‘TWISTERS’: Bringing Sexy (Science) Back
(But not in the way you think…)
When I first started championing more women in STEM roles on TV and film with my Scirens team a decade ago, every second response was a snicker, “You mean like Denise Richard’s ‘nuclear physicist’ in James Bond?” Yes, ‘Dr. Christmas Jones’ — in shorts and a cropped tank top, wielding thin science dialogue and enduring more than one ‘unwrapping’ joke. Instead, I yearned for the gravitas of Jodie Foster’s ‘Ellie Arroway’ from Contact, brimming with awe for the universe and armed with real science. Yet, like Richards’ character, ‘Ellie’ was an outlier — overlooked, underestimated, and usually alone in her quest. My favorite TV scientist, ‘Dana Scully’, and second favorite sci-fi show, Fringe, also exemplified this: scientists as outcasts, the ‘Davids’ against governmental or corporate ‘Goliaths’. And on the flip side, lone scientists so consumed by their ambitions that they turn to the dark side, as often depicted in comic book narratives. They were never just… popular.
I think it’s time that scientists became the cool kids. They’ve weathered enough storms, been on society’s fringes for long enough. They deserve to be seen in a new exciting light because what they do is inspiring and fascinating... understanding the world around us! Science, especially as we move into uncertain times because of climate change, needs to be celebrated by the populace.
Thus, entering the theater to see Twisters, I braced for disappointment. Why? Despite stellar reviews of this sequel to Twister, conversations with friends and both a New York Times and CNN article indicated that in a film about increasingly dangerous tornadoes, not a single character, not even a scientist, openly names the climate crisis. The reason? Apparently to embrace as many potential audience members as possible, especially in the ‘Red States’:
“Universal’s approach to “Twisters” involved positioning the movie as escapist fun and studiously avoiding sociopolitical issues.” (NY TIMES)
Thus, no subtle mention of the carbon-fueled warming temperatures that heighten storm systems, no aside about human activities driving these changes, and certainly no hint at actionable solutions (sorry, Kate’s device is not scientifically viable). Just bigger, badder, and more frequent tornadoes arising from… well, nothing specific? As a fervent climate-in-stories entertainment activist and filmmaker, I was ready to take up metaphoric arms against the filmmakers and the studio (even though I deeply respect the work of director Lee Isaac Chung.) How could they overlook such a critical opportunity for a climate crisis acknowledgment?
Yet, I walked out euphoric, once again thrilled by the power of cinema.
Yes, Twisters is a four-quadrant epic popcorn flick; but it’s also a film that makes science sexy. And I think that is BIG for climate action.
But it’s not sexy for the reasons you might think. Yes, ‘tornado wrangler’ ‘Tyler Owens’, portrayed by the charismatic Glen Powell, saunters through a rainstorm in a tight white t-shirt, which is hilariously glorious. However, where previous films might have pitted his character — a storm-chaser YouTube superstar — against the protagonist, a grief-stricken, ivory tower-educated meteorologist ‘Kate Carter’, Twisters does something different. The film’s sexiest scene involves crosscutting between Tyler and Kate, each fervently sharing their storm physics expertise with their respective teams as they chase a forming tornado. Here, two brilliant but DIFFERENT minds echo each other, revealing a shared, primal passion… for the science. Hubba Hubba.
Yet Twisters does more than spotlight these two scientists; it celebrates an entire community of them. Almost every character depicted is a storm chaser, each passionate about the science in their own authentic way, making them cool and integral to a vibrant, diverse community with a shared mission that rings true (thanks to NOAA — the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration — as a prominent advisor). And… they have ‘fans’. Kate, in fact, is the outsider, dismissed as the ‘big city girl’ with the University degree. ‘Tyler’s’ band of storm chasers are mostly self-taught, each with a unique skill — a symbol of ‘citizen science’, where you don’t have to have a degree to partake in studying the natural phenomenons around you. I left wanting to be one of them, and I bet I’m not alone.
To note, even the on-screen villains are scientists, amassing data for profit, dressed in matching white jumpsuits like Storm Troopers. Are these villains vanquished for good? No, they continue their nefarious plans in the background once exposed, evoking an Empire and Rebellion battle on the horizon (fleets of sleek shuttles and all).
But what about dropping the ‘climate’ ball? Though the film avoids explicit climate change dialogue, I think Chung is a Jedi here as the film weaves climate change awareness and reverence for nature into its visual fabric. It’s the gravitas that balances out the quick-witted banter of the sci-nerd community. The film’s imagery powerfully communicates: verdant hills dotted with gleaming wind turbines juxtaposes a Mordor-esque oil refinery consumed in flames. Kate, stares lovingly at the swirling sky and the wind tangled grass, capturing it through her lens, framing the environment - though silent - as a vivid character to revere. (Indeed an interview in eco-magazine Atmos explores the actress’s work in evoking her character’s love of nature and the sustainability practiced on set, though, again, no mention of the ‘C’ word.)
The portrayal of the aftermath and recovery in communities hit by tornadoes adds additional social commentary on the inequalities exacerbated by real natural disasters. It shines a light on vulnerable communities, particularly Indigenous ones, underscoring the pressing reality of the climate crisis and its impact on marginalized society. As townsfolk and storm chasers unite and shelter together from the final storm, the film metaphorically hints at the movie’s sci-fact, showcasing a movie screen being ripped away by the winds (also, a homage to the original film).
This entertaining rollercoaster left me wanting more — not just more scenes of our two leads in steamy atmospheric physics pillow-talk, but a continued quest from this vibrant community of storm chasers to combat the escalating threats of tornadoes and corporate overlords. Because alongside them, I forsaw a better world.
Were these passionate on-screen scientists (no longer the outliers) and poignant climate visuals enough to offset the lack of overt messaging? I have to acknowledge that Hollywood has weathered its own storm these past few years and is having to pivot its content and marketing in order to survive; it’s still frustating. But, yes, because of Chung’s deft hand in crafting this film, Twisters earns my support, as a filmmaker, a ‘Sciren’ and as a climate activist. A whole new generation of rockstar meteorologists, engineers and even citizen scientists might just have been birthed thanks to it (as some were because of the original). Not to mention, the average person may just take an extra second to look at the nature around them and feel more compelled to protect it. And that is what’s important here.
Because in Twisters, like in real life, the storm has already arrived…
Let’s get the gang together, in whatever way we can.
