This whole nostalgia thing is getting twisted - a look at the strange Twister sequel

In a cinematic landscape where nostalgia is practically an industry, the news of a "Twister" sequel whirls in with the subtlety of a cow flying across the sky. Yes, you heard right, folks: "Twisters" (yes, with an "s" like "Aliens") is on the horizon for 2024, and it's stirring up more than just fictional tornadoes.

Now, let's get this straight: the '90s were a golden era for disaster flicks, and "Twister" spun right into the heart of it. With flying cows and a love story more turbulent than the storms themselves, it was a whirlwind of a movie. But as much as we cherish Bill Paxton's roguish charm and Helen Hunt's steely determination, let's be real: this isn't the sort of nostalgia that screams "sequel material."

But here we are, with "Twisters" barrelling towards us, and it's as perplexing as finding a drive-in still showing "The Shining" during a tornado. The original film's charm, aside from its visual spectacle, was the stormy romance between Paxton and Hunt. Yet, with Paxton's tragic passing and Philip Seymour Hoffman's too, one can't help but wonder: how will this sequel navigate its legacy without its key players?

Directed by Lee Isaac Chung, known for his poignant and intimate storytelling in "Minari," "Twisters" feels like it might be more of a whirlwind for Chung than the audience. It's a well-known Hollywood tornado when indie directors get sucked into the vortex of blockbuster filmmaking. More often than not, they emerge on the other side, a bit dishevelled, their unique voices lost in the howl of the storm.

Daisy Edgar-Jones and Glen Powell, however, are set to lead the cast, which does pique some interest. But let's face it: a legacy sequel set decades after the original, focusing on the daughter of the original storm-chasers? It sounds as much like a safe bet as chasing an F5 on a bicycle.

"Twisters" in 2024 feels like an odd gust from the past. In an age where every other film is a superhero saga or a universe unto itself, the quaint charm of '90s disaster flicks seems almost as out of place as a kangaroo in Kansas. The original "Twister" was a product of its time, a fun, if not slightly cheesy, ride through the eye of the storm. It was the thrill of the chase, the CGI cows, and yes, the central romance that made it a hit, not the intricate plotting or character development.

As we look back with a light nostalgia, it's hard to shake the feeling that this sequel might be chasing storms that have long since dissipated. "Twisters" might spin up some interest, but whether it can recapture the heart of the original or offer something new remains to be seen. It's a curious case of Hollywood digging up the time capsule and finding a weather-beaten VHS tape. Maybe it'll be a cult hit, or perhaps it'll just remind us that some things are better left as fond memories.

So, as we brace ourselves for "Twisters," let's not forget the original's place in our hearts. It was a wild ride, a '90s gem that, while not warranting a sequel, deserves its spot in the tornado alley of our nostalgia. And who knows? Maybe "Twisters" will surprise us all and become the eye of the storm in 2024's cinematic landscape. But for now, I'm keeping my flying cow scepticism firmly intact.