“Standalone sequel” - what a horrible phrase.
Spoiler
Twisters is an upcoming American disaster film… It is a standalone sequel to the 1996 film Twister.
You must log in or register to comment.
“a standalone sequel”
what a horrible phrase.
“a standalone sequel”
Hollywood’s new craze
It means shit movies for the rest of your daaaaaays!
Twister 2: The Twisterning
Twister 3: Tokyo Twist
Twister’s: The Grocers Comma
2 Fast 2 Twisty
2 Fast 2 Twister
I want a movie with sentient twisters. Twisters that have to consume to survive. Like the entity in Nope.
Pretty sure there’s a courage the cowardly dog episode that is exactly this
deleted by creator
The bit where somebody writes a movie title on a board and then writes an s after it and then draws a line through it to make it a dollar sign except they actually keep getting greenlit.
Batman$
and storm chasing itself is pretty outdated at this point right? Like its still awesome (the original meaning) to see a tornado, but hopping into a van or whatever to get footage? Seems kinda quaint
I perceived stormchasing as pretty “popular” back in the 2010s
It’s probably outdated now because everything fun and new is outdated and done already
A sequel to Twister…fucking Twister? Jesus, that’s dire. I mean, I like Twister as much as the next person (Helen Hunt? Bill Paxton? Flying cows? What’s not to love!), but I’m pretty sure that movie told us everything we need to know about the Twister universe.
Also goddamn, I didn’t realize it grossed half a billion at the box office and beat out Mission: Impossible. Presumably the execs just have a list of movies sorted by box office returns and are greenlighting reboots and sequels in order, reason be damned
a list of movies sorted by box office returns and are greenlighting reboots and sequels in order, reason be damned
In nutshell it’s hard to see that not being standard operating procedure. Hollywood has always been a business but it seems now it’s only a business to those with power and influence.
It’s true on a general level, but like…Twister? I get trying to milk beloved cultural icons for all they’re worth, but Twister has no cultural cachet whatsoever. I doubt anyone who wasn’t alive when it came out has even heard of it, and for the rest of us it’s not the kind of movie you reminisce about. As crass as the Disney live action remakes are, the market is obvious. I can even understand Willy Wonka (although I do wonder who tf is actually watching those–aren’t we on like the third reboot in 15 years or something??). But Twister? You’re really gonna throw $200 million at Twister? Maybe these studio execs know something I don’t, but I just can’t imagine that many people are gonna get excited about CGI tornados with a cast of randoms.
I just can’t imagine that many people are gonna get excited about CGI tornados with a cast of randoms.
I entirely agree. But I think the current and average Hollywood exec has no real passion for movies or pop culture. For comparison what makes movies like dramas financial successes requires actual interest in storytelling, acting, and directing. The execs have no interest in something that’s much-loved. They want money. For example - the profit upside for stuff like dramas tends to be very low.
“CGI tornados” is the kind of thing that for them smells like money. CGI-based movies are often ideal for them because the tricky part and heart of the movies - storytelling - plays second fiddle to the spectacle, massive CGI overkill, and the cartoon physics. The execs think
CGI + Big Stars = a potential huge hit.That mindset can create very expensive movies and the risk is high that they don’t even break even. But a big budget CGI-extravaganza might make 100s of millions of dollars. And - of course - a hit movie will have the usual possible tie-ins. Sequel(s)? Prequel(s)? Become a full-fledged franchise? Spinoffs like a TV series? Other marketing crap (a Twisters Burger?), etc.
And - of course - ~20 dramas don’t get made because because a movie like Twisters sucks up all the money and resources.
I’d rather see a twister remake than remake #219486753 of DC/marvel/capeshit etc
i’ve been thinking a disaster movie would be a really fun setdressing for a slasher. like there’s a big tornado but also some very-unworried-about-the-twister killer is on the prowl
“Mike is dead!”
“What?!? Stop screwing around. The tornado is still at least 10 miles away.”
“Somebody cut his throat!”
-–
Remember us little people when you make it big in Hollywood. I think it’s a great idea. Now all you need is the one sentence tagline/summary and a very catchy title. If it was a horror-comedy - and I hope it’s not - you could call it Twiller or Tasher. But if it’s just horror I have no title ideas.
can’t wait for the twister cinematic universe
I hate all these lazy ass titles. It’s always just LITERAL SUBJECT or NAME OF PROTAGANIST
I’m surprised nobody in Hollywood created a big-budget franchise to monitize the weather. The Rock is the lead in glasses and sort of mildly corporate clothing so he’s the super smart scientist guy. Once in a while he still takes off his shirt and shows his bulges but that’s easily explained by his catch phrase “I’m smart but I also like to work out.”
And - for some reason - he needs to be close to the action as possible in Super Storm, Super Hurricane, Super Tornado, Super Firestorm, Super Typhoon (filmed in Asia), etc.
I’m surprised nobody in Hollywood created a big-budget franchise to monitize the weather.
The Rock
Earthquakes are weather?
Don’t forget Dimly Lit Super Meadow
Twister: Infinity Storm
Oh, no.
Mankind dealing with natural disasters is a universal concept. Another film about tornadoes isn’t a necessarily indicative of a decline in standards.
I think that making it a sequel to Twister does indicate an obsession with risk mitigation though which I think, overall, hurts film making. They’re either wanting to tell a story but are burdening it with a vestigial IP purely to hedge their bets at the box office or they don’t have a story to tell and the new film will be an exercise in reviving an IP for it’s own sake with the actual creation of a film and the telling of a story being an obligation at best.
I simply don’t believe anyone is really passionate about telling the continuing story of the characters or world presented in Twister.
It’s more the fact they didn’t make “another film about tornadoes” they just rehashed an existing one.
One of the worst things about being on the older edge of “Millennial” is that at this moment in time, it feels like nearly all media and advertising is geared towards people precisely around my age bracket (since we’re probably at the relative zenith of income and spending that income). The original sucked and I haven’t even thought about it in 25+ years but it’s such an obvious attempt to cash in on people my age’s feelings of nostalgia, which are largely fueled by precarity that everyone would rather think about how cool things were when they were 16 instead of deal with current reality.
They mined my age bracket’s nostalgia too with Star Wars, Star Trek, Hawaii Five-O, SWAT, Total Recall, etc. The list goes on and on. Eventually I decided to ignore it all. When I learned a reboot of Road House was coming out for about 30 seconds I was interested. But then I realized it will be the same all other the other uncreative, branded, formulaic, by-the-numbers dreck created to make money. The only thing in common with the original will likely be the title.
Twisters.
This time, it’s war.
