Jump to content

Top Gun 2: Greatest Cinematic Event of the New Millennium


Veltigar
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just got back, don’t have time to read the comments here headed out to the pool with the family; so I’ll drop three thoughts.

1) Movie was awesome
2) Don’t end an awesome movie with Lady Gaga song.
3) Pretty sure the ultimate mission was lifted directly from Iron Eagle 2. (But they had a land unit to take care of missiles.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Iron Eagle was written in the summer of 1984 and went into pre-production shortly after, and principal photography began in early May of 1985, whereas Top Gun wasn't even announced until the end of 1984 (when it was titled Top Guns) and principal photography began in late June 1985. Which is part of the reason why Iron Eagle came out first.

The film has commonly been said to be a clone or rip-off, but it feels like it's just one of those zeitgeisty things -- neither film influenced the other, it was just "that time" for patriotic military airforce films. (The F-16s flown in Iron Eagle were American-made, of course, but were actually rented from the Israeli Air Force.)

I have seen Iron Eagle 2, but the first Iron Eagle is much superior because of the teenage misfits side of things adding a (exaggerated) glimpse into military base life for military brats (which, being one at the time the film was made, made it especially appealing to me). [I say exaggerated because no, we did not have handy abandoned bunkers to commandeer for our clubs... we just broke into empty base housing and hung out in them :P]
And despite its obviously-lower budget and craft, if Louis Gosset Jr. had had Tom Skerrit's role in Top Gun, I wouldn't have complained, he had fantastic presence as Chappy and Chappy was a great character.

Edited by Ran
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I'm in, seen it at the theatre last evening.

Great nostalgia trip for me, was pleasantly impressed.

Ed Harris and Draper (Hamm) were perfect top brass pricks.

Edited by DireWolfSpirit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Mexal said:

Iron Eagle is a classic. I will hear no other opinions. It still holds up. “Chappppppppppppy”

I just love that the Leader of a nameless mid Eastern country would strap himself into a fighter jet and personally face down the invading infidels. :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Rhom said:

I just love that the Leader of a nameless mid Eastern country would strap himself into a fighter jet and personally face down the invading infidels. :thumbsup:

Yeah, that "zeitgeist" Ran was referring to probably involved vicarious revenge against "not the" Iranians, for thumbing their noses at the USA and getting aways with it. Also giving the Russians what for, by god. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I looked up the director of Iron Eagle because why not. This guy has had quite an extensive career

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidney_J._Furie

Quote

He is considered by some an auteur director, elevating otherwise unremarkable genre films through strong, creative visuals, and atmospheric direction. His horror film The Entity (1982) was declared by director Martin Scorsese as one of the scariest movies of all time, and his Vietnam War film The Boys in Company C (1978) was a major influence on Stanley Kubrick's Full Metal Jacket (1987).

However, not to disparage the guy, his '80's filmography definitely has a "whatever will support my coke habit" vibe to it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Rhom said:

I just love that the Leader of a nameless mid Eastern country would strap himself into a fighter jet and personally face down the invading infidels. :thumbsup:

So good! And he was a pretty damn good fighter pilot too... until you realize he got fucked up by a 17 year old kid who's flown like once...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/30/2022 at 12:29 AM, Corvinus85 said:

 

I agree that it was fairly predictable, though I wasn't sure who was going to die if any.

Honestly, I think the film for me was not that predictable because of the death dynamic.

Spoiler

For me, I felt that the film deftly deployed the Rooster-Maverick relationship to misdirect. At a given point, I felt like they were heavily hinting on a sacrifice from Maverick to safe Rooster. Even the romantic relationship with Penny seemed to have the sort of cop-three-days-before-retirement vibe to it that hints at a poignant ending. So when Maverick  took the Scud missile for Rooster, I was completely devastated because I assumed that was were the film was building up too. Now when he managed to survive that, it was clear that the F-14 would come into play and they’d make it but before that I was so fascinated that I couldn’t think beyond the sacrifice.

Quote

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Rhom said:

I just love that the Leader of a nameless mid Eastern country would strap himself into a fighter jet and personally face down the invading infidels. :thumbsup:

The Shariff would not allow anyone to rock the Kasbah

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
37 minutes ago, Veltigar said:

Honestly, I think the film for me was not that predictable because of the death dynamic.

  Hide contents

For me, I felt that the film deftly deployed the Rooster-Maverick relationship to misdirect. At a given point, I felt like they were heavily hinting on a sacrifice from Maverick to safe Rooster. Even the romantic relationship with Penny seemed to have the sort of cop-three-days-before-retirement vibe to it that hints at a poignant ending. So when Maverick  took the Scud missile for Rooster, I was completely devastated because I assumed that was were the film was building up too. Now when he managed to survive that, it was clear that the F-14 would come into play and they’d make it but before that I was so fascinated that I couldn’t think beyond the sacrifice.

 

Oh I agree that the movie did a good job putting the viewer on the edge with Maverick, but you got to remember this is still a Tom Cruise movie.

Spoiler

I can't think of a movie where he played the protagonist and he died.

Also, the trailers showed a F-14 in flight and when the briefing scene showed that it was the baddies who had it, I doubted that we were gonna have faceless goons flying the iconic plane.

The movie does do a good job playing with our emotions when Maverick gets shot down after saving Rooster. In fact, I felt that the humorous scene with the two of them arguing in the woods after the fact slightly diminished the emotional impact of what had happened earlier.

I saw it a 2nd time, this time with my dad, and he liked it a lot, too. I was able to discern now why F-35s couldn't be used, but are F-18s faster & more maneuverable? If so, the Navy owes us money. :P Besides, the Navy was never going to rent out F-35s to the studio.

Also, Scuds are cruise missiles that Saddam used. Those were SAM's, not sure exactly what make. 

I saw a funny fan theory about Maverick

Spoiler

He died during his Mach 10 test and the rest of the movie is just his death dream sequence. :laugh:

 

Edited by Corvinus85
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Corvinus85 said:

Oh I agree that the movie did a good job putting the viewer on the edge with Maverick, but you got to remember this is still a Tom Cruise movie.

  Hide contents

I can't think of a movie where he played the protagonist and he died.

Also, the trailers showed a F-14 in flight and when the briefing scene showed that it was the baddies who had it, I doubted that we were gonna have faceless goons flying the iconic plane.

The movie does do a good job playing with our emotions when Maverick gets shot down after saving Rooster. In fact, I felt that the humorous scene with the two of them arguing in the woods after the fact slightly diminished the emotional impact of what had happened earlier.

I saw it a 2nd time, this time with my dad, and he liked it a lot, too. I was able to discern now why F-35s couldn't be used, but are F-18s faster & more maneuverable? If so, the Navy owes us money. :P Besides, the Navy was never going to rent out F-35s to the studio.

I saw a funny fan theory about Maverick

  Reveal hidden contents

He died during his Mach 10 test and the rest of the movie is just his death dream sequence. :laugh:

 

Now that is why I avoid watching trailers. Apart from the technical stuff and a teaser I steered clear off

on the F-35 v. F-18

Spoiler

The real reason was  probably practicality for shooting (I believe the F-35 is not a two-seater right?), but in the movie don’t they say that the F-35 is out because the whole target area is GPS-blocked? I assumed that their targeting system would therefore be impaired 
 

Seems like a total bullshit reason, but they don’t dwell long on it and the fact that they move rapidly pivot away from the question is actually a sign of the skill of the screenwriters and director imo

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I accidently deleted my genius response and don't feel like typing it again!

One thing, the screening I went to was maybe 20% full. Same day and time of the week for Dr. Strange and it was 80% full and yet Top Gun set records? The night showings must have been selling out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, dbunting said:

I accidently deleted my genius response and don't feel like typing it again!

One thing, the screening I went to was maybe 20% full. Same day and time of the week for Dr. Strange and it was 80% full and yet Top Gun set records? The night showings must have been selling out

I went at 11 AM on Memorial Day and it was probably 90% full I'd say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Veltigar said:

Now that is why I avoid watching trailers. Apart from the technical stuff and a teaser I steered clear off

on the F-35 v. F-18

  Hide contents

The real reason was  probably practicality for shooting (I believe the F-35 is not a two-seater right?), but in the movie don’t they say that the F-35 is out because the whole target area is GPS-blocked? I assumed that their targeting system would therefore be impaired 
 

Seems like a total bullshit reason, but they don’t dwell long on it and the fact that they move rapidly pivot away from the question is actually a sign of the skill of the screenwriters and director imo

 

Yes, I don't believe there is a version of a 2-seat F-35 out there. Also, it cost the studio $11k per hour for each F-18 during flight. The studio would have gone bankrupt if they tried the same for F-35s. :laugh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My wife and I were trying to figure out who Penny was while watching the movie.  She thought it was Tom Skerrit's teenage daughter from the first movie.  We watched the original TG last night and realized she was the admiral's daughter that was name dropped a couple of times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...