You’re probably right. But that doesn’t square with the reviews now, does it?
At a guess, I’d say it’s different “growing up” with TG1 as “your generation’s” movie, and watching your parents’s old DVD copy.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Top Gun 2
- Thread starter danpass
- Start date
At a guess, I’d say it’s different “growing up” with TG1 as “your generation’s” movie, and watching your parents’s old DVD copy.
I liked the "Pull the UHF 1 circuit breaker."I must say I did get a chuckle out of the Tomcat's radar not working (or I suppose not being turned on). Probably the most realistic part of the movie right there
"Which one is that, there are a ton back here?!"
"I don't know kid, that was kinda your dad's job!"
Probably got some weird looks cracking up at that in the theater. Sorry, flew Grumman, can't help it . . .
Also enjoyed the whole "we have to get the hell out of here, but first we have to dick around with this stupid fucking huffer" situation.
Last edited:
Yeah, that’s where I would have taken it, but my name isn’t Bruckheimer. I think Mav using his knowledges of Tomcat performance in a fight against one, morally conflicted… does he pull the trigger or doesn’t he… “Talk to me Goose!” ?
It's at least funny that different factions of millennials are calling each other Boomers as a pejorative.
Spekkio
He bowls overhand.
To me it suffered from the same phenomenon as Creed in that the main character who we should be caring about (Adonis Creed in Creed and Rooster in Top Gun: Maverick) wasn't the star. Not only that, they were cast as no-name, relatively bad actors. Maverick's story is already told and there's really nowhere else to go for his character development as someone over 50 years old in the twilight of his career, thus focusing on him in the sequel leads to bland writing. His role should have been similar in scope to Viper's in the original.
So then after that we're left with lots of pew pew and swish swish, without the 'it's so bad it's good' bar scenes with cheesy pickup lines and homoerotic locker room scenes. And the 80s/90s were generally better at building tension and story arcs with action scenes than movies in the 21st century that just focus on sensory overload.
Last edited:
Forgetting (and forgiving) the ridiculousness of the overall plot for a moment, it seems the weakest part of the script was actually pointed out by Jon Hamm. Maverick spent 2 weeks (and a lot of screen time) showing his students that they couldn't do the mission. Yes, the scene where Maverick then goes out and shows everyone it can be done is meant to address his weakness as an instructor, but that was lazy writing and in the end, he didn't actually have them go do it as a team until the actual mission. It was kind of a "what was the point of that?" moment for me.
I'll give the actors some slack when trying to portray military bravado when they have no experience or foundation to understand how it actually happens in a room with peers. To me, it seemed a big reason Cruise can pull it off now is a lot of life experience and realization of self-worth. Hollywood in general excels at getting this wrong (especially for aviators) Generation Kill seemed to do it pretty well and is an exception.
And don't be talking bad about sweet little Monica Barbaro.
I first noticed her in Chicago Justice!
Spekkio
He bowls overhand.
Cruise and Val pulled it off just fine in 1986.
Wait, you have procreated ??? God help us . . . .
The Royal we.
*Whew*
Theres also one in San Diego.