There’s a new “Twister” movie out. Is it worth watching? 

“Twisters” serves as a standalone sequel to the original 1996 film, meaning that you don’t have to watch the original to understand what’s going on (at least that’s what New York Magazine says). 

This is actually a huge deal for the movie, as it allows it pass or fail entirely on its own merits. Unlike other belated sequels, it’s not burdened by inside jokes only fans of the original will know or the need to constantly rehash fan favorite characters and moments in hopes of scoring points on the internet. 

Because of this, it’s one of the most easily accessible films of the summer. It might be carrying the “Twister” name, but it’s only using it as a way to sell its original story. 

The film follows meteorologist Kate Carter (Daisy Edgar-Jones), a former storm chaser that was researching how to break up a tornado with chemicals when an EF5 tornado (the strongest kind) kills almost all of her friends and convinces her to give up on her dreams. 

Most of the film takes place five years later, when the one other survivor, Javi (Anthony Ramos), gets in touch with a business proposal. He was the data guy on their team, and has since launched a firm that hopes to capture a detailed 3D scan of a tornado using state-of-the-art technology. Kate of course accepts, putting her back on the collision course with dangerous weather. 

On the road, Javi and Kate have competition from a cowboy/scientist/YouTuber Tyler Owens (Glen Powell), who does reckless stunts with tornadoes with a team that includes videographer Boone (Brandon Perea), drone operator Lily (Sasha Lane), scientist Dexter (Tunde Adebimpe), mechanic Dani (Katy O’Brian) and Ben (Harry Hadden-Paton), a journalist from London writing a feature story about Tyler. 

Javi’s company, Storm Par, is mostly made up of one-dimensional characters with multiple PhDs who are sidelined for most of the film. The one exception is Scott (David Corenswet), his short-tempered No. 2 who is as subtle as a “Looney Tunes” character when it’s revealed that he is a capitalist caricature (spoilers). 

The film swerves into a great tale about learning not to judge others on their appearances, as Kate slowly warms up to Tyler, who comes off as loud, raucous and immature but actually has a heart of gold. Likewise, Javi is presented as good-intentioned, but he holds uncomfortable secrets related to how he was able to fund the company. 

“Twisters” is a great film to see in the theaters. Its action is big, sometimes mind-numbing (there’s literally a fire tornado in this), but meant for the big screen. If you wait until this thing comes out on streaming, you won’t be getting the full experience; this is a blockbuster in every sense of the word. 

I really enjoyed all the work the film did to explain tornadoes and how they function — and why its characters are so enamored by them. The weather conditions have to be exactly right for them to form, and there’s a strange beauty to them. They’re part of the natural world, being neither good nor evil, which makes them interesting antagonists. 

This film is not perfect, with its last third unfortunately feeling rushed during its climax. It also pushed the envelope in terms of what I could take seriously — there’s a scene where Powell’s character is almost crushed by a trolley, which almost broke my suspension of disbelief due to how silly it was. 

But don’t write this film off: it’s one of the best belated sequels, standing on hallowed ground shared by some of the best ones, like “Top Gun: Maverick” (another Powell project) and “Cobra Kai,” largely because it’s focused on telling an excellent, original tale, rather than trying to rehash a nearly 30-year-old movie. 

Bring some friends to this. You all might be blown away. 

“Twisters” gets an 8/10