Twisters

Twister is an almost three decades older movie yet it has unquestionably superior cinematography, editing, sound editing, surround sound mixing, score and soundtrack. It also has much more creative and visually memorable tornado sequences.

Does Twisters have higher resolution CGI? Yes, the CGI is higher resolution but it's not used right and the quality has barely improved since the one decade older tornado movie "Into The Storm".

There is zero mention of climate change and the human causes of more extreme weather.

There's a rodeo sequence (really?) that could have easily been replaced with some other activity like monster truck show or whatever.

They could have made the tornadoes more dark, ominous and violent like in Twister. It also lacks thrilling shots of crazy debris almost hitting the characters.

The could have made it suspenseful and less predictable by adding and killing off some well developed and likable characters.

High frame rate 3D would have been the appropriate choice for an action movie like this, but they cheaped out..

The budget of Twisters is double the budget of Twister. Unbelievable.

You can clearly tell that it was directed by someone who has no talent or experience with directing action.

Twisters is not a sequel to Twister. It's a pointless re-imagining of Twister.

There would have been a chance for some cinematic magic again if they hired the right people to make a sequel to Twister: Director: James Cameron or Jan De Bont Writers: David Koepp and Anne-Marie Martin.

Have you noticed an epidemic of movies that don't take themselves seriously? They often involve knowing looks/winks at the camera and meta-jokes that break the fourth wall. (And maybe a Ryan Reynolds appearance.) Twisters is not that. In fact, it is the opposite of that. Twisters is a throwback to when summer blockbusters just went for it, and it is ridiculous in all the best ways. This movie builds on what made the original Twister fun, dials all of it up to 11, and makes absolutely zero apologies for it. Not coincidentally, I had an absolute blast. Everybody who walked into that theater knew what they were signing up for, and we all got it. Not only that, but these characters were way more well rounded than the original, so I understood their choices and cared more when the winds started swirling. It isn't perfect, and it certainly strains credulity throughout, but it was a thrill ride that treated its setting, characters, and audience like they deserved some respect. What's not to like about that?

PS - Powell and Edgar-Jones were absolutely tailor-made for this one.

Nowhere near as good as the original. Why did they feel the need to remake this? Why can't studios come up with their own new ideas instead of remaking past great movies? What has happened to Hollywood? Where has creativity gone to? It's like they fired or all the best creators quit in Hollywood. I just don't get it. Why are so many movies so horrible today? It's so sad what's been going on lately.

I would highly recommend just watching the original again instead of this mess. The visuals are OK (sometimes), but the original's effects were really good as well, and that was decades ago. The acting and story was subpar at best.

2 out of 10 - save yourself some money and watch the original instead.

Recently saw the 90s version with the same title starring Hunt & Paxton which was an epic disaster thriller. It was better than this one in every sense be it casting, acting, emotional connect or gravity & intensity of scenes. One thing though seemed to have improved is the visual effects and why not, it's been 30 years since the previous one got released. It's the least they could have done.

Kate, a former tornado chaser is lured back to study a series of tornados expected to hit Oklahoma. Still haunted by a devastating encounter with a tornado during her college years, she crosses paths with fearless Tyler Owens, a modern day tornado chaser cum blogger and his awesome team. In 1996 version they had this alert system called Dorothy which was supposed to track the nature of the tornado. In this film they go next level to mitigate the tornado itself.

Daisy Edgar Jones looks great but disappoints with her portrayal of Kate. Her performance lacked the vigor and magnitude that Hunt's character had. Glen Powell carries the whole movie with his ever-charming role. Though this movie lacked the thrill that the other Twister had, maybe because of the better cast involved in the earlier installment, current version excels in the visual department. Those Tornados looked realistically awesome on the big screen.

Twisters is certainly well made with a talented core cast. It is far from a bad film, but I found the story to be familiar and predictable as far as disaster films go.

I was happy to settle into something fun and entertaining; I don't think my expectations were too high, but I think Twisters was missing tension, which is a vital part of a film like this. At no point did I feel any of the central cast of characters were under real threat as they bounced between set piece stunts.

Glen Powell and Daisy Edgar-Jones are very watchable in the leads and Anthony Ramos does well to give dimensions to a difficult role. There are however, simply too many peripheral characters.

A large portion of the film's runtime focusses on the relationship between the two leads and, aside from Anthony Ramos, there is no time left to flesh out the rest of the supporting cast, who operate largely as comic relief.