Twisters2024

Plot:

Kate Cooper (Edgar-Jones) is a former storm chaser haunted by a devastating encounter with a tornado during her college years who now studies storm patterns on screens safely in New York City. She is lured back to the open plains by her friend, Javi (Ramos) to test a groundbreaking new tracking system. There, she crosses paths with Tyler Owens (Powell), the charming and reckless social-media superstar who thrives on posting his storm-chasing adventures with his raucous crew, the more dangerous the better. As storm season intensifies, terrifying phenomena never seen before are unleashed, and Kate, Tyler and their competing teams find themselves squarely in the paths of multiple storm systems converging over central Oklahoma in the fight of their lives.

  • WWW
  • imDB
  • tmDB
  • Rotten Tomatoes
A decent cast is wasted in this shlocky Lifetime movie wannabe set in Tornado Alley.

When I heard last year that there was a new movie headed to theaters called Twisters, I was a little confused.  Was this a sequel to the action-picked Twister, a remake, or a reboot?  The trailers didn’t give me much to go on, so I figured I’d just wait to see the film and find out.  Turns out (based on a Google search) it’s a “stand-alone” sequel.  But, would it be able to live up to the original, or would it be just an inferior copy?

The cast is all new in Twisters, lead by Daisy Edgar-Jones and Glen Powell.  They both do decent jobs with what their given, although they tend to give the film more of one of those Lifetime channels romance flicks.  They spend most of their time making googly-eyes at each other and flirting, then throwing caution to the wind and doing wild tornado-related stunts at the drop of a Stetson (especially Powell).  Their characters are laughably goofy, but they – and the rest of the cast (who aren’t any better scripted) – also manage to turn in decent performances as well.

Rather than having a reluctant wind-reader team up with a gal with a tragic past (like in the original), Twisters makes the reluctant wind-reader the gal with the tragic past.  While that works well for her (and actually makes sense), it doesn’t leave much for the guy in the pic.  So instead, they make him a impulsive thrill-seeker with a sensitive side = so in other words, a complete joke.  The gal gets roped back into tornado-chasing, meets the nutty thrill-seeker, and the story apparently just writes itself.

One of the biggest problems with Twisters is how much it denigrates the prior film.  Apparently, the gal (whose name is utterly forgettable) is brought back in to chase tornadoes to allow this new tech to map a tornado better than ever, in order to stop tornadoes from being able to strike without any warning.  Sound familiar?  It should, since that’s exactly what they were doing with the first film.  Only difference is, they invented the tech originally, and it’s currently in use in this new film.  So, what was the whole point of the first movie at all?  If tornadoes still strike without warning, and a better mapping system is needed, then the whole first film was a waste of time?  How does this make sense to put in a “stand-alone” sequel?  Isn’t that basically telling the viewer to not bother watching the original Twister, since they failed?

And then there’s the depiction of the general population in Twisters.  These folks, who live in what most consider to be “tornado alley,” don’t have the first inkling what to do when a tornado hits.  Instead, they just cower until these random strangers (the heroes of this pic) show up to tell them what to do.  Then, after the storm passes, they plaintively ask “is it over?”  Wow.  Talk about dissing an entire population.  If a person lives in “tornado alley,” chances are they are the experts at what to do when a tornado hits.  Oh, and is there a basement or a shelter anywhere to be found?  Silly, of course not.  What then would the heroes have to do?

The special effects are pretty decent in Twisters, but pale in comparison to the level witnessed in the previous film.  There aren’t any iconic moments in this flick (like the floating cow, or driving through a house).  The best they can muster is an explosion that briefly turns the tornado into a fire whirlwind.  Nice effect, but not nearly as iconic as the ones that occurred in the previous film.

While the cast is decent in Twisters, the plot is both a retread and a hokey Hallmark special rolled into one.  And it does the one thing no sequel – not even a “stand-alone” one – should do, and that’s totally negate the plot of the first film.  Why oh why would a film actively try to discourage the viewers from watching the first film?  There’s only one reason that makes sense:  the first film so blows this one away, they don’t want the comparison to happen at all.  And if the filmmakers are thinking that, who are any of us to argue the point?

MPAA Rating

    PG-13 for intense action and peril, some language and injury images.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *