• 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

Random8145 said:
You guys talking about realism need to remember the original Top Gun was not meant to be realistic. The whole idea was marketed to the Navy to create a film that would be a fantasy portrayal of being a Navy pilot. So it isn't surprising the sequel was similar in this regard. Some of you are saying the flying wasn't realistic, well they had Mav in an old beat-up F-14A take out TWO 5th Gen fighters :)
Click to expand...
You're asking weapons school grads to suppress their well-honed instinct to go "well ackchyually . . ."

Sometimes that's a tall order. ;)
 
Random8145 said:
Maybe I am misremembering, but wasn't he kind of supposed to be teaching them that the key to piloting (in the film) is not to think while doing it?
Click to expand...

No, that was just something he kept telling Rooster to get his shit together. The reason why he was there was to work them through a training program while holding them to a strict (and silly) standard, which none of them met, so they went anyway.

While the first movie may not have been realistic, the plot was much more straight forward which helped it make a lot more sense.
 
Random8145 said:
…Top Gun was not meant to be realistic…
Click to expand...
How about this for a movie plot…The story begins with a small war where soldiers, mounted on horses, are leading one part of the indigenous population against another - a war not near to any ocean or major body of water. Far away, on the other side of the world, our young “hero” is just a punk kid with a GED and a few years in the Navy riding in the back of a fat, old electronic warfare aircraft.

The war rages on, far away, but our hero, desperate to be part of the action works hard and finds his chance as the war expands across the region. It seems like our war is almost a forever war. The glorious idea of Top Gun studs blasting enemy jets from the sky is replaced by nearly continuous ground strikes with simple bombs against an enemy that barely has electricity. Our hero continues on his Paladin-like quest, even commanding a school (like our pal Viper) to teach the young ones how to use the force to wreck havoc on the enemy.

In the final scenes there isn’t a dramatic dog fight or race through tight canyons, but a slowly rumbling transport jet heading down a runway with indigenous people clinging to the sides. Last scene…our hero is sitting on a beach in Hawaii commanding sunsets and a few contractors…waiting for his retirement to kick in….fade to black, Lady Gaga song, roll credits.

Would you watch that movie? Well, maybe, when it hits HBO.
 
Last edited:
I would have preferred a CSAR scenario done right.. could have been realistic while also having lots of cool flying scenes involving different aircraft, including the obligatory Mav dogfight. Think the plot was a huge wasted opportunity, dreamed up by guys who don't know much about naval aviation. This is a case where the reality could have been cooler than their fiction.
 
Mirage said:
I would have preferred a CSAR scenario done right.. could have been realistic while also having lots of cool flying scenes involving different aircraft, including the obligatory Mav dogfight. Think the plot was a huge wasted opportunity, dreamed up by guys who don't know much about naval aviation. This is a case where the reality could have been cooler than their fiction.
Click to expand...
That could have also turned some applicants on to helos instead of everybody wanting to be Mav.
 
Random8145 said:
You guys talking about realism need to remember the original Top Gun was not meant to be realistic. The whole idea was marketed to the Navy to create a film that would be a fantasy portrayal of being a Navy pilot. So it isn't surprising the sequel was similar in this regard. Some of you are saying the flying wasn't realistic, well they had Mav in an old beat-up F-14A take out TWO 5th Gen fighters :)
Click to expand...
The original TOP GUN was inspired by an article called “Top Guns,” written by Ehud Yonay for the May 1983 issue of California magazine about the real Navy Fighter Weapons School, more commonly called TOPGUN. Screenplay was written by Jack Epps Jr. and Jim Cash. Under Tony Scott's direction, the movie evolved into a fantasy aimed at the general public, with not much intent on realism.

Remember that originally, the adversary aircraft used at NFWS were '50's and '60's technology that in the hands of properly trained and skilled pilots, could give the F-14's, F-15's, F-16's, & F-18's of that era, a run for their money. And that was the intent of the establishment of NFWS, to improve the air combat maneuvering skills of our Naval Aviators. Manfred von Richthofen once said, “The quality of the box matters little. Success depends upon the man who sits in it.”
 
Mirage said:
I would have preferred a CSAR scenario done right.. could have been realistic while also having lots of cool flying scenes involving different aircraft, including the obligatory Mav dogfight. Think the plot was a huge wasted opportunity, dreamed up by guys who don't know much about naval aviation. This is a case where the reality could have been cooler than their fiction.
Click to expand...

Honestly, how hard would it have been to have added a 3-5 second shot of TR's EOD kitted out and pretending to be SEALs loaded in the back of some Sierras on the waist when someone asks "should we launch the search and rescue helicopter?" before Mr. Hamm denies the request. Probably because anyone who actually cares about the Navy helicopter community abover the 1 star level (does that even exist?) scoffed at the idea of attempting to push ANY helo involvement in a TG movie.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top