IronWatcher’s review published on Letterboxd:
Watched in the cinema (112th visit in 2024)
The appealing thing about "Twister" was its simplicity. The movie had a clear and effective premise that was presented as a fast-paced rollercoaster ride. Essentially, it was a demonstration of the effects art of the time, complemented by a cast that bravely stood their ground against the destructive whirlwinds. A well-composed entertainment production with the charm of classic summer blockbusters.
There were already big event spectacles in 1996; "Independence Day" was probably the ultimate of the time. But "Twister", which was released just two weeks earlier, also sought to position itself not just as a movie, but as a broad spectacle. Looking back, this seems almost cute, because at its core, the disaster movie by Speed director Jan de Bont was very simple: the heroes chased tornadoes to collect data. There were also some relationship dramas, a competitive struggle and supporting characters who were mainly intended to arouse sympathy. And, of course, the famous flying cow.
It worked brilliantly at the time. The film was impressive, partly because digital effects were not yet ubiquitous and not every crowd-pleaser relied on "higher, faster, further". Now, 28 years later, "Twisters" follows and is described as either a reboot or a sequel.
It's really almost impressive that "Twisters" doesn't try to bring up references to the 1996 film with a single gust of wind. Only Dorothy makes an appearance, but it doesn't seem celebrated or forced. There's something really refreshing about the way the movie largely refrains from nostalgic finger-pointing and stubbornly pursues its plot, which, it has to be said, is nothing more than functional.
But at least it's so functional that with Daisy Edgar-Jones and Glen Powell, two up-and-coming Hollywood stars find their place in front of the camera. While Powell scores with his toothy white sonny-boy image, Edgar-Jones is particularly convincing with her natural charisma. Mark L. Smith's screenplay goes much deeper than "Twister" in terms of characterization, but no really exciting or appealing aspects are brought to the surface.
In 1996, the supporting cast also helped to give the film a certain esprit. This was also attempted in 2024, with a cast bursting at the seams with promising names and faces: Anthony Ramos, Brandon Perea, Sasha Lane, Katy O'Brian and the always great Maura Tierney. It really is too much of a good thing. Most of the aforementioned are unfortunately not present enough to leave a lasting impression. They have their visual peculiarities, but for the course of the story they ultimately only serve as explanatory bears or chatty co-passengers. David Corenswet also makes far less of an impression as an unsympathetic character than Carey Elwes did back then.
On the other hand, "Twisters" offers a component that the first part lacks: the competition between the storm chasers is clearly divided into two camps. The slightly crazy group around Glen Powell, who have succumbed to their stormy fascination and yet always try to keep the focus on human welfare, and on the other side the capitalists, who try to use the data to boost real estate deals. Here it becomes clear that director Lee Isaac Chung is more interested in people and far less in hurricanes. Unfortunately, the script leaves him hanging in a vacuum from time to time. Nevertheless, it is often astonishing how interpretative and interpretive some moments in "Twisters" are.
Considering that "Twister" was released at a time when spectacles were still something special and drew crowds to the big screen, it is almost a kind of declaration of love when parts of the cast seek shelter in a movie theater of all places during the course of the film. While parts of the building are hit by a tornado, Frankenstein is playing inside. "It's Alive!" screams the scientist on the screen.
And while the man-made creature slowly rises, Mother Nature's monster causes chaos and destruction outside. A remarkable juxtaposition. Even more impressive is the symbolism of the tornado gradually engulfing the movie theater - almost like a wishful thinking on the part of the studio that their film would incorporate the movie theater along with the audience. This scene allows for various interpretations and is perhaps the most mentally stimulating of the blockbuster year so far - even if it naturally steals from "Twister". "The Shining" was once shown there in an open-air cinema.
Unfortunately, many good individual moments are offset by many disturbing decisions. As beautifully and warmly as Lee Isaac Chung captures the area around Arkansas and Oklahoma, it is clear that he is not a really good action director. The chases between the two teams seem to have been copied from Jan de Bont, but without really developing a serious dynamic. The races to the next gray funnel of clouds never really create any real tension.
What is most disappointing, however, is that "Twisters" does not really capture the overwhelming. While the size of the hurricanes gradually increased in 1996, 28 years later it already starts with an F5 and increases from tornado to tornado - without the threat really expanding. Although the film's technical tricks are neatly executed, the production lacks the necessary impact and urgency. Scenes that are impressive on paper, such as a tornado of fire, remain visually interesting but lack any real impact. Their extravagance and power fizzle out, partly because such moments are rarely dwelled on for any length of time. As a result, these impressive elements seem loveless and meaningless.
"Twisters" positions itself in a dilemma: the human drama should be in the foreground, but the quality of the characters is not sufficient to carry this convincingly. Although there are many and powerful tornadoes, they do not have a convincing dominance. As a result, the film lacks the necessary balance between impressive disaster staging and in-depth character development. As a parade of many nice to successful individual moments, it is convincing. As a consistently engaging movie, however, it proves to be a thoroughly stormy affair.