“Twisters”

Taking the ridiculous to a new level, the disaster spectacle “Twisters” falls short in delivering a compelling story to match its go big or go home premise. Directed by Lee Isaac Chung, the movie plunges viewers into a relentless tornado “outbreak,” setting the stage for a half-baked sequel that’s so stupid, it’s actually a challenge to suspend disbelief.

Former storm chaser Kate (Daisy Edgar-Jones) is haunted by an encounter with a killer tornado while she was in college in Oklahoma. It was a disastrous day, and she continues to live with survivor’s guilt years later. Now living in New York City, she is lured back into the field by her friend Javi (Anthony Ramos) with the promise of testing a groundbreaking new storm tracking and mapping system. The science-minded pair meet the reckless, renegade storm chaser and social media superstar Tyler Owens (Glen Powell), who seems more concerned about getting views and likes rather than contributing anything meaningful. But as the storm season quickly intensifies, there is a scary proliferation of deadly tornadoes that leave nothing but devastation in their path.

Amidst it all, Kate and Tyler find themselves competing to be the first to document each funnel for entirely different reasons. All of this is so dumb. There’s no reason for these people to be racing to get to the tornado first, but Chung tries to create a sense of urgency and drama by pitting them against each other. The plot is straightforward: see tornado, chase tornado, repeat. While this tried-and-true formula offers fleeting thrills, it quickly becomes tedious. There’s only so much humans can do to fight back at killer forces of nature, and there are laughably idiotic scenarios like a character shooting fireworks into the funnel of a tornado just to see if he can.

Most of the film is divided between show-stopping tornado “attacks” and Powell making lovey-dovey eyes at the camera (we get it: he’s good looking)! I suppose there’s no arguing the fact that everyone loves an easy-on-the-eyes tornado wranglin’ hunk, but even his charm can’t carry the movie.

The film’s science is absolutely laughable, with tornadoes depicted as nearly sentient forces capable of reducing buildings to rubble in seconds and sucking humans into the sky while somehow sparing people’s hats.

The special effects, and especially the sound design, are impressive, creating a visceral experience of the storms’ fury. The action sequences may be visually striking, but they lack the originality and impact needed to make them memorable. What’s fun about seeing people’s homes destroyed and lives ruined?

Disaster film fans may be a bit more lenient in unearthing more to enjoy about “Twisters” than I did, because I found it to be big, loud, and dumb. Those attributes can be satisfying if they’re executede well and the story at the core of the movie is good, but this one is not. It’s heavy on the mindless, light on the fun.

By: Louisa Moore

22 comments

  1. what a ridiculous review. Glad that you’re in the minority of people who found it “stupid”. You said:

    “The film’s science is absolutely laughable, with tornadoes depicted as nearly sentient forces capable of reducing buildings to rubble in seconds and sucking humans into the sky while somehow sparing people’s hats.”

    However if the reviewer actually knew anything about tornado science , this is exactly what tornadoes do – they can leave a cake on a counter undisturbed while destroying the whole house. Please go research tornado phenomena first.

    So the only thing “stupid” is this ignorant review.

    Like

    1. I’m so sorry if I offended you about tornadoes, I apologize. But when a person is standing in a movie theater that is completely being blown away by a tornado and is getting sucked into the funnel, there is no way her sun visor is staying on through all of that. It’s ridiculous. And I grew up in a tornado area and have lived through many, by the way.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Couldn’t agree more. I’ve sat through some really dumb movies, but I had to walk out of this one. This movie wants to have its cake and eat it. It aims to ape Twister while pretending to ignore it—and ends up failing miserably at both tasks.

    Soulless and vapid: It feels like it was directed by AI.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I sat in the theater shaking my head and thinking everything you wrote in this review. It’s like the town people were idiots and had to be rescued every time. Really fleshed-out characters with skin in the game may have helped me care. These were poorly drawn caricatures. Glen Powell is just O.K. and nothing, really, to get worked up about. Having watched many real YouTube tornado chasers at work, it was a joke how they were portrayed as super competitive and reckless adolescents. Oh, and having seen a lot of gorgeous 4K footage of real tornadoes, the special effects were nothing special or even realistic.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Not every movie has to be Shakespeare or have some deeper meaning to encapsulate the human condition. I can enjoy a French language movie with subtitles or a great Stanley Kubrick film but also escape a little reality and suspend some belief for a few hours to be entertained. It’s your opinion I get you are certainly entitled to it. My opinion: lighten up Francis! 😀

    Like

    1. Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts, and I wholeheartedly agree that movies don’t have to have a deeper meaning or stronger artistic merit to capture the human condition. In fact, if you browse through previous reviews you’ll see just that. I am not a movie snob by any means, I just thought “Twisters” was plain dumb and I didn’t enjoy it. Thanks again for sharing your thoughts, though, I do appreciate it.

      Like

      1. No all dumb movies are the same. Fun dumb movies know that their audience is smart enough to join in the dumb fun. Dumb cynical movies like Twisters look down on moviegoers so much you can almost hear the executives saying “This is so stupid—they’re gonna eat it up.”

        Liked by 1 person

  4. I’m sorry that you’ve had people telling you to lighten up or spamming your comments to promote their own terrible reviews. You are spot on. I have 40 minutes left of this drek and I’m very distracted as is probably obvious. It’s just so monumentally stupid. I don’t care about the science being daft, Star Trek had made up technobabble every episode practically, but I do care about the terrible writing.

    People who say ‘switch your brain off’ are missing the point, and at this point are incredibly tedious. You can have action blockbusters with something intelligent in them, hundreds of such films already exist and those concepts are not mutually exclusive. We should expect that and demand it.

    All the characters in this film are one dimensional, if that. It’s depressingly predictable, the love interest is super creepy (he is basically a discount matthew mcconaughey during his irritating romcom days) yet we’re supposed to be rooting for him (?!). The worst crime of all however is that the set pieces are not really all that, and they are supposed to be THE selling point.

    The audience liking it is not a shock. They have been starved of blockbusters (of any kind) in recent years and frankly my opinion of ‘people’ is not high anyway. The critics however were really smoking something. I watched a Guy Ritchie film last night and that WASN’T too dumb for me, so I’m not exactly setting the bar high.

    The lead does have charisma though and I hope she gets a decent film to star in at some point. I’m sure there’s a soap opera or low budget mini series awaiting generic american handsome man.

    One final point – country music sucks and therefore so does the soundtrack.

    I’ve finished it now, and I want some sort of award:-)

    Liked by 1 person

  5. I find it odd that some film critics forget that their job is not to tell us if they liked a film, it is to tell us if WE will like the film. A good film review will give me a pretty good sense of whether I will enjoy a movie. No one cares about your personal opinion, only your professional one. A professional film review should always keep in mind what kind of movie it is; summer blockbuster, raunchy comedy, art house, etc. Hope this helps you be better at your job.

    Like

    1. A professional opinion IS a personal one, just FYI. I think what you’re looking for is an AI algorithm that will tell you what you’d like. I would have zero idea what thousands of people would individually like (see how ridiculous that sounds)? But thanks for reading. I realize “Twisters” is a dumb blockbuster, but that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t also be well made.

      Like

Leave a reply to Carruthers Cancel reply