Top Gun: Maverick (2022) — may have spoilers! No spoilers in OP

[Asuka]

I’m listening to the “Mover Ruins Movies” YouTube review where an actual F/A-18 pilot reviews movies, and his Maverick review he also brings up the weird Earth pronunciation.

[AK84]

Used in Ukraine and from what I have read their most effective aircraft in contested space.

[Bullitt]

I can’t help but wonder what super-new-fantastic-wild interceptors / fighter planes / hyper-fast jetplanes the USA has. The SR-71 first flew in 1964, was introduced in 1966, and retired in 1999 (per wiki) and I’d like to think there’s some kind of skunk works out there that has developed a fantastic plane that they could tell us about, but then they’d have to kill us.

[Gatopescado]

@Bullitt

I’d like to think there’s some kind of skunk works out there that has developed a fantastic plane that they could tell us about, but then they’d have to kill us.

But they will never kill a pilot.

[AK84]

Well there is the NGAD

The US Air Force has built and flown a mysterious full-scale prototype of its...

[DPRK]

In the world of the movie, we can infer that prototypes of next-gen fighters are exactly the type of thing Maverick has been test-piloting (and destroying ) in the test-pilot phase of his career. (They mention buzzwords like Darkstar, scramjet, hypersonic, Mach 10)

[Stephe96]

Was the naval base called North Island in the original movie?

[Bullitt]

I don’t recall that. I’m pretty sure no. They called it Miramar, which is where it used to be. Now it’s Fallon.

[N9IWP]

For some reason I took an instant liking to Bob. “No, what’s your callsign? Bob.”
Do they allow WSOs to need corrective lenses?

The P-51 is indeed Tom Cruise’s personal plane, and an instance of “Chekhov’s P-51”
I also liked the sailing scene “I thought you were in the Navy” “I land on ships, not sail them”
(tricky to get out of the slip without the engine)

No surprise the bombing run was similar to one is Star Wars, though I didn’t hear “stay on target”

Met my expectations and was not bad way to spend a rainy day.

Brian
PP-ASEL

[nightshadea]

@Bullitt

I can’t help but wonder what super-new-fantastic-wild interceptors / fighter planes / hyper-fast jetplanes the USA has. The SR-71 first flew in 1964, was introduced in 1966, and retired in 1999 (per wiki) and I’d like to think there’s some kind of skunk works out there that has developed a fantastic plane that they could tell us about, but then they’d have to kill us.

come to the antelope valley at the edge of the Mojave desert here in ca we see weird stuff all the time … in the old days the radio stations would alert us that its “testing days” and we’re not seeing alien ufos or foreign bombers lol

just don’t take pictures tho… a friend did that for the yearly photo contest at the fair and it caused a stir …

[Llama_Llogophile]

OK, I’ll be Debby Downer here. And spoiler alert…

I’d say it’s a very successful film, in that it accomplishes what it sets out to do - be an entertaining sequel and have fun and nicely shot flight sequences. But that’s as far as I’ll go.

Like the first Top Gun, I loved the first few minutes. Beautiful shots, nice airplanes. Right up to the point where Tom Cruise speaks. Now, I don’t dislike Cruise at all and I think he’s made some very good films. But I just cannot take the Pete Mitchell character seriously.

I fly airplanes for a living and though I’ve never been in the military, I’ve flown with many military pilots. None of them have a whiff of “Maverick”. All the military folks I’ve flown with were very careful rules followers who were intensely interested in mitigating risk. When I’ve asked, they’ve told me that a Pete Mitchell type would never get near a military aircraft, having been weeded out quite early in the process.

So I was not able to suspend my disbelief. With better films I am able to to so, but this one did not clear that bar for me. I even laughed out lout at a few points. I especially enjoyed the scene where Maverick explains the basics of G-forces to a group of elite fighter pilots as if it were a novel concept.

Don’t take this as a reason not to see it. It’s perfectly entertaining, and I’m fast becoming a curmudgeon.

Edit: I’m scheduled to fly with a military guy in a few days, and I fully intend to tell him “Don’t think, just do” at some point.

[DPRK]

To be sure, but let us not forget The Right Stuff:

The talking and drinking began at the beer call [4 p.m.], and then the boys would break for dinner and come back afterward and get more wasted and more garrulous or else more quietly fried, drinking good cheap PX booze until 2 a.m. The night was young! Why not get the cars and go out for a little proficiency run? It seemed that every fighter jock thought himself an ace driver, and he would do anything to obtain a hot car, especially a sports car, and the drunker he was, the more convinced he would be about his driving skills, as if the right stuff, being indivisible, carried over into any enterprise whatsoever, under any conditions. A little proficiency run, boys! (There’s only one way to find out!) And they would roar off in close formation from, say, Nellis Air Force Base, down Route 15, into Las Vegas, barreling down the highway, rat-racing, sometimes four abreast, jockeying for position, piling into the most listless curve in the desert flats as if they were trying to root each other out of the groove at the Rebel 500—and then bursting into downtown Las Vegas with a rude fraternal roar like the Hell’s Angels—and the natives chalked it up to youth and drink and the bad element that the Air Force attracted. They knew nothing about the right stuff, of course.

More fighter pilots died in automobiles than in airplanes. Fortunately, there was always some kindly soul up the chain to certify the papers “line of duty,” so that the widow could get a better break on the insurance. That was okay and only proper because somehow the system itself had long ago said Skol! and Quite right! to the military cycle of Flying & Drinking and Drinking & Driving, as if there were no other way. Every young fighter jock knew the feeling of getting two or three hours’ sleep and then waking up at 5:30 a.m. and having a few cups of coffee, a few cigarettes, and then carting his poor quivering liver out to the field for another day of flying. There were those who arrived not merely hungover but still drunk, slapping oxygen tank cones over their faces and trying to burn the alcohol out of their systems, and then going up, remarking later: “I don’t advise it, you understand, but it can be done.” (Provided you have the right stuff, you miserable pudknocker.)

[Pork_Rind]

@Asuka

Saw it, and while I enjoyed it a lot I have some weird mino quibbles.

1. Is there a reason why Maverick and Goose Jr were flying solo in their Super Hornets? Why wouldn’t they have people in the back to help with the bomb or missiles? I understand plot wise why they did it (4 people literally running around in the ending would slow things down immensely) but would you really send a two seater jet with just one pilot? I assumed the ending would have Maverick and Goose Jr doing the bomb drops.

2. Why is acclaimed Naval flier Maverick flying a P-51 at the end? In production terms, flying or reproduction Mustangs are so much easier to come by but it would make far more sense for him to be flying a Hellcat or Corsair, they’re both WW2 Navy carrier fighters and both have at least a dozen airworthy today.

1. Most Super Hornets are single seat models. The dual-seaters are either trainers or electronic warfare models (Growlers). A better question is why they needed the two seat model at all for that mission. I think because the plot required a bigger cast.

2. As mentioned above, that’s Tom’s personal Mustang and it’s in the movie because it’s cool. I took it to be Maverick’s personal aircraft that he somehow acquired but they certainly didn’t say that explicitly in the movie.

[Stephe96]

Well, to be fair, Cruise is being Basil Exposition and explaining G-forces to the audience by explaining them to the pilots. But maybe the writers could’ve found a less clunky way to impart that information.

[Bullitt]

@nightshadea

@Bullitt

I can’t help but wonder what super-new-fantastic-wild interceptors / fighter planes / hyper-fast jetplanes the USA has. The SR-71 first flew in 1964, was introduced in 1966, and retired in 1999 (per wiki) and I’d like to think there’s some kind of skunk works out there that has developed a fantastic plane that they could tell us about, but then they’d have to kill us.

come to the antelope valley at the edge of the Mojave desert here in ca we see weird stuff all the time … in the old days the radio stations would alert us that its “testing days” and we’re not seeing alien ufos or foreign bombers lol

just don’t take pictures tho… a friend did that for the yearly photo contest at the fair and it caused a stir …

Well that’s 300 miles down I-5 for me, so it won’t be tomorrow.

Oh and BTW I took the tour at Edward AFB a while back and it was well worth it. I got to touch an F-117 stealth fighter and that was cool.

[Bullitt]

@Llama_Llogophile

OK, I’ll be Debby Downer here. And spoiler alert…

I’d say it’s a very successful film, in that it accomplishes what it sets out to do - be an entertaining sequel and have fun and nicely shot flight sequences. But that’s as far as I’ll go.

Like the first Top Gun, I loved the first few minutes. Beautiful shots, nice airplanes. Right up to the point where Tom Cruise speaks. Now, I don’t dislike Cruise at all and I think he’s made some very good films. But I just cannot take the Pete Mitchell character seriously.

I fly airplanes for a living and though I’ve never been in the military, I’ve flown with many military pilots. None of them have a whiff of “Maverick”. All the military folks I’ve flown with were very careful rules followers who were intensely interested in mitigating risk. When I’ve asked, they’ve told me that a Pete Mitchell type would never get near a military aircraft, having been weeded out quite early in the process.

So I was not able to suspend my disbelief. With better films I am able to to so, but this one did not clear that bar for me. I even laughed out lout at a few points. I especially enjoyed the scene where Maverick explains the basics of G-forces to a group of elite fighter pilots as if it were a novel concept.

Don’t take this as a reason not to see it. It’s perfectly entertaining, and I’m fast becoming a curmudgeon.

Edit: I’m scheduled to fly with a military guy in a few days, and I fully intend to tell him “Don’t think, just do” at some point.

I discussed it with my brother the former F-16 pilot. He also flew the FB-111. He echoes your sentiments.

It is an entertaining film, but it is “Hollywood”.

[Tamerlane]

@Stephe96

And a “fifth-generation fighter plane” sure sounds like a scary thing.

@Asuka

Fifth-Generation Fighter Plane is such a weird way to refer to them since they’re actually real life aircraft, the SU-57.

The SU-57 is in fact a fifth-generation fighter, as is the U.S.’ F-22 and F-35. It’s a real term .

[icon]

For a break down of all the laws that Maverick broke in the first movie check out the Legal Eagle YouTube channel, in which he has a former JAG specifically call out all of the laws broken as well as some other info, like how unlikely it would be have the call-sign Maverick.

@N9IWP

The P-51 is indeed Tom Cruise’s personal plane, and an instance of “Chekhov’s P-51”
I also liked the sailing scene “I thought you were in the Navy” “I land on ships, not sail them”
(tricky to get out of the slip without the engine)

That quote reminded of another movie that Cruise was in: A Few Good Men. I don’t know if it was an intentional reference or not, but it made me laugh because of the similarity.

//i\\

[duality72]

So, this is a different take. Some excerpts:

At no point in this two-hour monstrosity is it ever mentioned that the Iranians would strike back instantly, sinking the aircraft carrier that Cruise took off from and beginning a war that would annihilate millions of innocent lives. In fact, from the perspective of international law, the Iranian government would be in the right to do so, as Tom Cruise just executed an illegal and unconstitutional act of war on a foreign power without congressional approval. If every single one of our plucky heroes had died during their training montages, it would have made the world a safer place.

“Top Gun: Maverick” is a 131-minute long advertisement for death. Aggressively unoriginal, wildly irresponsible with its messaging, historically revisionist, and shamelessly jingoistic in the name of providing fellatio to arms dealers. This is a masterwork of propaganda in defense of some of our nation’s worst traits, and it’s an enormous success. I left the theater depressed and forlorn.

So I don’t generally expect a whole lot of social awareness in my popcorn films, but this seems pretty far out there and reprehensible. Is the movie really that bad?

[Bullitt]

It’s Hollywood. The military scenarios are not realistic, but close enough. If you don’t scrutinize the operations for realism and just enjoy the show, it’s fine.

It is not a documentary. It is out and out fun.