Top Gun - Maverick

13567

Comments

  • Posts: 4,617
    Just had lunch with another TG fan. We chatted about ideas for TG3. We agreed that redoing the template again would be too much but there are few areas of aviation that still have high stakes. We came up with:

    Top Gun: Ghost Squadron

    Maverick is now "settled" living with Penny and her daughter. Slightly struggling with "family" life and working as an airshow display pilot in the P-51, with mock dog fights but still yearning for genuine action. A record breaking Summer (global warming not explicitly referenced) leads to record breaking wild fires leads to an urgent government project to put together a "ghost squadron" of pilots to fly aged water bombers (pulled from storage) as a back up to existing resources. Maverick takes the job (against the wishes of Penny) and puts together a classic team of misfits (including Rooster who has been forced to leave the Navy due to an accident) flying 1940s/50s airframes. The climax sees a whole town at risk of fire with Maverick ignoring orders and taking his team into direct peril.






  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,641
    After how good Top Gun Maverick is I'm not sure I want a Top Gun 3. I'm still in shock how brilliant the sequel is, I never dreamt it could be that good. I fear a third would be a bit tough to match. Who knows given how well Maverick is doing at the box office

    @patb I like your idea though mate, I like the relevant plot
  • Posts: 4,617
    Thing is, it's easy to forget TC's age. IF he is going to do more action stuff, he needs to hurry. He looks remarkably good for his age but time catches up with all of us...even TC.

    @Jordo007 I think most people have forgotten "Always" it was a weird backdrop for what was effectively a rom com and deserved to be an all out action movie. Also, anyone who has seen "Only the Brave" (a real sleeper) can see that Kosinski would love this. I'll drop him a line :-)
  • 00Heaven00Heaven Home
    Posts: 575
    I wouldn't like a 3rd one. I think it would be hard to top the second and it just leaves it on a nice note.
  • Posts: 3,327
    00Heaven wrote: »
    I wouldn't like a 3rd one. I think it would be hard to top the second and it just leaves it on a nice note.

    Me neither. We now have another worthy sequel that lives alongside Godfather 2, Empire Strikes Back and The Dark Knight as proof that sometimes sequels can be better.

  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,641
    I'm taking my dad to go see it over the weekend and I can't wait. It's been nearly two weeks since I first saw it, so hopefully it'll be fresh again
  • Posts: 4,617
    I need to see it in Imax
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,641
    patb wrote: »
    I need to see it in Imax

    You won't be sorry mate. It was phenomenal in Imax
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,411
    Will I feel airsick? :D
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,217
    There's a 4DX screening available near me and I'm tempted to go to the pub beforehand, just for the craic.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,641
    mtm wrote: »
    Will I feel airsick? :D

    I tell you what you will feel..the need...the need to see it again because it's boss

    No seriously see it in Imax mate. I spoke to a friend of mine who's seen it twice last weekend, once in imax and once in normal. He said it was a different experience seeing it Imax
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,217
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Will I feel airsick? :D

    I tell you what you will feel..the need...the need to see it again because it's boss

    No seriously see it in Imax mate. I spoke to a friend of mine who's seen it twice last weekend, once in imax and once in normal. He said it was a different experience seeing it Imax

    I'd be inclined to agree. We only have Digital IMAX here so it's not quite the same but the audio quality alone made it worth it.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    Posts: 16,411
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Will I feel airsick? :D

    I tell you what you will feel..the need...the need to see it again because it's boss

    No seriously see it in Imax mate. I spoke to a friend of mine who's seen it twice last weekend, once in imax and once in normal. He said it was a different experience seeing it Imax

    Lovely. I'm booked into the BFI IMAX on Thursday, so I can't get it any bigger in the UK :)
  • CommanderRossCommanderRoss The bottom of a pitch lake in Eastern Trinidad, place called La Brea
    Posts: 8,264
    mtm wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I watched the original last night to get up to speed on the characters, and erm… it’s not very good is it? :D Everything feels hollow and done for effect rather than with any meaning, and every single character is there just to tell us something about Maverick. I know he’s the lead character, but everything revolves around him in quite a weird way: he’s the only character with any life. I think there’s only one scene he’s not in, and even in that they’re talking about him. The worst example is Kelly McGinnis’ character: on their first date he tells her all about his childhood, his dad going missing etc. so he gets to look sad and sensitive, but he doesn’t ask anything about her: she’s not important. We don’t really get to know her, it’s just all about what she can do for Maverick. Towards the end she literally says “I’m here to help”- yup that’s all you’re there for, love! :) Such a horrible, thankless role for an actress. Even Goose’s death is just shown as being a challenge for Mav, it’s not tragic in itself. Meg Ryan doesn’t get to grieve without Maverick being present and it all being about him.
    The flying stuff is very effective though, and I’m certainly looking forward to the new one because I have no doubt it’s miles better.
    When is it set though? I understand Goose’s son is in it, but shouldn’t he be nearly 40?

    I'm a little late on this conversation, but interestingly my Dad watched the original recently and came a way disappointed. Echoed those thoughts. In addition, having trained in a Navy flight program he felt the characters were too arrogant and immature to be taken seriously. He liked the aerial visuals, though.
    Last time I watched it I liked it enough. It is what it is.
    I may catch the new one in a coupe weeks when I get some time off.

    I realised one quite fundamental issue with the original film is that it never explains what Goose and all the other co-pilots actually do. They seem to have no role other than to tell the pilot who’s following them and give occasional moral support :)
    I’m sure there was a reason why those planes did have two pilots, but the film itself never explains it to the audience. Very odd.

    Well, let's start by saying they're not co-pilots, they're RIO's, or Radar Intercept Officers. They handle, amongst other things, the radar and weapon systems:
    https://fightson.net/987/did-the-f-14-tomcat-have-flight-controls-in-the-rear-cockpit/#:~:text=RIOs were the back-seaters,“verbally flying” the aircraft.

    And yes, it would've definately helped if that was explained a little, it would help people understand why it was so important to be a good team.
  • Posts: 2,402
    Got my second viewing in IMAX.

    I'm pretty sure I'm gonna be seeing this once a week in IMAX until it gets pulled from that screen.

    How the f-
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited May 2022 Posts: 16,411
    mtm wrote: »
    ToTheRight wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    I watched the original last night to get up to speed on the characters, and erm… it’s not very good is it? :D Everything feels hollow and done for effect rather than with any meaning, and every single character is there just to tell us something about Maverick. I know he’s the lead character, but everything revolves around him in quite a weird way: he’s the only character with any life. I think there’s only one scene he’s not in, and even in that they’re talking about him. The worst example is Kelly McGinnis’ character: on their first date he tells her all about his childhood, his dad going missing etc. so he gets to look sad and sensitive, but he doesn’t ask anything about her: she’s not important. We don’t really get to know her, it’s just all about what she can do for Maverick. Towards the end she literally says “I’m here to help”- yup that’s all you’re there for, love! :) Such a horrible, thankless role for an actress. Even Goose’s death is just shown as being a challenge for Mav, it’s not tragic in itself. Meg Ryan doesn’t get to grieve without Maverick being present and it all being about him.
    The flying stuff is very effective though, and I’m certainly looking forward to the new one because I have no doubt it’s miles better.
    When is it set though? I understand Goose’s son is in it, but shouldn’t he be nearly 40?

    I'm a little late on this conversation, but interestingly my Dad watched the original recently and came a way disappointed. Echoed those thoughts. In addition, having trained in a Navy flight program he felt the characters were too arrogant and immature to be taken seriously. He liked the aerial visuals, though.
    Last time I watched it I liked it enough. It is what it is.
    I may catch the new one in a coupe weeks when I get some time off.

    I realised one quite fundamental issue with the original film is that it never explains what Goose and all the other co-pilots actually do. They seem to have no role other than to tell the pilot who’s following them and give occasional moral support :)
    I’m sure there was a reason why those planes did have two pilots, but the film itself never explains it to the audience. Very odd.

    Well, let's start by saying they're not co-pilots, they're RIO's, or Radar Intercept Officers.

    That's cool, I'm just saying that the film needed to explain that- wikipedia wasn't around in 1986 :) I looked it up, I know what they are and that they're actually called WSOs now.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,641
    mtm wrote: »
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Will I feel airsick? :D

    I tell you what you will feel..the need...the need to see it again because it's boss

    No seriously see it in Imax mate. I spoke to a friend of mine who's seen it twice last weekend, once in imax and once in normal. He said it was a different experience seeing it Imax

    Lovely. I'm booked into the BFI IMAX on Thursday, so I can't get it any bigger in the UK :)

    I'm very jealous mate. That'll be a fantastic experience
  • goldenswissroyalegoldenswissroyale Switzerland
    Posts: 4,483
    I plan to see it this Friday. Mainly because the reactions here are outstanding. I didn't care that much for the first Top Gun but your positive comments for the new one make me very curious.
  • Posts: 4,617
    I'm showing my age but surely, 633 Squadron is the original "inspration" rather than Star Wars?
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited June 2022 Posts: 16,411
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Will I feel airsick? :D

    I tell you what you will feel..the need...the need to see it again because it's boss

    No seriously see it in Imax mate. I spoke to a friend of mine who's seen it twice last weekend, once in imax and once in normal. He said it was a different experience seeing it Imax

    Lovely. I'm booked into the BFI IMAX on Thursday, so I can't get it any bigger in the UK :)

    I'm very jealous mate. That'll be a fantastic experience

    Yep, that was amazing! It’s pretty much the perfect example of a film of its type, it’s hard to think how it could have been any better (could Mav have potentially been a little more flawed? I don’t know- he wasn’t actually perfect I guess).
    If that isn’t up for Best Film at the Oscars I don’t think there’s any justice: when you get something that right, no matter the genre, it should be acknowledged. At the very least Eddie Hamilton should get an editing Oscar for it: imagine the sheer amount of plane footage he had to compile to make those flying sequences so coherent. Incredible work.
    I was pumped for a couple of hours after seeing it! :D
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,217
    mtm wrote: »
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Jordo007 wrote: »
    mtm wrote: »
    Will I feel airsick? :D

    I tell you what you will feel..the need...the need to see it again because it's boss

    No seriously see it in Imax mate. I spoke to a friend of mine who's seen it twice last weekend, once in imax and once in normal. He said it was a different experience seeing it Imax

    Lovely. I'm booked into the BFI IMAX on Thursday, so I can't get it any bigger in the UK :)

    I'm very jealous mate. That'll be a fantastic experience

    Yep, that was amazing! It’s pretty much the perfect example of a film of its type, it’s hard to think how it could have been any better (could Mav have potentially been a little more flawed? I don’t know- he wasn’t actually perfect I guess).
    If that isn’t up for Best Film at the Oscars I don’t think there’s any justice: when you get something that right, no matter the genre, it should be acknowledged. At the very least Eddie Hamilton should get an editing Oscar for it: imagine the sheer amount of plane footage he had to compile to make those flying sequences so coherent. Incredible work.
    I was pumped for a couple of hours after seeing it! :D

    I had to go see it again the following night. No mean feat considering, like yourself, I wasn't a fan of the first film.
  • mtmmtm United Kingdom
    edited June 2022 Posts: 16,411
    I can’t deny I maybe felt a bit of airsickness in the climactic assault sequence! That’s a massive imax screen for you I guess :)
    But the final action bit just had me too engaged to worry about it. How did they make you understand where all the planes were in relation to each other? Witchcraft.

    I guess you could say the romance is slightly undercooked and only really works because you have two very good actors there (I also noted that, unlike in the first film, Maverick actually asks his partner about her life on their date!), but that’s minor stuff. Every time I think about any element of it, like the opening sequence, the bar scene where the cast is so coherently introduced etc. I can’t help thinking how perfectly machined the whole thing is. And I love seeing perfect narratives like that, I just find it so pleasing.
    And the jokes! Just so perfectly judged, like the lovely one which ends That Scene with Ice.

    It’s also an astonishing two hour long advert for Ray Bans! :D

    If I had to pick one moment I loved the most: when Rooster’s radar signal appears on the screen -Faltermeyer ‘Bong!’- “Maverick?”
    Yes!!!
    People were applauding the landing in my screening; and I’m in England! :D
  • 00Heaven00Heaven Home
    Posts: 575
    Glad you enjoyed it... it doesn't disappoint :D
  • Posts: 4,617
    when an English cinema audience applaueds, you know that's something special. We are a reserved bunch
  • matt_umatt_u better known as Mr. Roark
    Posts: 4,343
    The first one is still better IMO. I didn’t connect emotionally, unfortunately. The last 35 mins are fire tho.
  • edited June 2022 Posts: 2,402
    matt_u wrote: »
    The first one is still better IMO. I didn’t connect emotionally, unfortunately. The last 35 mins are fire tho.

    How you feel about the sequel is precisely how I feel about the original.
  • Brilliant film. Saw it last night. Took me right back to the 80s. Cruise is superb as is rest of cast. Glad they dialled down the homoerotic beach ball scene though. Hope they make TG3. Just want the great Michael Ironside to return. Anyone else think that Glen Powell who plays Hangman could be a contender for Bond?
  • goldenswissroyalegoldenswissroyale Switzerland
    Posts: 4,483
    I'm back from the cinema. It was indeed a great movie experience. Definitely made for the big screen with a good audio system.
    The film is very simple when you look at the story. And I think this is a big plus: everyone can follow and enjoy two hours of likeable characters and absolutely outstanding action in the air.

    Good that you guys recommended this movie, otherwise I would have missed an entertaining movie with a nice portion of emotions and an intense finale. This movie managed something that Bond movies usually don't succeed in: a perfect last battle/action scene.
  • Jordo007Jordo007 Merseyside
    Posts: 2,641
    I'm back from the cinema. It was indeed a great movie experience. Definitely made for the big screen with a good audio system.
    The film is very simple when you look at the story. And I think this is a big plus: everyone can follow and enjoy two hours of likeable characters and absolutely outstanding action in the air.

    Good that you guys recommended this movie, otherwise I would have missed an entertaining movie with a nice portion of emotions and an intense finale. This movie managed something that Bond movies usually don't succeed in: a perfect last battle/action scene.

    I'm glad you enjoyed it mate
  • goldenswissroyalegoldenswissroyale Switzerland
    Posts: 4,483
    Thanks. Me too ;)
Sign In or Register to comment.