Top Gun: Maverick

[scottcr]

Can’t stop thinking about this film… 

 

that whole end sequence was probably the best action sequence in a film since either the Trench Run in Star Wars or the race for the Ark in Raiders of the Lost Ark. It’s that level of movie magic.

[Gambit]

For those like me who need more Hangman in their life after watching this then check out the TV show Scream Queens on Disney+.

 

I'd happily take a spin off with his character.

[Junker]

Well no “hot take” from me. 
 As a teenager in the 80s I was obsessed with Top Gun and fighter planes in general.

Before seeing it I felt like, with such positive reviews, it wasn’t going to live up to my expectations.
 First trip to an iMax as well, and I’m glad I did. It looked and sounded incredible.

 Great action film, great sequel.

 Loved it.

[taurusnipple]

3 hours ago, Gambit said:

For those like me who need more Hangman in their life after watching this then check out the TV show Scream Queens on Disney+.

 

I'd happily take a spin off with his character.

 

I’m watching Too Old to Die Young with Miles Teller, myself. Uncomfortable viewing but it’s been a few since I’ve seen Whiplash. 
 

Now I watched Scream Queens when it aired but Glen Powell oozes charisma, have to see what else he’s been involved in. 
 

Today was my 3rd viewing of Maverick, I may have a problem. Both my daughters enjoyed the movie though!

[Loik V credern]

I watched Top Gun for the first time a few weeks ago and eventually finished it this morning. I thought it was rubbish, a forced romance that takes up most of the film, no Val Kilmer and Tom Cruise duel aside from two quick exchanges of words, no stakes, shitty music that kept being played over and over, military porn imagery that does nothing for me and it didn't communicate the flying well enough for me to understand what was happening leaving it to them to just outright say who did something wrong.

 

Anyone who considers themselves a flying expert based on watching Top Gun hundreds of times over many years and wants to explain how actually clearly the film visually communicates the action and how Goose's death was so obviously caused by Maverick's reckless flying rather than the film repeatedly telling you he's dangerous and it being taken as a given...don't pls.

 

Had Tony Scott made it in the 70s, I don't think he'd have had a career, it's only the stupid excess of the 80s that allowed him to get away with something so superficial and empty. I only watched it to be up to date because I thought the Top Gun Maverick trailer looked great and then it ruined all my excitement for seeing it.

 

My brain fought hard its fresh hatred for all things Top Gun and my legs took me to the nearest cinema, I was willing to pay a stupid amount and at least just enjoy the in the cockpit flying action with some stakes this time. Actually not as much as I'd hoped in some ways, only one mission, but I loved the pure videogame concept of it. 

 

I loved Teller's little moustache and bravado entrance, Cruise's melancholy at the song bringing back maybe a memory that for a long time forgotten or buried, Cruise has humbled since his 80s and 90s pretty unbearable confidence and it sold that moment, though I guess they were amplified the emotion by having Jenniffer Connoly spot him through the glass. 

 

Spoiler

I liked that they avoided Rooster's hatred being a petulant 'you were responsible for the death of my dad' like you expect it to be, and having Maverick take the entirety of Rooster's resentment knowing if he'd have known he was merely fulfilling his dead mate's wife's dieing wish, he'd to be able to mend their relationship. 

 

Dunno, not read the thread, presumably others liked that too, it's simple but clever writing, an insertion that still has the 'Rooster hates Maverick' conflict but layers it, makes it believable because we wouldn't be with Rooster so much if we thought he was being unreasonable. 

 

In Top Gun, I didn't believe Goose's death really, the only good part of it was finally finding out where the sample of 'I'm losing control, I can't..I can't control it' from Command & Conquer came from. 

 

The weaknesses of the film were it trying to replicate what Top Gun did, like with the relationship where you have to believe Jennifer Connelly's character is not only happily single but immediately ready and available for someone reappearing out of nowhere like Maverick. Someone who apparently broke her heart no less. It didn't add anything in Top Gun, it adds nothing here. 

 

Spoiler

I loved the flying, scenes I could understand for once. Maverick catching them out with lock ons..makes sense. The mission is videogamey but every part of it is explained. John Hamm's willingness to extend the time but allow better jets on them all but guaranteeing casualties made sense. All stuff Top Gun lacked. I didn't see the behind enemy lines happening, I love cold war snow vibes.  

 

It's predictable or 'crowd pleasing' but...I didn't want anyone to die and it to try some more emotion. I guess the success (kind of insane it's Cruise's most successful film ever) all but guarantees a sequel, I'd love more flying action and less Top Gun homages (which I understand they needed to go back into that world and give the same feel).

 

A 7. (Top Gun was a 1) I could have watched them trying to escape with more of the new recruits returning to help for 30-45 minutes more...many many blockbuster films I'm waiting to end so that's the rarest compliment I can give...I have no idea of its length, 2 hours or 2 hours 30, under 2 hours...no idea. Paced perfectly I thought. 

[Loik V credern]

On 01/06/2022 at 14:44, BitterToad said:

I think the only thing tenser than the action scenes in Top Gun: Maverick is waiting to see who the first dissenting voice is going to be. We've not seen a love in for a movie like this since Fury Road have we?

 

I regret posting my review before I read this now. 

[Festoon]

9 hours ago, Gambit said:

For those like me who need more Hangman in their life after watching this then check out the TV show Scream Queens on Disney+.

 

I'd happily take a spin off with his character.

 

Guy should be a major star. Might get to be now.

[The Bag]

@Loik V credern why didn’t you believe Goose’s death?  There’s lots of stuff in Top Gun that’s for the film - like how close they get to each other in the dog fights, or the inverted bit at the start which would have almost certainly led to the destruction of both planes.  But his death is based on a real incident iirc, the ejection procedure blows the canopy then ejects the RIO, then the pilot with a fraction of a second between each.  When flying normally the canopy will be safely behind the aircraft almost immediately, but in a spin that’s not the case.  In that situation the procedure is to blow the canopy, wait a few seconds and then eject.  They also eject the two crew members at slightly different angles so they go to opposite sides of the aircraft, which I guess is why only one of them hit the canopy.

[Loik V credern]

2 minutes ago, The Bag said:

@Loik V credern why didn’t you believe Goose’s death?  There’s lots of stuff in Top Gun that’s for the film - like how close they get to each other in the dog fights, or the inverted bit at the start which would have almost certainly led to the destruction of both planes.  But his death is based on a real incident iirc, the ejection procedure blows the canopy then ejects the RIO, then the pilot with a fraction of a second between each.  When flying normally the canopy will be safely behind the aircraft almost immediately, but in a spin that’s not the case.  In that situation the procedure is to blow the canopy, wait a few seconds and then eject.  They also eject the two crew members at slightly different angles so they go to opposite sides of the aircraft, which I guess is why only one of them hit the canopy.

 

Oh no I don't mean in that way of being realistic, I'd have no idea. Just in terms of it being predictable in terms of plot, Maverick's best mate with a young family who despite being a main character is still redundant in being there in relation to Maverick, who we're always told is so dangerous and no one would want to fly with him. In a film with much better characterisation I'd like how it unfolds more, but just in a film so empty the way it's inserted to make you believe Maverick is done with piloting so that the final act us set up is weak to me. 

 

I guess people will think the film can't spend too much time on a secondary character and being Maverick's wingman he isn't redundant. But the film could have exchanged all those pointless love scenes for more Goose stuff.

 

The film doesn't do the basic building to make you care. Jet pilots and their lives is genuinely fascinating, it's not like I expected much exploration in Top Gun, I knew it was a cheesy 80s film but I still expected more written depth. There is a much better film to be made. 

 

They tried to repeat the success with Days Of Thunder which I quite liked, i watched it a few years ago, nothing spectacular but it did more of simple characterisation films usually try to do. With realistic characters. Like Tom Cruise driving really fast and Nicole Kidman's character going ape shit at him, as is realistic, rather than in Top Gun where he pesters Charlie and she's not impressed by his hollow bruvado, then is taken by him being the legendary mig tamer enough to fall for him. It's just wish fulfilment. 

[The Bag]

7 minutes ago, Loik V credern said:

They tried to repeat the success with Days Of Thunder 

 

 

[Commander Jameson]

Have we had this yet?

 

 

[sith]

I watched this in IMAX in Bangkok (only £8) and it was packed. 

 

Fantastic movie, enjoyed it from start to finish. I hope we get a sequel!

[merman]

Very good. Felt it was a good sequel and a very good action film.

 

Don’t give me that look.

[Timmo]

Jesus, what a movie. 5/5

 

I don't think I've been that consistently entertained by any other film! Even though I still prefer Fury Road overall, it did sag in places. This just didn't!

[Timmo]

On 03/06/2022 at 18:56, Harsin said:

Made a rare trip to the cinema to see this and glad I did because the vistas on the big screen and the roar of the jets on the sound system was *chef's kiss*.

 

Thoroughly enjoyed it. I can't tell you how refreshing it was to watch a modern big budget mainstream studio film that just happily told a nice simple A to B to C story without numerous superfluous sub-plots setting up 3 films and 5 TV series.

 

One of my favourite things about the movie was that it was incredibly clear at all times what was going on, both in terms of action and in terms of plot.

[Eighthours]

Another $86 million in the US at the weekend. It’s now Cruise’s most successful movie over there, after only 2 weekends at the Box Office!

[Pob]

I saw this at the weekend with middling expectations and no nostalgia for the original. I always found Top Gun boring as a kid despite being really into planes and stuff. I watched Firefox and Blue Thunder repeatedly, for example. I watched Top Gun again a few weeks ago found it to be nothing special.

 

Maverick blew my bollocks off, though. I guess the most obvious thing, apart from the improvement in capturing the aerial stuff, is that it's actually based around a mission rather than a pissing contest. In hindsight, that's probably what always put me off the original.

 

I honestly couldn't believe how good this new one was - such a simple yet effective story, clearly told and executed with precision. It's pretty much the perfect blockbuster isn't it? Kosinsky has really levelled up here - I found Oblivion to be quite vacuous - but this is genuinely engaging at a character level rather than just visual.

 

I can't remember a time I've been more interested in the behind-the-scenes stories. It's fascinating listening to the stories of how they filmed it - stuff like the Darkstar (or whatever jet they used in its place) actually blowing the roof off the set as it flew over Ed Harris. Or the time when Miles Teller lifted out of his seat and banged his head due to loose straps, and them keeping that take in the film. Sometimes the BTS ruins the magic somewhat but here it makes me want to watch it again.

 

I do think there was a missed opportunity with Penny though:

Spoiler

She seems surplus to requirements for the main story, mainly being someone for Mav to talk to about Rooster. But I did find myself thinking about Maverick's life and why he ended up single. He seems happy, so I like the idea of someone finding what they love doing and sticking with it rather than climbing the greasy pole. I could infer that Maverick avoided starting his own family because of his high-risk job - he wouldn't want to put someone through what happened with Goose and his family. So perhaps Penny was 'the one' but he preempted getting into anything deeper and took off, and maybe this time around Penny would make it clear that she's getting into it with her eyes open, she can make her own decisions about who she falls in love with etc. But none of that was mentioned, I don't think. They seemed to be just two people who had a thing in the the past and happened to cross paths again. I feel like just a couple of lines of dialogue could've added some depth there.

 

Has anyone explained why they couldn't name-check the SU-57, and kept calling them Fifth Generation Fighters? Also, they studiously avoid naming the enemy through the entire film, then someone mentions Iranian airspace towards the end, almost like that line slipped through the net. What's going on there?

 

 

 

 

[Triple A]

Great observation and idea about the Mav/Penny storyline.

I reckon the plane model wasn't mentioned as to do so may have come over a bit anti-Communist regimes - perhaps better to avoid for both political and commercial reasons.

[Harsin]

Something I've noticed with a lot of these nostalgia projects is that they seem to lean on making the characters having lived in abject misery about 5 minutes of the supposedly happy ending of the original. Star Wars. Ghostbusters. Star Trek: The Next Generation… I liked that in this Maverick is pretty happy and still doing what he loves. 
 

I now have three years later sequels I actually rate, this, Fury Road and Blade Runner 2049.

[Pug]

Saw this yesterday. Enjoyed it but didn't find it the second coming like everyone else. Great action, well worked sequel but wasn't really worth the trip to my nearest cinema half hour away. Needing the loo with not being able to pause is a big negative for me. Cinema was great with decent sound (looked like there were hundreds of speakers) and electric recliners were nice. 8K big screen too. I still would prefer to watch at home.

 

Wish I waited to watch it on my awesome AV kit as I will with all films from now on.

[Robo_1]

Yeah, I mean it's all been said but that was incredible. It had a thread of authenticity which ran through it from start to finish, which I think kept you invested in the plot and characters.

 

The action was a real tonic to the CGI fireworks which we're mostly treated to nowadays and I think that contrast alone gave the action an additional urgency to it.

 

I was lucky enough to catch it in one of the new 4D cinemas where they move the seat and spray air and water at you etc. Comfortably the best experience I've had in one of those halls.

 

Seriously tempted to go for a second visit towards the end of its run.

[Loik V credern]

Joseph Kosinski is a director I completely forgot about since Oblivion. He was always presented as a director with a slick visual look, I do think Oblivion looks nice but I think people are going over board and Tron is Tron. Also Tron Legacy was among the most bored I've been in the cinema. His firefighter film was overlooked, one of those solid disaster dramas that is never going to get people talking about. I assume it's solid...only just found out about it.

 

And now another big revival of a huge cultural classic, and also another film out this year about prisoners volunteering as medical subjects to shorten their sentence which stars Thor. And Miles Teller for the third time, must like working with him.

 

I guess Top Gun will be a reminder to everyone Miles Teller is still about after he was in that cool drumming film I assume everyone got around to seeing. I guess being in a Winding Refn tv show is a big deal so you're attached to a cool thing and an auteur, but he must be psyched to be in a film that's done as well as this that opens up new opportunities...if he can avoid another dull superhero film immediately after. 

 

One thing that does make sense in how it plays out but initially I thought didn't fit the character was 

 

Spoiler

Hangman being cool about not being picked as one of the 3, given how he was confident of how quicker he was than the others. 

 

[taurusnipple]

Same beat as Maverick in the first film, another call back that works 😊

[Orion]

Question about part of the film 

 

Spoiler

I've not seen the film and been avoiding spoilers and this thread. Someone here though posted in another thread, not related to this film at all. A description of what sounded like the end or a big action sequence from this. I tried to skip when I realised what I was reading but it mentioned flying very low, under an arch then under roof height to avoid some SAM sites.

 

Has that prick spoiled a section of the film ?

 

[SpagMasterSwift]

Several sections...but not really tbh.

[Down by Law]

Just came back from this, it was class. So unashamedly 80s, and how it rejected modern conventions that many franchise revivals fall into was so refreshing. They didn't piss all over the legacy characters for cheap drama, the story was simple but well written and all the characters felt like they had reason to be there and all had something to do. They didn't even drop a hip hop version or dance remix of the top gun theme 😅. This film knew it's audience well and played up to it. 

 

 

[Gigawatt]

6 hours ago, Orion said:

Question about part of the film 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

I've not seen the film and been avoiding spoilers and this thread. Someone here though posted in another thread, not related to this film at all. A description of what sounded like the end or a big action sequence from this. I tried to skip when I realised what I was reading but it mentioned flying very low, under an arch then under roof height to avoid some SAM sites.

 

Has that prick spoiled a section of the film ?

 

I wouldn’t worry about that at all, those are just minor details which are outweighed by all the other epicness. 

[Shimmyhill]

Watched this tonight, IMAX and all - its just incredible, possibly one of the best action films ive ever seen… im sure there is some after Covid / life stuff going on that means it was just the perfect remedy but I went in fairly blind and certain it wouldn’t live up to expectations but it blew them out of the water.

 

 

[Pob]

I went to see this again last night - took my son this time. It genuinely feels like a landmark event film. Despite being a sequel it feels so fresh in its storytelling and groundbreaking as a spectacle. I was getting the moist eyes thing right from the start this time! The mach 10 test flight is so majestic - just a perfect marriage of visuals and audio.

 

The last act is off the charts - it's so rare these days to see a movie that ramps up and up, and ends on such a high. The bit where

Spoiler

they climb out over the mountain and it's down to raw survival with SAMs flying everywhere, smoke trails in every direction and shouting over the radios. Just incredible. And then it gets better still!

 

[Down by Law]

Also: turns out the best way to write a strong female character is to just write a strong female character.

 

Spoiler

At no point was Phoenix treated differently from any of the men. Didn't show her getting undressed, being hit on, or being undermined by any of her colleagues or superiors. She was great. Refreshing. More like that please.