Pretty sure at no point in the two-hour “monstrosity” is it ever said that this was Iran. They purposefully left the enemy ambiguous to fit in with the obvious fantasy element of the film. This guy apparently took the movie way too seriously.
Patton. Now there was a war movie that caused trouble: Nixon watched it a few times to gin himself up to invade Cambodia, and identified with Patton because they’d both been treated by Ike as the immature lightweights they were. But Patton is a good movie anyway.
Maverick won’t be starting any wars, and I doubt it will even have as much impact on recruiting as Top Gun had. It’s just a shoot-’em up.
How did they handle the Iceman cameo? I know that Val Kilmer had a scene, and that he has had some serious health issues that I presume they worked into his appearance (perhaps Iceman was in a bad crash?). I’ve also heard that they gave him a voice, something he doesn’t have in real life anymore.
Please fight my ignorance. What was his involvement?
Yeah the only reason people are even saying it’s Iran is because Iran is the only country in the world other than the United States to run Tomcats, but also apparently the Tomcat seen in Maverick is actually not an A model which was the only one Iran actually used prior to the Islamic Revolution, which means the whole THEYRE USING TOMCATS IT HAS TO BE IRAN thing moot, most likely intentionally so on the movie makers part.
They worked it in by establishing, before his scene, that his character has serious health issues, i.e., cancer.
I assumed it was Finland, and the “Tomcat” seen in the film was from an F-14 that was stolen by US Navy 2nd Fleet pilot in the mod-‘Eighties secretly defecting to the Soviet Union because of his shameful love for another pilot but only made it as far as an airfield outside if Helsinki before being forced to land due to being ‘bingo fuel’. In this alternative future, Finland arose post-USSR to dominate the strategically crucial Nordic countries to become the major military power challenging the American hegemony, hence why Tom Cruise and the World Police need to blow the shit out of their secret installation.
Stranger
Not only do they not say it’s Iran, but they don’t say congress wasn’t aware, they don’t say the UN wasn’t aware. The country is not named, the enemy aircraft are not named, and there is the barest minimal backstory to justify the plot. Brett needs to lighten up and stop pulling complaints out of his ass.
It’s Hollywood! It’s entertainment, and this movie is definitely entertaining.
Being a Navy recruiting advert disguised as brainless popcorn entertainment does not render a film exempt from criticism. Personally, I’m waiting for the “Chomsky Critiques Cinema” review.
Stranger
Just like in the first one (which was set in “Present Day”) they don’t ever name the adversary, in this one no one is named and no known insignia are shown. For all we know it could be Blofeld back from the dead with help from Dr. Evil.
It is an action movie with military themes and all the problems that engenders. But action movies in general are escapist fiction where actions do not have true to life consequences. If you are not into that type of film then you will not enjoy it.
//i\\
Yeah it probably takes place in some alternative universe where there were a lot more actual Communist countries than in our timeline which leads to MiG-28’s being exported to Sri Lanka, Bangladesh or even India itself. As a result the US exports even more F-14’s to “friendly” nations, eventually leading to them getting Super Tomcats, but then the fall of the Cold War leads to those formerly friendly countries getting shunted to the bottom of the US foreign aid list, leading to internal de-stability and then in the 00’s a resurgent Russia starts to rearm them, leading to their current mixed arsenal of old F-14D Super Tomcats, SU-57 Felons, and Mil-35 Hinds.
This begs the question of why the Navy didn’t go ahead with the F-21 ‘Super Tomcat’ proposal in this reality. I mean, the F/A-18 is quite the capable aircraft but it is the Toyota Camry of 4th Gen jet fighters; flexible, durable, low maintenance, the kind of jet a soccer mom might dream of flying once she gets the kids off to college. To misquote Captain Steve “America’s Ass” Rogers, if you’re going to fight a cold war you you need a fighter; not some aircraft version of a delicate Japanese mid-engine sports car like an Acura NSX but a real muscle car of an aircraft, the Corvette Z-06 of naval aviation.
Stranger
I think that kind of answers the question 
. F-14’s were hideously expensive and labor intensive to maintain - a bit of a delicate hothouse flower of a plane. The F-18 is cheaper, more robust, requires one less pilot, is much easier to maintain and you can buy more of them. Absolute best quality isn’t always the best choice - listen to the wise Asakura Toshikage:
‘Swords or daggers of famous warriors ought not to be coveted. A sword worth ten thousand pieces can be overcome by one hundred spears worth only one hundred pieces.’
In the world of the Top Gun Cinematic Universe (TGCU) in which pilots are apparently allowed to chase a plan by riding a motorcycle on the taxiway shaking their fist in the air, “astrophysicists” teach their jet pilot students mostly about silhouette sex, and the “MiG-28” reigns supreme in the air forces of unnamed Warsaw Pact-aligned nations operating in the Indian Ocean, the aeronautical porn factor of the F-14 with its swing-arm wings, fuel-thirsty GF110-400 engines, and requirement for a RIO who could die in an emotionally-crucial canopy deployment failure so as to give the hotshot young and ‘dangerous’ pilot just a moment of personal epiphany about the consequences of his actions before going on to start a world war with apparently zero consequences.
The F/A-18 is a plane for boring pilots who don’t routinely buzz the control tower, talk smack to their fellow pilots, smart off to superiors, and destroy $50m aircraft in a fit of pique because another pilot was in their way and they can’t figure out the correct follow distance or recover from a flat spin.
Stranger
Do they play that goddamn Kenny Logins song?
They also got a big Search and Rescue thing going out there. Lots of Helos and F-18s flyin’ around. Weird to see Navy planes out in the middle of the desert. Of course, there is the Underwater Warfare place in Hawthorn. Crazy.
Indeed they do. You don’t like it? I think it works.
To be clear, the song is Danger Zone. In the first Top Gun there was another Kenny Logins song, Playing with the Boys, and that’s not in this one. Thankfully. I didn’t care for that song.
Archer kinda ruined it for me. But made it more funny. It is serious Cheese.
Fair enough. In the Top Gun movies I like it.
I was surprised, but pleasantly so, that for the opening scene they reused the same lead-in to Danger Zone as in the first movie along with new carrier launch scenes. Watching the deck crews do their work to that soundtrack, and then the buildup to the F-18 launch just as Danger Zone starts, it just works, it is motivating (in a military way), and it’s exciting.
Dane-Ja Zooone!
LOL
I tried finding the opening scene of Top Gun Maverick but was unable to. The one from 1986 is east to find and here it is. The remake does the same kind of opening with the same soundtrack. Dane-Ja-Zone! is right on!
