Controversial opinion: Twisters was only fine

The sequel to the classic film Twister was released in July to broad audience and critical appeal. Starring Glenn Powell (Top Gun: Maverick) and Daisy Edgar-Jones (Where the Crawdads Sing), the film is a sequel to the 1996 classic starring Helen Hunt and Bill Paxton but other than the premise and technology is not a continuation of any of the characters. The story centers around Edgar-Jones’s Kate who is a meteorologist with a complicated tornadic history and Powell as Tyler, a viral video star meteorologist with his own agenda. Their worlds collide in Oklahoma where a super storm of tornados is terrorizing locals.

The Conservative Critic asks: Is it entertaining? Does it have artistic/intellectual value? And is it liberal propaganda? 

The Conservative Critic Meter Check: Twisters

Overall Rating: Fine Fun

There is a reason the Conservative Critic breaks up my reviews by category. I can understand why a lot of conservative voices are raving about Twisters because it really did pay a lovely homage to Americana and traditional masculinity in a refreshing way. It also avoided almost all political messaging entirely. Furthermore, there is such a lack of good movies out there that audiences were desperate for anything at all decent (and in this case pretty family friendly) to make its way onto the screen. So the accolades for the film are not at all surprising and in a sense, I agree with them especially when focused on the political elements of the review.

However, to say the film was great overall is a disservice to viewers, a disservice to film and a disservice to the iconic original masterpiece, Twister. The construction of the film from the acting and characterization to the writing and even cinematography at times was simply not good. The movie was fun but not even as fun as it could have been because it was so redundant. 

Overall the film was fine. It was very patriotic and conservative friendly and definitely better than most films that have been released in recent months but it’s barely clearing the low bar. 

Is it entertaining? 

Rating: Good pace. Low tension. 

In the words of Alfred Hitchcok: there is no terror in the bang only the anticipation of it. The film has a lot of twisters in it, per the name, but it makes the cardinal mistake of showing viewers the worst tornado right up front. And then again about 50 times. One of the things that made Twister a classic was that it treated tornados like a villain in a thriller. There is a high tension creep pulling the viewer from bad tornado, to worse to the true worst of all. And each time the audience was confronted with what seemed like a really bad storm, they became more scared of the big evil “F5” that hadn’t yet shown its face. 

Twisters takes a different approach where they deluge the viewer with as many huge tornadoes as humanly possible. This approach creates a more explosive (sometimes literally) environment and certainly it is fun, it just isn’t maximizing the potential. It’s more akin in style to Sharknado (undeniably fun) than the original Twister. 

There is nothing boring about Twisters. It has a quick pace and a manageable run time and it’s a perfectly enjoyable movie. 

Does it have artistic/intellectual value? 

Rating: No

Twisters is not well made and I won’t be bullied into saying it is. Glenn Powell is currently Hollywood’s number 1 darling but I’m simply not buying what he’s selling in Twisters. The ‘cowboy rebel with a heart of gold’ characterization is not only done to death (a problem with the writing) but Powell delivers it so heavy handedly it’s as if he was wearing a t-shirt that said “I seem wild but really I am sensitive.” There is even a moment in the film where Edgar-Jones’s character, Kate, is photographing a tornado and says, “Beautiful” and Powell’s Tyler looks at her because she is really the beautiful one get it audience?? GET IT??? Powell’s performance isn’t the only problem by a long stretch. Edgar-Jones has absolutely 0 handle on an Oklahoma accent (or even an American one) but makes a troubling attempt at it anyway. She provides almost no emotional depth to a character who experiences a pretty major trauma right at the top of the film. She does not convince audiences to even believe her trauma let alone her motivations. It may be unfair, but it is impossible to not compare her performance to Helen Hunt from the original who was masterful. Finally, in a supporting role, Anthony Ramos is the worst I’ve ever seen him.

The cinematography is also questionable. At times it is masterful. Beautiful landscapes of Oklahoma and interesting depiction of wind and weather. Depictions of wreckage are also heartbreaking and realistic. At other times, its shaky camera is making viewers sick or so over-CGIed it once again looks like it belongs in the Sharknado universe. 

Twisters are not carefully crafted or thoughtfully made. It is not close to art and it does not loop back to camp. It is not good.

Is it liberal propaganda? 

Rating: Americana

What Twisters does best is its honor of American tradition. For no reason other than releasing in the middle of Freedom Month (July), the film features a significant amount of American flags. This is one of my favorite artistic choices in films which are seeking to connect with American audiences. From denim jackets to rodeos, the star spangled banner is all over that film. Also as noted above, when the cinematography hits: it hits. The wide shots of (ostensibly) Oklahoma are beautiful and they pay respect to rural midwestern heritage. 

Additionally, Twisters celebrates masculinity in a way that I thought was bad (re: Glen Powell as cowboy rebel with a heart of gold) but does appeal to conservative values since his foil beta science man (Anthony Ramos) came across like he sucked a lot. 

Finally, where many liberals had hoped Twisters would bring in progressive talking points on climate change, the film avoided those subjects entirely. 

Overall, it was a very conservative film with plenty of Americana. 

Conclusion

Twisters is a fine movie and received a lot of audience benefit from releasing at a time when there was truly no competition and nothing even close to good out for months.