Legacy sequels are something that are always divisive amongst fans. Some will be raving that one of their favourite films is getting a revival decades later. Others will just see it as a needless cash grab.
Jan de Bont’s 1996 disaster flick Twister seems to have gained a staple cult status amongst many fans. A cast stacked with legendary names like Bill Paxton and Phillip Seymour Hoffman is bound to bring it to the forefront of the genre. But the question is, did it need a legacy sequel?
My answer is simply, yes. A film that collectively shows what modern blockbuster filmmaking is capable of, simultaneously showcasing the stars of the future. A reminder of what happens when a studio and director care about the medium and the legacy that it holds. When they announced Lee Isaac Chung was going to helm the reins of this project, many people had the same reaction: ‘The Minari director?’. Off the back of his Oscar-nominated drama, he turned to a studio blockbuster. A decision that to many might seem stupid, but, in actual fact, it couldn’t have turned out better.
A Directional Beauty
It could have been so easy to just attach a director to it with no ounce of respect for the original or with no clear directing talent. You know you have instantly made the right decision when the director decides to shoot on film. The absolute standout factor of this film. The dirt roads stand out with this red tint and the flowing Oklahoma fields are such a stunning green. The wide-angle shots have a gorgeous grain to them, really giving it that pre-2000’s feel. Chung’s direction consists of some lovely executed one-take sequences that set this film apart from any regular blockbuster.
There’s one moment when our lead character Kate, played by Daisy Edgar-Jones, has this small moment of realisation when chasing a tornado. A gorgeous moment of direction and sound design, as we cut to a shot of field blowing in the wind and the sound isolated. It’s the small moments of direction that make the difference. For a lot, it’s such a minor thing but it just hasn’t left my head. This film could’ve just been 120 minutes of grained wide shots of roads and fields and it would’ve been pure bliss, although not very practical for the film.
A Thematic Storm
There have been many criticisms of this film’s, lack of, plot. It works a treat. Instead of wasting time trying to form some form of overall narrative arc, we are just left with a rather satisfying meandering set of events. One of the set of events, in particular, includes a wild opening taking no time to just dispose of actors. The loose arc that this film holds, concerns some scientific journey, similar to the original. Chung swaps that for a more character-driven approach as our character’s abilities evolve with their relationships. Relationships that admittedly aren’t acted out to the best of their ability. Nor do they either give off the best sense of chemistry that maybe they could’ve. No doubt this film’s biggest weakness.
One of the standout factors of the film, however, is its importance in conveying the tragedies of the tornado seasons that occur across America. The script balances the horrors of the aftermaths and the people who try and take advantage of it surprisingly well. An important piece of commentary that I’m sure many people don’t realise is so impacting on many lives. It could’ve been easy for this film to try and say too much and consequently hinder other aspects at play. Many have been discussing this film’s lack of commentary on climate change itself. In all honesty, for the film’s sake, it is better that it was minimalised. Not because it doesn’t matter (it very much does), but because it would’ve been attempting to say too much and disturbing the thematic balance that the script was going for.
This film does attempt to strike some comedic elements that are hit-and-miss. The back-and-forth between one British journalist in the film is particularly hilarious. Especially the fascination of Americans trying to make out our town and county names. It is an understandable difficulty.
The Stars of the Future
Yes, the original had a car driving through a house (which is really cool) but the charm of young Hollywood stars is unmatched (yes this is just directed to Glen Powell). This film is genuinely a showcase for some of the younger stars in Hollywood (complimentary) and it works in that it literally is the entire cast.
Glen Powell is on top of the world right now, from Top Gun, to Hit Man and Everybody Wants Some. There is no young actor working today with the levels of charisma he has. In every scene, the screen presence is immaculate. It’s not just his good looks either, his acting ability carries that side of the film on its back. He’s had on-screen relationships with Sydney Sweeny, Adria Arjona, and Zoey Deutch. Unfortunately for Daisy Edgar-Jones, this is by far the weakest from a writing and chemistry standpoint. It doesn’t help that the chemistry between the other relationships are just that good.
Anthony Ramos tries to bring something to the table but he just brings the acting equivalent of some stale crackers. His character feels awkward in what ends up being a flimsy love triangle. Although it’s probably better that his relationship with Kate goes nowhere. Brandon Perea brings his charm A-game once again and does his best with a weak (comedic) script. Being overshadowed by Glen Powell doesn’t help their case either. Katy O’Brian has a minimal part to play but she just adds to this young showcase of actors. A future star without a doubt and anyone who hasn’t seen why; go watch Love Lies Bleeding. It is also a showcase for the future of Superman. David Corenswet has a small part to play but one many are eager to see play out, just to get a glimpse of what may be to come next year.
