“Twisters” (2024) is the standalone sequel to “Twister” (1996), which like most natural disaster movies aspired to reunite a fractured family, namely impending divorcees, traumatized Dr. Jo (Helen Hunt) and born storm chaser turned aspiring weatherman Bill Harding (Bill Paxton). If the original felt like a remarriage comedy, then the sequel is a rom com with tornadoes playing matchmaker to another traumatized leading lady, the protagonist, Kate Carter (Daisy Edgar-Jones), who is also a homegrown storm chaser, and her perfect match, Tyler Owen (Glen Powell, whom I pegged as a star as early as “Scream Queens” in 2016), a meteorologist turned YouTube star who uses his fame for good. Apparently the franchise is no good without a potential rival to put a hitch in the inevitable pairing, but instead of the normal everywoman therapist, Dr. Melissa Reeves (Jami Gertz), a person who met Bill after the split, this film makes the rival Javi (Anthony Ramos), a man with a long-term history with Kate and shares her trauma and career aspirations. Javi lures Kate back into the field after a five-year stint in the relatively safe Manhattan, which leads her back to her true love, science and making the world a better place, and potential love interest.

“Twisters” is probably the safe summer popcorn movie that everyone has been waiting for but had hoped “The Fall Guy” (2024) would be. It is completely predictable, inoffensive, entertaining and spectacle filled. It is so crowd pleasing that there may not be more than one on-screen kiss, if that, lest parents be afraid to bring children. In the opening, it is heavily implied that most of the storm chasers follow Noah’s ark rules and require pairing off so they can sleep under the stars together, but everyone is fully clothed and chaste. There is chemistry however, and all of it rests with Powell and his characters’ team of wild ones, who will feel like an updated version of Jo’s rowdy crew of merry scientists, which included such greats as the late thespian Philip Seymour Hoffman and “Succession” ensemble star Alan Ruck among many others. 

Tyler’s ragtag band includes an embedded British journalist, Ben (Harry Hadden-Paton), who exists for comedic relief as someone who does not belong there but is committed to the story. In another universe, he would be a great match for Gertz’s character. Providing comedic relief as a scientist educated in the field, Boone (Brandon Perea), Tyler’s cameraman, is in it to set off rockets and get his adrenalin junkie fix. Perea may seem familiar from his supporting role as technical support in “Nope” (2022), and under the right circumstances, could be a breakout star one day. As Dani, Katy O’Brian is back to looking more like herself and playing according to type after a star turn as the ambitious bodybuilder in “Love Lies Bleeding” (2024). Recent fans may not recognize O’Brian, but these parts are her bread and butter as a woman who is one of the guys. It is nice to see Sasha Lane play a lighter character, Lily, the drone operator,  for a change after memorable performances in “How to Blow Up a Pipeline” (2022) and “The Miseducation of Cameron Post” (2018). She is also the lead do-gooder on the team after Tyler of course. Then there is Dexter (Tunde Adebimpe) who is the most overt nerd on the team who is also game to hawk their wares and earn a buck like a twenty-first century barker. Cue inevitable comparisons to Neil deGrasse Tyson.

In comparison, Javi’s team, Storm Par, more resembles the villains whom Dr. Jonas Miller (Cary Elwes) led in “Twister.” They are well financed, which makes them suspicious and adds unnecessary tension to “Twisters.” Part of the narrative’s momentum rests on the struggle for the soul of Kate and Javi. As they get closer to redemption, they dress more casually and are less uptight. There is a “money is bad” thread so perhaps the box office profits will all go to a charity supporting tornado victims and research? This go-round, the human villain is Javi’s super serious, implicitly sexist, uncaring nerd, Scott, whom David Corenswet played because Henry Cavill was unavailable. The investor behind the operation is Riggs (David Born), who is an utterly forgettable character for someone considered to be the human equivalent of a vulture. Imagine if J.R. Ewing had no defining characteristics other than his wardrobe—that is how anticlimactic this character is. The other people on the team are less individuated although one seems to get carried away and wish that he could hang with Tyler instead. The story neglects most of Javi’s team, which is fine, but the popcorn flick could have been punchier by leaving most of them on the cutting room floor and shaving off a smidge of running time. 

A careful reader will notice that not a lot has been devoted to Kate, the actual protagonist. She is a character who sounds good on paper-a smart, natural who must work through some difficult emotions to get to the next step of her life. I’m unfamiliar with Edgar-Jones’ work. She was inert and a blank slate to project your positive traits on to. If there was a time machine, it should be used to bring Helen Hunt to the future so she could act opposite Powell. While Kate as a character can hold her own and surpass Tyler, Edgar-Jones made it work, but the appreciative, outsized reactions to her delivering lines that were supposed to be zingers felt disproportionate to Edgar-Jones’ actual delivery and presence. If it was intentional to reflect that her character was not fully living in the present, it did not work. Hunt made a career of playing women who were distinct characters and happened to be more than a match for their big and bold significant others because of their already existing assuredness and confidence. Also, while Hunt may not be considered a great beauty by conventional standards, she had a stranglehold on most heterosexual men during the height of her fame in part because of her looks but also because of her trademark dry personality. It does not matter how many on screen characters hype her up, neither Kate not Edgar-Jones is intriguing. 

In contrast when the always perfect Maura Tierney turns up as Kate’s mother, Cathy, she is the kind of woman that can peg Tyler in seconds, still appreciate his charm, but not get blown away because she has stuff to do on the farm. “Twisters” needed a May December romance because Tierney finally added some realistic, three-dimensional zest to a woman character that was missing in Edgar-Jones depiction. 

While “Twister” may be remembered fondly, now it looks more like a ride at Universal Studios. It is unclear whether the special effects in “Twisters” will age well, but Oscar nominated Korean American director Lee Isaac Chung, famous for “Minari” (2020), balanced realism with spectacle and made the tornadoes feel as if they were genuinely jeopardizing people’s lives whereas the first movie’s twisters seemed to predominantly be vegetarians. He devotes as many shots as he can to artistic integrity: still shots without dialogue showing the relationship of the main character to their surroundings. For example, a white screen later reveals itself as the sky to add suspense before delving into the emotional impact of what preceded. He is making a blockbuster so there is only so much individual personality permitted lest it spoil the brand. 

Oklahoma becomes an unofficial character, and Chung is clearly communicating a sense of pride in places that the coastal states shun. In the wrong hands, such homespun, middle America charm could feel alienating or mistakenly connote a certain political stance, but considering how it is balanced out with such a diverse cast and paean to science (no mention of climate change, but lots of science jargon), it feels lived in and appreciative. Of course, a lot of people of color die in the opening, and the last one standing is not a romantic lead for anyone, but let’s let it slide for now considering no one is exactly breaking a G rating when it comes to the romance in “Twisters.” It does not matter how low Powell’s shirts are buttoned; this movie is not going there.

“Twisters” is an affable film that everyone can agree on and is suitable for all ages. It may not change anyone’s life, but it won’t start arguments or leave a bitter taste in your mouth. It is the kind of new movie that feels familiar and won’t be too challenging to absorb. It also does not pander to the old audience by making explicit tie-ins to “Twister” except movie theaters play pivotal dramatic roles. You do not need to see the original to understand this installment. Just go and have a good time. It is the kind of movie that Goldilocks would enjoy.