This article contains spoilers for the movie “Twisters."
It’s one of the most anticipated weather events of this year — a fictional movie about tornadoes.
When the trailer was released for Twisters, the follow-up to the 1996 blockbuster Twister, meteorologists and storm chasers beamed — even as some expressed some concerns about whether it would be accurate. While it’s not a perfect representation of reality, “Twisters” is likely going to make weather nerds and most movie-goers pretty happy.
The film focuses on a talented meteorologist named Kate Carter (played by Daisy Edgar-Jones) and “tornado wrangler” Tyler Owens (played by Glen Powell), who drive dangerously close to tornadoes and devise a scheme to tame their fury. The Post’s review says the film “blows away the summer competition” and rates it 3.5 stars out of four. In our view, aside from the validity of the characters’ lofty goal, the action-packed movie presents a better understanding of tornado chasing, impacts and science than its predecessor.
“There’s attention to detail that I don’t think was there the first time around,” said Rick Smith, a warning coordination meteorologist at National Weather Service forecast office in Norman, Okla, who was consulted on the film. “I went in knowing how hard that [the crew] had worked, how much fact checking they did and how much they strived — the director, the producers and even the actors — to wherever they could make it scientifically accurate.”
Several members of The Washington Post’s weather team — meteorologists Matthew Cappucci, Jeff Halverson and Jason Samenow and reporter Kasha Patel — attended a recent screening of the Steven Spielberg project directed by Lee Isaac Chung, which opens in theaters across the U.S. on Friday. Cappucci, a tornado chaser himself, has spent hundreds of hours pursuing storms. Halverson, a professor of meteorology, has written textbooks on severe weather. Here are our takeaways:
What we liked
- It was obvious producers consulted with meteorologists. Sure, the script stretched the truth at times, but it often felt like we were watching a careful weather documentary. Smith said he met with the production crew several times and even gave a two-hour tornado class on Oklahoma tornado culture, storm spotting, tornado safety, severe weather and meteorology. Many other scientists were also consulted on the film.
- The action was captivating and characters were relatable — you certainly won’t be bored. Glen Powell’s character seemed to us like a mix of real-life “extreme” chaser Reed Timmer and viral YouTube personality Ryan Hall.
- We loved that the chasers had GR2 Analyst -- a radar program that allows meteorologists to analyze real-time storm data -- on their dashboard-mounted laptop. We use it too.
- It was fun seeing a few local government and broadcast meteorologists in Oklahoma City, like Rick Smith, Mike Morgan and Emily Sutton, make cameos.
- The final scene — which takes places in a movie theater — offers a thoughtful but haunting illusion to an iconic photo of the movie theater damaged by the disastrous Mayfield, Ky. tornado in December 2021.
- This movie will draw attention to meteorology and the need to improve our understanding of tornadoes to keep people safe. It has the potential to inspire a whole new generation of meteorologists. We were glad to see women and people of color as positive role models in the film, groups underrepresented in meteorology.
What we didn’t like
- In one scene, a huge twister surprises attendees at a rodeo. Monster tornadoes don’t sneak up on us anymore because of a strong warning system...usually. This movie unfortunately reinforces the flawed notion that tornadoes often take people by surprise.
- The movie was filmed and set in Oklahoma, potentially reinforcing the misconception that most tornadoes occur in the Plains. The most violent and deadly tornadoes are actually more common in the South. By not straying from Oklahoma, the movie missed an opportunity to educate audiences about this reality.
What the movie got right
- The movie did a very good job of accurately using meteorological jargon, referring to factors important in tornado forecasting like “the cap,” the strength of the jet stream, moisture availability, wind shear and more.
- The CGI was incredibly realistic, and even subtle details about the shapes of storm clouds and fluid, turbulent motions in tornadoes exhibited extreme attention to detail.
- The movie correctly captured the myriad reasons people storm chase. There are academics seeking data. There are insurance agency-backed groups conducting research. There are tours for the wealthy. There are photography groups. There are yahoos who don’t know what they’re doing and who make it dangerous for others. There are meteorologists reveling in what they’ve dedicated their lives to studying. And there is an emerging group of social media influencers gaining notoriety.
What the movie exaggerated
- The premise of modifying a tornado is untested and probably unrealistic. “I’m not aware of any experiment, any project, any research that’s ever been done to try to do what they’re doing in the movie as far as disrupting or taming the tornado," said the Weather Service’s Smith. “The science behind what they’re trying to do is sound. Whether you could actually do it in practice is the question because you’re dealing with a huge supercell thunderstorm, you’re dealing with a tornado that itself is very large."
- Extreme winds don’t strike minutes ahead of a tornado as depicted in the film; the serious winds ramp up in just seconds. Too many structures collapsed and way too many people were sucked into the air too far in advance.
- Most tornadoes portrayed were roaring monsters. That’s just not the way it is! The vast majority of tornadoes are weak, rated EF0 or 1 on the 0-to-5 Enhanced Fujita scale for intensity, not the violent EF5s depicted in the film.
- The movie shows chasers driving into tornadoes intentionally; that’s not the norm. There are a couple of real-life chasers who drive specifically-designed vehicles to intercept a tornado dead on, but most keep a safe distance.
- The actors are seen frequently driving through fields but real-life chasers generally stick to paved roads. Anyone who has driven in Oklahoma knows that fields and dirt roads turn to muddy slip-n-slides at the first hint of rain and quickly become impassible.
What we wish the movie had included
- We wish the movie had leaned more into the growing problem of “chaser convergence,” i.e. instances when too many storm chasers are pursuing the same storm causing traffic jams and dangerous driving practices. Moreover, by popularizing and glorifying storm chasing, movies like this could contribute to the problem.
- Meteorologists who broadcast or stream live coverage of unfolding tornado events draw massive audiences and are a vital information source. It would have enriched the film to have a broadcast meteorologist as a prominent character.
How we’d rate the movie out of 4 stars
- Matthew Cappucci: 3.5 stars, “I was extremely impressed.”
- Jeff Halverson: 3 stars, “Blows the original ‘Twister’ away! I’m a hard sell for realistic science and the efficacy of our warning system but, still, this movie really raises public awareness of the societal threat and scientific challenges of understanding tornadoes.”
- Kasha Patel: 3.5 stars, “Highly recommended. Feels like this decade’s touchstone weather movie that will entertain all generations. Fast-paced, family-friendly movie that gives you all the emotions. Definitely one I’ll watch over and over again.”
- Jason Samenow: 3.5 stars, “The best weather disaster movie I’ve seen, better than the original and other classics like The Perfect Storm and The Day After Tomorrow.”
