Top Gun Maverick

[howiebrou]

The theater was like a mouse fart… and the music was kinda tinny sounding.

Ah. They should have used horns.

 

[morricab]

Ah. They should have used horns.

I saw it in a theater with big JBLs...I guess there were at least some horns!

 

[Ron Resnick]

I just saw this movie. I think this is the most exciting movie I've ever seen in my entire life.

 

[BlueFox]

That’s quite a compliment. Can’t wait for it to be released on high res Blue Ray.

 

[Ron Resnick]

That’s quite a compliment. Can’t wait for it to be released on high res Blue Ray.

Please be advised that I am a soft touch on movies. Sometimes I'll see a movie that I thought was great -- and it's got like a 12% rating on Rotten Tomatoes.

I think a movie like this should be seen on a giant screen in the movie theater.

 

[Gjo]

Jennifer Connelly. Woof.
Ever since “The Rocketeer”.

 

[morricab]

I just saw this movie. I think this is the most exciting movie I've ever seen in my entire life.

Really? I thought it was good fun but most exciting ever?? I still much prefer Edge of Tomorrow as being cooler, innovative and exciting from Tom’s more recent work.

 

[analyzer]

Seen yesterday at the cinema in widescreen; I enjoyed very very much.
Casting perfect; the top gun team has been mixed with great accuracy: the old/young but competitive instructor (Cruise), two leaders one against the other (Teller & Powell), a damn pretty girl (Barbaro), a shy co-pilot (Pullman), the bad Admiral (Harris), a well assorted choice of the American people (Jacinto, Ramirez, Ellis). Also some minor characters are perfect.
History follow in a credible way the original plot; pleasant the touch of vintage gear (not only the Kawasaki GPZ 1000 dating 1985 and the Porsche 911s of 1972 driven by Connelly but also the hommage to the Grunman F-14 Tomcat at the end of the movie is great...).
What doesn't appear credible is a certain Easy way to reach very high G-Force values (8-10g's) every time that pilots Flying...
Furthermore... is totally irrealistic the test-flight at 9-10 Mach (!!!!!!) when it's widely known that the fastest plane ever is already the mighty SR-71 at 3.5 mach (record dating from 1976!) and that also the missile-jet X-15 that completed a few experimental flights reached mach 6.6.
The Tom Cruise's accident during test-flight seems take from a real dramatic event when an SR-71 disintegrated in 1966 at more than 3 Mach and the pilot Jim Zwayer survived; the event was de-classified recently and there's an epic account on the web.
Until today the problems related of heating surfaces due to air-resistance are still unsolved.
In any case a pleasant movie, two hours of pure entertainment.
Just my two cents..
Marco

 

[bonzo75]

I still have to find a Tom Cruise movie I liked, outside Born on the 4th

 

[Ron Resnick]

Hello Marco,

I agree with you our criticisms of those inaccurate and unrealistic aspects of the movie.

I would add that the nuclear reactor target seemed like it would be in Iran. Also supporting this notion is that, I think, maybe only Iran used F-14s in a land-based role.

But then where did all of that snow come from?

I thought the weakest part of the movie was the blatant rip-off of the Chuck Yeager crash in The Right Stuff.

 

[analyzer]

Hello Marco,

I agree with you our criticisms of those inaccurate and unrealistic aspects of the movie.

I would add that the nuclear reactor target seemed like it would be in Iran. Also supporting this notion is that, I think, maybe only Iran used F-14s in a land-based role.

But then where did all of that snow come from?

I thought the weakest part of the movie was the blatant rip-off of the Chuck Yeager crash in The Right Stuff.

Yes Ron, you're right! I forgot to mention the Chuck Yaeger's incident... dramatic.
I didn't know that only Iran may have still a few F-14 in active service... Producers choose a politically correct way not to mention the country, good choice
The snow remains a mystery also to me

 

[howiebrou]

I haven't seen the movie yet but are people saying it might not be Iran because there is snow?

 

[analyzer]

I haven't seen the movie yet but are people saying it might not be Iran because there is snow?

Yes. It's a little bit strange since the attack of the F18's comes from the sea; mountains are just close to the coast and in two minutes flight Cruise and partners reach a target in a high mountains contest...
There's something strange to me, Just a sensation... more similar to a Lord of the Rings' ambientation than a real country...
Just my opinion...

 

[bonzo75]

I think they purposefully did not want to show a real country as the enemy, so they just combined data points from various ones to create an enemy.

 

[Ron Resnick]

Really? I thought it was good fun but most exciting ever??

I felt that this two hour and 11 minute movie flew by faster (no pun intended) than any other two hour plus movie I can recall.

 

[treitz3]

Well, the family went to go see Top Gun Maverick yesteday. Without giving anything up? Believe the reviews, it is as good as they say. They didn't ruin the first one by introducing a second and honestly? I couldn't tell you which one I liked better. Both are equally and even separately good movies. Still, best to watch the first one first.

They touched on some of the history of the first movie and brought some of that history into this movie but this story line didn't really have that much to do with the first. I didn't even realize the movie was that long, truth be told. It flew by quickly (pun intended).

Val didn't talk much (because of real life issues) but apparently Tom Cruise insisted he be in the movie.

Tom

 

[morricab]

I felt that this two hour and 11 minute movie flew by faster (no pun intended) than any other two hour plus movie I can recall.

Yeah, even though on the one hand I was like “another dogfight”…they weren’t boring…

 

[morricab]

Well, the family went to go see Top Gun Maverick yesteday. Without giving anything up? Believe the reviews, it is as good as they say. They didn't ruin the first one by introducing a second and honestly? I couldn't tell you which one I liked better. Both are equally and even separately good movies. Still, best to watch the first one first.

They touched on some of the history of the first movie and brought some of that history into this movie but this story line didn't really have that much to do with the first. I didn't even realize the movie was that long, truth be told. It flew by quickly (pun intended).

Val didn't talk much (because of real life issues) but apparently Tom Cruise insisted he be in the movie.

Tom

Well actually it drove the whole relationship arc between Maverick and Rooster.