Preacher Movie Review: Top Gun

Jakedog

Telefied
Ad Free Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2003
Posts
22,953
Location
The North Coast
But beautiful scenery and lifelong friendships are not what draws people to this film…admit it, viewers like you want to see TC going Mach 2 with his hair on fire, riding his motorcycle as fast as he can without the helmet, getting the hot girl and thumbing his nose at his bosses and getting away with it because he is “the best there is”.
It’s every teenage boy’s wet dream.

Fortunately, I am well past that stage, but if others want to enjoy it, more power to them.
Admit what? Of course I love that stuff.

Believe it or not, growing old is mandatory, growing up is a choice. Biggest differences between me and maverick are that I got my running around out of the way early and have managed to hold onto the same hot girl for twenty six years now. I will also never fly at Mach 2. Although given the opportunity to take a ride there’s nothing that would get in my way.

I’ve worked for myself almost my entire adult life because I’m the only boss I’ve ever had worth working for long term. None of the others understood that if you can have a ton of fun and still get the job done well, you should.

PS- Motorcycles are supposed to go fast, and helmets are for football players.

All of this said- If you’ve seen the new movie, and the things you’ve stated are all you took away from it, I’d find that very sad. Because there was so much more there than that. Even my wife (who is not even close to what you’d call a Tom Cruise fan, and not much of an action movie fan at all) loved it and said it was the best movie she’s seen in a theatre in a really long time.
 

Lawdawg

Friend of Leo's
Joined
Mar 13, 2018
Posts
2,330
Age
51
Location
Atlanta
All of this said- If you’ve seen the new movie, and the things you’ve stated are all you took away from it, I’d find that very sad. Because there was so much more there than that. Even my wife (who is not even close to what you’d call a Tom Cruise fan, and not much of an action movie fan at all) loved it and said it was the best movie she’s seen in a theatre in a really long time.

100%. I was pleasantly surprised by how strong the non-flying scenes and performances were. It's the rare sequel that surpasses the original in every way.
 

lowatter

Tele-Holic
Joined
Jul 6, 2008
Posts
841
Location
SC
Admit what? Of course I love that stuff.

Believe it or not, growing old is mandatory, growing up is a choice. Biggest differences between me and maverick are that I got my running around out of the way early and have managed to hold onto the same hot girl for twenty six years now. I will also never fly at Mach 2. Although given the opportunity to take a ride there’s nothing that would get in my way.

I’ve worked for myself almost my entire adult life because I’m the only boss I’ve ever had worth working for long term. None of the others understood that if you can have a ton of fun and still get the job done well, you should.

PS- Motorcycles are supposed to go fast, and helmets are for football players.

All of this said- If you’ve seen the new movie, and the things you’ve stated are all you took away from it, I’d find that very sad. Because there was so much more there than that. Even my wife (who is not even close to what you’d call a Tom Cruise fan, and not much of an action movie fan at all) loved it and said it was the best movie she’s seen in a theatre in a really long time.
old.jpg
 

Ed Driscoll

Friend of Leo's
Joined
Aug 19, 2003
Posts
2,253
Location
South of Dallas
Just came back from seeing it. I had never seen the original Top Gun other than scenes contained within the rock videos that promoted it on MTV and VH-1, so I watched it on Roku last week just so I'd be up to speed with the plot and characters. The original Top Gun felt like an '80s rock video stretched out over two hours, and a film that unironically recreates Dr. Strangelove's "Try a Little Tenderness" scenes of the B-52 and tankerplane, almost eroticizing the F-14s whenever they're on camera.

The new version feels like a WWII movie with cutting-edge 21st century technology (and cinematography): The Dam Busters and 633 Squadron (training the crew for an ultra-dangerous mission), 12 O'Clock High, and more than a hint of the Star Wars Death Star trench sequence (which itself was inspired by those movies). It's loads of fun, much more watchable than the original, and Cruise and Jennifer Connelly both look great. And a really touching scene with Cruise and Val Kilmer.
 

Rufus

Friend of Leo's
Joined
Apr 13, 2004
Posts
2,207
Location
NW Atlanta
Sad news out of the Naval Pilot training group.

That's the sad truth that few folks realize...the life of a military pilot generally doesn't NEED to be unnecessarily dramatized by Mach 10 nonsense. Military aviation is inherently dangerous and even daily peacetime flights are high risk. I have lost more friends to peacetime training accidents than wartime missions. There are other members here that were military aviators or aircrewmen and women that would probably say the same..

I was an attack helicopter pilot for 20 years and have a good amount of shipboard time...but slamming an F-18 onto a pitching and rolling carrier deck, at night under heavy cloud cover with no moon or starlight illumination would scare the beejeesus out of the average person...and rightfully so. And its just a day's work for the Naval Aviator.

What disappointed me most (but did not surprise me) about the movie was that they could have had just as an exciting and emotional movie, while having a more realistic storyline, without being so over the top unbelievable.
 

Rufus

Friend of Leo's
Joined
Apr 13, 2004
Posts
2,207
Location
NW Atlanta
The death dream sequence sounds to me like a lame attempt to generate controversy and keep people talking about it…much like the ending of The Sopranos.
However, unlike The Sopranos (where it worked very well), Top Gun is a fairy tale and has nowhere near the moral gravitas.
 

Rufus

Friend of Leo's
Joined
Apr 13, 2004
Posts
2,207
Location
NW Atlanta
And as long as I’m on my soapbox, my first thought about Maverick in the diner scene was that it was a direct ripoff from the movie The Right Stuff…where we see a battered but unflappable Chuck Yeager emerge from the fireball crash of his X-1 rocket with parachute neatly tucked under his arm.
 

Colo Springs E

Doctor of Teleocity
Ad Free Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2003
Posts
16,823
Location
Colorado Springs
The difference is that Naval aviation is real…and zombies, are not.

Our facilities director where I work is a retired Navy jet fighter. He absolutely loved Maverick.

I don't mind shoot 'em ups and fighter planes etc where you have to suspend disbelief. It's easy for me to do, and just enjoy the ride. Example: James Bond. LOVE that stuff!

When it comes to things that aren't real in movies that bug me.... the worst one for me, is someone slips/can't hold on any longer, and starts to fall off a skyscraper or cliff, and someone grabs their arm and saves them. Having no leverage, nothing holding them (the person saving the other), not 'strapped in' to anything etc. That is dumbest, most physically impossible thing I can imagine, and it seems to occur in about every other movie. I really wish they'd stop doing that lol

As for Tom Cruise in this movie, I'd hardly call it his best acting job ever. But I think he's a really good actor who has nailed a lot of roles. And yes, he was great in Maverick!

I did like his little intro to the movie. It seemed very genuine. (but maybe he was just acting lol)
 
Last edited:

oregomike

Tele-Afflicted
Joined
Mar 28, 2019
Posts
1,523
Location
Hood River, OR
So Preacher was at the movies again. I almost decided to not give a review, but what the heck, I enjoy it and if you don't like it keep scrolling.

So I saw the original Top Gun just as I was to graduate High School. I was an avionics nerd from the time I was twelve so I was invested big time in that movie. I actually went through ROTC during HS and had meetings with an Air Force recruiter to go to the AF Academy in Colorado Springs once I graduated. Everything was pointing in that direction until the summer after my Junior year when I grew six inches. I met with the recruiter before my Senior year and he told me that at 5'9" I was pushing it for a fighter pilot, at 6'3" I would not fit into conventional fighter aircraft as if I ever ejected they would have to call me "stumpy". He did say that I could fly C130s or maybe helicopters if I wanted but that fighter school was out of the question.

Well I gave up on flying fighter jets until I saw Top Gun right before I graduated. That lit the fire again so I decided I would follow my dad's suggestion and become a Naval Aviator. I had all the grades so I marched down to the Naval Recruiting office, giving a big screw you salute to the Air Force office as I passed by, and had a meeting. My dad was a Navy Vet, my grades were great and maybe I could go to the Naval Academy and pursue the dream of flying Navy planes.
The recruiter heard my speech, looked me up and down and said, "how tall are you?".
I replied, "6'3" SIR!"
He said, "well son, you can't serve as an aviator, you are too tall. You probably can't even serve on a submarine as you are too tall and too wide, and you probably don't want to serve on a ship as you are going to hit your head on everything imaginable. You sure you want to join the Navy?"
I replied, "Maybe not sir." The recruiter told me to think it over and get back to him.
I left feeling despondent and decided to become an architect instead.

Anyway I digress, Top Gun - Maverick Review (no spoilers allowed!)

We fast forward 36 years and find Captain Pete "Maverick" Mitchel still flying like his hair is on fire. Maverick is still the same old guy (haha he's pushing 60, see what I did there with "old" guy :) ), with the same old rank, and the same old chip on his shoulder. But the Navy still needs him, just not as much as he thinks.

Tom Cruise- I think this is probably the best acting that Tom has ever done. I forgot he was Tom Cruise, superstar, action hero, scientologist, whatever. He was "Maverick" on the screen the entire movie. His commitment to this film and this role is one that I think might be his crowning achievement. He is just so good with just enough Cruise Cheese in the film to make him endearing and not over bearing. We get the typical shirt off moment where he gets to show his hip bones and his bulging clavicles but not enough to see the softness that has hit his midsection, I mean the guy is almost 60 so give him a break with the shirt off moments! We get to see the stare off into space, you know the one where he flexes his jaw making the muscles around his temples pop up and down like the Rock does with his pecs. And we get the Cruise smile with those pearly whites. We get all of that cheese, but we also get Maverick, the underdog, the "I just want to fly fast and dangerous" throughout the entire movie.

Val Kilmer - Val of course reprises his role as "Iceman". I wasn't sure how they were going to accomplish this but let me say it was beautiful. You will have to watch the movie for more, but Val plays "Iceman" to Tom's "Maverick" and I can say that it was the most emotional I think I have gotten in a movie in a while. For the limited amount of time that Val is in the movie, his moments are huge even when he is not on screen.

Miles Teller - Miles plays "Rooster" a jet jockey whose father was "Goose", Maverick's late REO who dies in the first Top Gun (OK I said no spoilers but if you haven't watched the first movie over the last 30 years, that's not my fault, you had time). Miles does a fabulous job playing the orphaned kid who comes to face with the man who was part of his father's death. There are so many similarities that Miles plays off of that you don't have to think too hard that he could be "Goose's" son. Although there are other movies where I think Miles' acting was better, he does a great job with what he has been given with this role.

The Planes - I almost did not do this part but how can you not mention the planes? They are the real actors in this saga. The big star of the original movie, the F-14 Tomcat sadly has been retired and put out to pasture so we have to find a new rocket ship for our pilots to ride. The F-14 is paid its fair share of respect for this film, and in my opinion it is still one of the most breath taking planes in the Navy's history.

P51 Mustang - talk about a throwback to Naval history. The first plane you are introduced to is Mav's P51 WWII era Mustang. Mav is wrenching away on the old war bird trying to keep something alive that has expired long ago. However, there is just nothing more beautiful than a P51 Mustang sitting in a hangar.

SR-71 - Blackbird - however in this film they call it the prototype SR-72 "Darkstar" (prototype as the SR-71 was retired and a successor has not been forth coming) which is a hypersonic scram jet that is trying to break Mach 9. The SR-71 could break Mach 3 so they were essentially trying to create a plane that could fly three times as fast as the original Blackbird. Purely fictional, the Blackbird was de-commissioned in the late 90's and it still makes my heart flutter when I see its shape on a tarmac or in the sky.

FA-18 Super Hornet - the Super Hornet is the star of this show as it's two seat configuration allows for a pilot and weapons specialist to work together. The replacement to the F-14 it only makes sense to have this new star replace the original.

F35 - Lightening - You would think that the F35 would be Justin Bieber to Justin Timberlake's outdated F18 but because of the two seat ability of the F18 we only get to see the F35 in a side role on this film. So for this film the old dog gets to keep his role, for now.

Sukhoi SU-57 - These are the bad guy's jets. A beast of a single seat stealth fighter that would give any aircraft a run for its money. Not as sexy as the Mig29s in the original movie, but these jets look deadly and sexy all at once. Although the bad guys in the movie were not named, they do have some fancy aircraft.

There are a number of other parts with actors you would be familiar with, like Jon Hamm as the Top Gun Commander, Ed Harris as one of the admirals and Lewis Pullman (BOB) who I expect to get some more big time jobs after his role here.

All in all, I give it three thumbs up because I don't have four.
Just regarding the planes, I loved they showcased the SR-71, and others. I built multiple models of every one of these planes as a kid. The only olane I wish they had there and wasn’t, is the F-4 Phantom. As a kid, I used to sit at the end of the runway and watch them take off from Edwards AFB when I lived in Reno.
 

Ed Driscoll

Friend of Leo's
Joined
Aug 19, 2003
Posts
2,253
Location
South of Dallas
When it comes to things that aren't real in movies that bug me.... the worst one for me, is someone slips/can't hold on any longer, and starts to fall off a skyscraper or cliff, and someone grabs their arm and saves them. Having no leverage, nothing holding them (the person saving the other), not 'strapped in' to anything etc. That is dumbest, most physically impossible thing I can imagine, and it seems to occur in about every other movie. I really wish they'd stop doing that lol
I think those are often homages to those Hitchcock scenes such as the climaxes of North By Northwest and Saboteur.
I did like his little intro to the movie. It seemed very genuine. (but maybe he was just acting lol)
I thought it was a nice touch. Back when record sales were tanking in the video game-obsessed early '80s, Quincy Jones told the crew working on Michael Jackson's Thriller, "Ok guys, we are here to save the recording industry." This seemed like Cruise's way of saying to the audience, "Welcome back to the movies, and helping me to save this industry."
 
Last edited:

ellielo

TDPRI Member
Joined
May 23, 2021
Posts
69
Age
39
Location
Ontario
Thanks for the review. Haven't seen the original movie but this version enjoyed a lot.
 

cometazzi

Friend of Leo's
Silver Supporter
Joined
Dec 3, 2019
Posts
2,069
Location
Wisconsin, Das Land von Käse und Bier
Thank you for taking the time to write up a nice review. I enjoyed the movie. However, you are totally wrong on this point and I must rub your nose in it. A P51 is most beautiful at WOT with the gear up, several feet overhead...



🤓


Man, it's too bad the audio recording is distorted like that. What a beautiful sound.
 

CharlieO

Friend of Leo's
Ad Free Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2003
Posts
3,214
Location
Sarasota, FL
Thank you for taking the time to write up a nice review. I enjoyed the movie. However, you are totally wrong on this point and I must rub your nose in it. A P51 is most beautiful at WOT with the gear up, several feet overhead...



🤓

…or flying upside down at eye level outside your office window. I saw that 40 years ago and will never forget it.
 

Preacher

Poster Extraordinaire
Joined
Apr 17, 2007
Posts
5,571
Location
Big D
Just regarding the planes, I loved they showcased the SR-71, and others. I built multiple models of every one of these planes as a kid. The only olane I wish they had there and wasn’t, is the F-4 Phantom. As a kid, I used to sit at the end of the runway and watch them take off from Edwards AFB when I lived in Reno.

Funny you should post this as my kids and I on Father's day were discussing planes. I believe that all of the kids went and watched the movie and I subjected them to the "he died going mach 10 theory" :)

Then one of the girls mentioned "the old plane" and how it would not be able to compete against the newer planes. I talked endlessly about the F14 and its abilities even though it was engineered back at the end of the Vietnam war. My son then said, "no way that old plane is as fast as a new plane", at which I said the F14 actually is faster than the planes that they used in the film to fly the mission.

My daughters asked how I knew all of this, and I waxed poetic for ten minutes about how I had all the models hanging from my ceiling and had pretty much memorized the specs of the planes and their armaments.

I did tell them the SR71 story as well, still gives me a chuckle.

For your daily laugh:

We listened as the shaky voice of a lone Cessna pilot asked Center for a readout of his ground speed. Center replied: "November Charlie 175, I'm showing you at ninety knots on the ground."

Now the thing to understand about Center controllers, was that whether they were talking to a rookie pilot in a Cessna, or to Air Force One, they always spoke in the exact same, calm, deep, professional, tone that made one feel important. I referred to it as the " Houston Center voice." I have always felt that after years of seeing documentaries on this country's space program and listening to the calm and distinct voice of the Houston controllers, that all other controllers since then wanted to sound like that, and that they basically did. And it didn't matter what sector of the country we would be flying in, it always seemed like the same guy was talking. Over the years that tone of voice had become somewhat of a comforting sound to pilots everywhere. Conversely, over the years, pilots always wanted to ensure that, when transmitting, they sounded like Chuck Yeager, or at least like John Wayne. Better to die than sound bad on the radios.

Just moments after the Cessna's inquiry, a Twin Beech piped up on frequency, in a rather superior tone, asking for his ground speed. "I have you at one hundred and twenty-five knots of ground speed." Boy, I thought, the Beechcraft really must think he is dazzling his Cessna brethren. Then out of the blue, a navy F-18 pilot out of NAS Lemoore came up on frequency. You knew right away it was a Navy jock because he sounded very cool on the radios. "Center, Dusty 52 ground speed check". Before Center could reply, I'm thinking to myself, hey, Dusty 52 has a ground speed indicator in that million-dollar cockpit, so why is he asking Center for a readout? Then I got it, ol' Dusty here is making sure that every bug smasher from Mount Whitney to the Mojave knows what true speed is. He's the fastest dude in the valley today, and he just wants everyone to know how much fun he is having in his new Hornet. And the reply, always with that same, calm, voice, with more distinct alliteration than emotion: "Dusty 52, Center, we have you at 620 on the ground."

And I thought to myself, is this a ripe situation, or what? As my hand instinctively reached for the mic button, I had to remind myself that Walt was in control of the radios. Still, I thought, it must be done - in mere seconds we'll be out of the sector and the opportunity will be lost. That Hornet must die, and die now. I thought about all of our Sim training and how important it was that we developed well as a crew and knew that to jump in on the radios now would destroy the integrity of all that we had worked toward becoming. I was torn.

Somewhere, 13 miles above Arizona, there was a pilot screaming inside his space helmet. Then, I heard it. The click of the mic button from the back seat. That was the very moment that I knew Walter and I had become a crew. Very professionally, and with no emotion, Walter spoke: "Los Angeles Center, Aspen 20, can you give us a ground speed check?" There was no hesitation, and the replay came as if was an everyday request. "Aspen 20, I show you at one thousand eight hundred and forty-two knots, across the ground."

I think it was the forty-two knots that I liked the best, so accurate and proud was Center to deliver that information without hesitation, and you just knew he was smiling. But the precise point at which I knew that Walt and I were going to be really good friends for a long time was when he keyed the mic once again to say, in his most fighter-pilot-like voice: "Ah, Center, much thanks, we're showing closer to nineteen hundred on the money."

For a moment Walter was a god. And we finally heard a little crack in the armor of the Houston Center voice, when L.A.came back with, "Roger that Aspen, Your equipment is probably more accurate than ours. You boys have a good one." It all had lasted for just moments, but in that short, memorable sprint across the southwest, the Navy had been flamed, all mortal airplanes on freq were forced to bow before the King of Speed, and more importantly, Walter and I had crossed the threshold of being a crew. A fine day's work. We never heard another transmission on that frequency all the way to the coast. For just one day, it truly was fun being the fastest guys out there.
 

Preacher

Poster Extraordinaire
Joined
Apr 17, 2007
Posts
5,571
Location
Big D
Was that ROTC Civil Air Patrol? Cause that's what I'm doing now and I just got promoted last Tuesday to Cadet Technical Sergeant

We actually had an Air Force JROTC program at our high school. It was considered extra curricular activities which you had to have two classes of each year.
All I remember is we seemed to march every day in our school clothes around the parking lot in the hot sun.
 

tele_pathic

Friend of Leo's
Ad Free Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Posts
3,131
Age
50
Location
St. George, UT
Maybe the best sequel I’ve ever seen.

For the folks that missed that- it’s not a “remake”. It’s a sequel, set this many years later. And it’s fabulous.

If I really had to dig super deep and find one thing to complain about, I thought Jennifer Connelly was a little wooden and flat in her delivery. But that’s really the only I could nitpick, and it didn’t suck. I’m just being SUPER picky.

The entire thing was fantastic, and yes, Val’s appearance was a very emotional moment for me. Miles Teller and Lewis Pullman just killed. Standout performances for sure.

I’ll definitely buy this one to add to the DVD collection.
I thought we could edit/delete parts of a quoted post on this board. I guess not.

The best sequel you've ever seen, @Jakedog? What about Empire Strikes Back? Wrath of Khan?

I can't say that I loved the first Top Gun, but it is one of the few movies my dad has taken me to while still in the theater (the others being the IV, V, and VI Star Wars movies). And I can't say I was "stoked" to see this new one. But my wife and I went because she loves going to the theater and has no taste in movies or television, so she literally doesn't care what we watch.

Now for my mini-review without spoilers. I got the movie I expected to get. It was sentimental and relied on nostalgia for the 1980s. AND it was basically a remake of the original. And I mean that. If you've seen the first, you've seen this one. Was it amazing to see Val Kilmer on screen? Given his health issues, yes. Was it disappointing that Tom Cruise, who is 60, was cast but Kelly McGinnis, who is also 60, not cast? Fracking yes. But Jennifer What's her name, who is about 50, cast? Again, f'n dang ol straight it was. Just unbelievable the hypocrisy!

The basic plot point of the mission was lame as well. Everything could have, and would have, been accomplished by high altitude bombers, bombs, or smart missles. The idea of invading enemy air space with manned aircraft is ludicrous (and I mean, that's not a spoiler. If you didn't know that basic plot point, why are you here in a thread about a movie like this?).

And Rooster? I guess Gosling would have been too obvious. Or maybe it's simply taken by the Ryan.

The aerial photography was amazing. The practical effects, or lack of CGI, for that blows my mind. One criticism of the original film is that many aerial combat shots are simply duplicated over and over. In Maverick, I kept an out for such shots, but I didn't see any or many that were duplicated. It seemed as if each one was fresh. The aerial photography was stunning.
 




Top