me). Loss of a parent, fear of storms, etc. Kate's story isn't really that.
 
I found the PAR research idea far fetched. I'm not aware of any mobile PARs that are that small and that easily deployed. Also, their strategy to surround a tornado with a triangle of 3 PARs and having "Lion" place theirs directly in the path was moronic. Given the natural arrangement of an equilateral triangle, it makes more sense to rotate the shape 60 degrees so that "Lion" doesn't have to be directly in the path (which, in theory, would have led to a loss of a single PAR on every successful deployment...where's the money to keep replacing those things???).

I was also a bit put off by the rowdiness of Tyler Owens' driving. Easily a few reckless driving violations as well as being wholly unsafe. Sure, almost the exact same thing happened in Twister, but I feel the action in Twister was a bit more defensible. Not to mention how convenient it was that every time Kate was like, "we need to turn!" there just happened to always be a road right in front of them to turn onto. And in the few instances where there wasn't a road to turn, everyone just casually took off and plowed across a vegetated field. I'm pretty sure that's also illegal and you're likely to get shot at doing that in many plains areas, including Oklahoma.

Also, the only chaser convergence shown was in that initial scene at the gas station and one or two scenes at a hotel at night. The tailgating is not realistic either, and in the heat of the action the roads were always mysteriously free of other chasers.

I also figured Kate was intending to commit suicide in an attempt to save El Reno in the finale. She should never have survived. All of the vehicles in that movie were shown getting hit by sometimes very large debris and almost never suffered window breaks. Yeah...right...
 
I'm not aware of any mobile PARs that are that small and that easily deployed.

Does this count? ;)

737par.jpg

I was also a bit put off by the rowdiness of Tyler Owens' driving. Easily a few reckless driving violations as well as being wholly unsafe. Sure, almost the exact same thing happened in Twister, but I feel the action in Twister was a bit more defensible. Not to mention how convenient it was that every time Kate was like, "we need to turn!" there just happened to always be a road right in front of them to turn onto. And in the few instances where there wasn't a road to turn, everyone just casually took off and plowed across a vegetated field. I'm pretty sure that's also illegal and you're likely to get shot at doing that in many plains areas, including Oklahoma.

This bothered me too. As someone whos ended up in a field, let me tell you it didn't go as nicely as you'd think. The literal demolition derby driving down the road was also kinda wild.

Also agree with you on the glass, Jeff. Want the phone # to Tylers glass guy. Those are some incredible windows!
 
This bothered me too. As someone whos ended up in a field, let me tell you it didn't go as nicely as you'd think. The literal demolition derby driving down the road was also kinda wild.

Also agree with you on the glass, Jeff. Want the phone # to Tylers glass guy. Those are some incredible windows!
I thought about the May 22 2010 incident was in the front of my mind when I first saw them taking off into the fields. I was hoping they had consulted you or the others involved in that for that scene.

Ha, I was thinking about the windows - that's the clearest damn Lexan I have ever seen!
 
I also didn't like the characterization of Tyler in the first half. I'm not Reed Timmer so I don't exactly have a dog in this fight, but to me, he was more an insulting chariacture than a bit of a silly parody. I loved his character in the second half though. I'll have to go lookup what Dr. Timmer himself thinks about the character. If he's ok with it, who am I to complain?
Judging by his social-media reactions, I think he loves it. He seems to be embracing the whole thing.
 
Back
Top