You don't play with Mother Nature. That's common sense; anyone who does, well, I feel sorry for them. In "Twister," Nature is given a frightening new dimension courtesy of breathtaking Hollywood CGI effects but it's dumbed down by a questionable script and dialogue (thanks to none other than novelist Michael Crichton himself as a co-author, along with wife Anne-Marie Martin) and sub-par acting. Sure, a number of liberties are also taken with tornadoes ("fingers of God" - one character calls them), but what do you expect from a film directed by "Speed" Jan de Bont?
And lastly, who goes to see movies like this for scientific accuracy? I remember watching it with a friend and giving him a nasty tongue-lashing afterwards for his redundant pointing out of the various scientific and factual inaccuracies that abound in it (which he told me had each been identified by his science teacher - go figure). I snapped back, "Dude, chill out. It's just a movie. Who cares if this does or doesn't happen, or tornadoes don't suck like that." I basically told him to get a grip.
Nature is unrepentant in its desire to test human will to withstand her destructive forces. I showered praise on "Twister" for capturing that and making sure its human characters realize it. I make these statements because "Twister" is quite terrifying in its scenes of tornadoes blazing paths of destruction, and this is what people tend to miss when watching it. I know I'm sure to run into flak because of it but, what am I going to do {*shrugs shoulders*}?
As the film opens on the plains of Oklahoma's Tornado Alley, the National Weather Service is tracking several storm systems that if they were to merge any time soon, they could see a record outbreak of violent, tornado-producing severe weather. Next, we're introduced to meteorologist and recent divorcée Bill (Bill Paxton) and fiancée Melissa (Jami Gertz) - "She's a reproductive therapist," he reassures us, after Bill is asked if she is HIS therapist. Melissa isn't too keen on the idea of storm chasing, which poses a problem for them both, but for Bill it was always the thrill of the hunt, and we know he's not going to pass the opportunity to get back in the mode of things.
We then arrive at a field where we meet the storm chasers, led by Bill's tough ex and fellow meteorologist Jo (Helen Hunt), who has somehow mysteriously forgotten to sign her name to the last page of the divorce papers (she still loves him). When asked if he's back by the various supporting players, he emphatically denies he has returned to his field of expertise. But it turns out, however, that before their marriage went to hell, they had been busy developing a revolutionary storm system-tracking device that could give them the inside knowledge of how tornadoes work.
"DOROTHY" (real original), the miracle device, a package that contains hundreds of little sensors, could be placed in the damage path and each sensor could provide a detailed map of a tornado's inner-workings and with such knowledge now available, they could design an advanced warning system. The trick is, however, they have to wait until a twister spawns, place Dorothy in its damage path (or "Suck Zone"), and then run like hell. The action begins when they're forced to take off to chase after the storm, and it's about here the film abandons logic and plot for nonstop special effects, peril, and destruction.
Saying the acting here sucks and is uninspired is like saying we went to see "Jurassic Park" (1993) for the performances - understatement - get real. It's easy for any casual movie-goer to pick apart bad acting and lousy story, but come on, it's a roller coaster film. I'm not sure I could put it in clearer writing for you about how we don't go to see movies like this for Oscar-winning actors or plot. I've always liked Bill Paxton (who I personally see as probably being the next Clint Eastwood), and I find it difficult about how he has somehow managed to avoid stardom. Here, his character seems to know how the storm functions and what it "thinks," and in essence he's a human barometer (even his wild days as a radical storm chaser do deserve some laughs).
The writing is substandard, including Jo's barely-hinted upon obsession with chasing the storm (as a child, she saw her dad killed by a monster F5), Lois Smith as Jo's Aunt Meg (who supplies our famished heroes with platters of beef and eggs between effects scenes), the underdeveloped storm chasing team (some of whom are more colorful than others, including Philip Seymour Hoffman as Dusty), and the unnecessary subplot involving stiff competition from Cary Elwes as a corporate-sponsored rival who stole Bill's invention. But this isn't too glaring a problem, if you're a hard-a** for art in cinema and came to "Twister" expecting it. You'll see plenty scenes of destruction (just wait for the drive-in showing "The Shining"), and the music that swells up when tornadoes appear.
Lastly, I can see how anyone who has experienced a twister in their lives could probably want to possibly stay from "Twister." I've never seen one and I don't want to. I do know people who have experienced tornadoes; in northern Virginia, where I live, we rarely see the kind of severe weather that produces twisters, but my grandparents, who live close to me, were once in an F1 and thankfully it caused minimal damage to their property and neighbors.
"Twister" isn't a failure; it's a simple realization of the popcorn blockbuster. Put aside the hard-pressing of art, turn off your brain, and enjoy (but you should still watch out for those flying cows, tanker trucks, and other debris that can become a hostile projectile if picked up by a tornado's winds); it's that simple.
7/10
31 out of 63 found this helpful.
Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
