Jeanskynebu the audience applauded

Smartorhypo Highly Overrated But Still Good

Matialth Good concept, poorly executed.

Nessieldwi Very interesting film. Was caught on the premise when seeing the trailer but unsure as to what the outcome would be for the showing. As it turns out, it was a very good film.

Uriah43 This is one of three "tornado movies" filmed in 1996. The other two were "Twister" and "Tornado". Having said that, I don't believe that this one is as good as the other two. That's not to say that this movie is necessarily bad, it's just that the other two were more intense while "Night of the Twisters" seemed to focus more on family dynamics than anything else. Be that as it may, there was definitely some suspense here and the special effects were pretty good for the most part too. Along with that, I think it's important to also realize that the blockbuster film, "Twister" was made for the big screen (and general audiences) while "Night of the Twisters" was a made-for-television film intended for family audiences. In short, if you're looking for a good "tornado film" then you might want to check out the other two I mentioned earlier. However, I suppose this one is okay for a rainy day if there's nothing better to watch. Slightly below average.

rslitman I've had a morbid fascination with tornadoes for more than 40 years, since my 5th grade teacher, a native Texan, told stories of ones he saw in his youth. Fortunately, I've lived my whole life in the middle Atlantic states, where tornadoes are rare and usually not as violent as the ones in the Midwest, but I have had two close encounters, one in PA and the other in NJ, in the past decade.I enjoyed the family scenes, particularly the conflicts between Jack and Dan Hatch. When the tornado was close, Dan knew most of what he had to do, and he probably learned this in school, since I know that tornado safety is an important subject in parts of the U.S. where these storms are more frequent. However, characters in the movie did two things that some people think are supposed to be done or are safe to do in tornadoes but are actually not supposed to be done or are unsafe.When the siren first sounded, Dan and Arthur went through the house and opened the windows. For years, this is what people were told to do, but tornado safety web sites now advise against doing this. Also, people were shown hiding in a highway underpass. This method was made popular by an early 1990s video made by a T.V. crew during a relatively weak twister in Kansas. However, in the most serious tornadoes, people can be sucked out from these underpasses. This happened during a May 1999 outbreak in Oklahoma.The tornadoes in this movie hit in the fall, which is not a common time for them to happen. (Then again, one of my close encounters took place in late September.) Also, they traveled from northwest to southeast, while most such storms in the northern hemisphere go from southwest to northeast. However, this is not all that unusual. A famous tornado that struck Joliet, IL, in the early 1990s traveled in that direction (as did the one involved in my other close encounter).I think that the movie should have been set in the spring. This movie was based on a book that in turn was based on an actual event that happened on June 3, 1980. But it was still a compelling story.

pck69 OK, so the FX are not high budget. But this story is based on actual events. Not something thrown together to make a couple of rich actors, even richer!! As most movies that are based on books, there are somethings that just don't fit. Only a couple of people have stated that this movie was based on real events, not a knock-off as most people believe it is!! This movie is in no way related too TWISTER! Other than both movies are about tornadoes.For those of you who have problems with the science of the tornadoes and storms in the movie, there are a couple of things you need to remember... The actual "night of the twisters" was June 3, 1980. So this movie was released 16 years after the actual events. Try think how far storm research has advanced in that time. It happened in a larger town; Grand Island, Nebraska is the third largest city in the state. Even though the movie calls the town something else, and says it's a small town. For the real story check out: http://www.gitwisters.com/

paulkat About the baby: Why wasn't big brother assuming he'd be hungry for a bottle or some nourishment or a diaper change? He should have been screaming non-stop after that many hours without care. Definitely stupid to take the baby from a safe place when he didn't need to.And why was the road miraculously clear whenever anyone wanted to drive somewhere? Didn't any uprooted trees fall on the roads and block them?I can't imagine the cops at the roadblock not immediately following after any young person who would crash it, especially when they said it was dangerous to go there.That being said, it was nice to have a movie children could safely watch, for a change.