Promoting the Power of Practical Effects

When it came to marketing Jan de Bont’s 1996 film Twister, there was absolutely no question about it: The star of the film was not Helen Hunt or Bill Paxton, who play a pair of storm chasers going after one last tornado system before finalizing their divorce. The star of the film was the goddamn tornado.

Sold as a special-effects extravaganza so buzzworthy that it was the basis for a theme park attraction, Twister expertly blends CG tornadoes and disaster-movie practical effects so effectively that the visuals still hold up today. (Viewers can appreciate that thanks to a new 4K Blu-ray release of the blockbuster.) To commemorate the film’s rerelease, director Jan de Bont spoke to Polygon about the film’s still-remarkable blend of digital and practical effects, and the ways he wanted his actors to stop acting and just feel how scary the storms were.

Practical Effects vs. CGI: Bringing the Storm to Life

Polygon: When Twister came out, the CG tornadoes were a big part of the promotion. But watching it now, I’m struck by how practical the effects are. You throw so many physical objects at Bill Paxton and Helen Hunt!

Jan de Bont: What I remember most is getting the actors to confront an artificial storm — this huge amount of wind machines and jet engines, and all the debris coming right at them. Suddenly, it’s not acting anymore. Now they have to actually react to real things coming at them. That was so funny, of course — actors, the very first thing they complain about is, My hair is wrong, look at my hair! Or, My shirt is ripped! It was so hard to convince them.

Now, that’s exactly what it should be! That’s what would be like, clearly, in real life. It was really hard to convince the actors not to worry about their hair and their costume, because if it looked bad, I would take it out. I would just do another take. But it was a sort of strange thing for them. Because, [without] hair and makeup, they kind of lose their identity a little bit. That was exactly, of course, the goal.

Are there things you would like to see directors using to make digital effects feel more real?

Right now, technology has so improved — I’m sure you can make them look better and more real now. But it’s not so much about that. The thing is, to me, effects in itself are soulless. It’s hard to connect with [them], it’s really hard to connect with for actors. How can they respond to something that big if they have no idea of the scale?

I wanted to really make sure that all the actors really felt what it is, and that they all had to be in those gigantic wind machines and muddy fields, completely being haunted by that stuff non-stop. So they can get an idea what it really is to be a storm chaser, and also feel the danger that tornadoes represent. And I don’t think you can do that just with visual effects. I think the practical brings actors back to reality.

Do you think people have forgotten that this film has a whole His Girl Friday-style premise, where it’s about this couple realizing they don’t want to get divorced?

The way that the whole project started, [Jurassic Park author] Michael Crichton saw a PBS documentary about storm chasers, and he and [Crichton’s spouse and co-screenwriter] Anne Marie Martin thought it was exciting — and he said, “But then what?” Then he thought, If I use the plot of His Girl Friday, where basically a couple [are] on their way to divorce, but they have to do one more thing together — that would fit perfectly in there. And I’m glad he did, because it was a perfect way to keep [Paxton and Hunt’s characters] together, then separate them, then put them together and separate [again]. I thought it was really smart idea.