Film Review: ‘Twisters’ is a legacy sequel done right

Legacy sequels are par for the course these days in Hollywood, from the successful (“Top Gun: Maverick”) to the less successful (“The Exorcist: Believer”). Nowadays, big blockbusters tend to tie into a movie from 20+ years ago, aiming to tickle our nostalgic funny bone but so often failing to capture what made said old movie special in the first place – whether it be the style, the stars, or the ingenuity.

“Twisters,” the follow up to Jan de Bont’s 1996 disaster classic “Twister,” is one of those movies that seemed poised to fall into the same trap as so many before it. It’s a film that could have easily gotten lost in the mechanics of how this new crop of characters connects to the old ones, or what happened in the intervening 28 years between films. But, luckily for audiences, Helen Hunt does not show up as Daisy Edgar-Jones’ mom, or some other ridiculous tie-in. Instead, director Lee Isaac Chung is focused less on empty nods to the original movie and more on attempting to recapture the singular magic of the 1990s blockbuster.

“Twisters” starts much like the original film – with an inciting traumatic incident. Five years after losing three friends to a tornado, Kate Cooper (Edgar-Jones) heads back to Oklahoma and the storm chasing game to help her friend Javi test a tracking system he thinks could save lives. Enter their adversary Tyler Owens (Glen Powell), a tornado chasing YouTube star who seems to be just around the corner at every turn as storm season in Oklahoma starts to pick up to a terrifying crescendo.

With a story by “Top Gun: Maverick” director Joseph Kosinski and a screenplay by Mark L. Smith, “Twisters” might not lose itself in trying to make the connections between old and new, but it does smartly echo the original movie’s story beats with a slight inversion to keep you on your toes.

At the beginning of “Twister,” Jo Harding (Helen Hunt) watches her father get swept away by the strongest category of tornado there is, prompting a lifelong obsession with understanding and preventing the storms. Kate undergoes a similar experience, but the loss of her friends causes her to abandon tornadoes altogether. Whether you’ve seen the original film or not, as soon as “Twisters” starts there’s a sense of foreboding as Kate and company head out after the storm.

From the music, to the framing, to the false sense of fun – and how quickly it changes on a dime – Chung crafts a truly harrowing motivating experience for Kate. There’s a moment where her boyfriend Jeb (Daryl McCormack) gets whipped in the face with a piece of straw. It might as well have been a tree with the shudder of foreboding that passed through me.

Edgar-Jones, more known for far quieter projects such as “Normal People” or “Where the Crawdads Sing,” is an interesting choice to lead an action blockbuster of this scale. When she’s engulfed in the greater ensemble, she can sometimes feel a little lost. But that works rather well for where Kate finds herself at the beginning of her trip back to Oklahoma, still hurting and unsure where she now fits into this world, especially going up against adrenaline junkies like Tyler Owens. Edgar-Jones and Powell’s on-screen dynamic is rather comparable to their characters in that way, an indie ingénue paired up with a hot young movie star, butting heads over the correct way to handle the obstacle in front of them. But when Edgar-Jones delivers a teary, guilt-ridden monologue about the deaths of her friends, her composure held together by gossamer thread, you understand why she’s there. When Powell once again proves his excellent talent for looking at a love interest like he can see right to the core of them, like they hold the secrets of the universe, you understand why he’s there.

However good they are, “Twisters” probably could have afforded to spend a little less time on Kate and Tyler and more on the wonderful ensemble cast that surrounds them (including a standout over-the-top performance from Brandon Perea). But even if the film doesn’t quite capture the real hangout vibes of the original, Chung still manages to harken back to that 90s blockbuster sentiment without an ounce of irony. The 2024 visuals feel a little sleeker, a little less chaotic than their 90s counterpart, but there’s an earnest goofiness to “Twisters” that we just don’t see too much of anymore in big budget filmmaking. Characters use wacky scientific jargon with the straightest of faces. Benjamin Wallfisch’s score is sweeping and orchestral, triumphant with a hint of whimsy.

The phrase “love letter” feels trite and overwrought, but at the same time, “Twisters” feels like it was made with a real love for blockbuster filmmaking in mind. The film’s grand finale takes place in a movie theater while 1931’s “Frankenstein” plays as a tornado rages on, one monster whipping around outside as another graces the screen. The screen is eventually ripped off, but the place where it stood is still shaded in black and white, people stumbling towards the opening as they look up in awe at the sky. Much like movies, storms have the power to move us, to terrify us, to amaze us. I’m just glad that someone is interested in keeping that spirit alive.

The post Film Review: ‘Twisters’ is a legacy sequel done right appeared first on Rough Draft Atlanta .