Top Gun is on the History Channel?!

Sadly, the Discovery Channel is also heading in the same direction. Sigh.

it was just a tangent actually, not meant as a direct reply... perhaps a little Food Network is in order...

except for the iron chef america crap.

-- tokyo rosemary (rosemarygilber...), May 16th, 2004.

right, or docs about the luftwaffe. everytime i turn this channel on it's something about the luftwaffe.

"top gun" IS history, though: tony scott's relentless soft-focus has become THE mode for blockbusters today. i'm sure that following the film they had a long discussion of film aesthetcs with audience call-ins.

http://www.jeje.nu/rambo/3+.jpg

Saw this on the big screen at the Laurelhurst here in Portland. This film is so, SO gay.

And what the fuck, Tim Robbins is in it!

loving this thread

top gun = documentary on fags in the air force

lmao

fuck that this is a navy movie

30 years old!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uAopLTK4qVs

the meisterwerke of cinematic giant thomas cruise mapother iv

how did it get so gay?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinking-man/how-did-top-gun-become-so-gay/

Manly men, being men.

Funny thing: when the movie came out, my dad had just served a short stint on an aircraft carrier as part of that year's RIMPAC exercise (thus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exercise_RIMPAC ) involving contact with the submarines, which would lead to him being chief of staff for an admiral in a carrier group shortly thereafter (keep in mind his career was mostly submarines, so this was somewhat atypical, but given both subs and carriers are based out of San Diego, it was an easy temporary shift since he'd long since built up his career cred -- would have been an officer for almost 25 years at this point -- and after that he was the exec to the admiral in charge of the entire sub base at Point Loma). Anyway: we all went to see it as a family, and since we were Navy, living in San Diego etc., we were mostly watching it for the locations and the verisimilitude as much as would be allowed. Dad essentially became our own private narrator about a lot of the flight sequences, the crew and procedures involved on deck and so forth and that was totally fine, I think we were mostly bored with the story! Our conclusion was that Anthony Edwards was the one who actually acted most like a real Navy guy down to the mustache.

But as for it being gay as hell -- nah, no conscious thought about that at ALL, not that I think we would have even talked about it to begin with. I remember being amused by the volleyball sequence but mostly because I thought it just dragged on a bit and the song was goofy as hell.

a service that doesn't think twice about calling an exercise 'rimpac' may have a bit of a blind spot when it comes to homoerotic overtones tbf

Submarines, as is well known, are long, hard, and full of seamen, so.

Chinese fighter flies inverted over US Air Force jet

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/18/politics/china-us-jets-intercept/index.html

they've been studying the classics i see

Whole movie? Nothing but a strip volleyball match.

Val Kilmer is indeed reprising his role as Iceman in 'Top Gun 2'. https://t.co/dODdP3hyzY

— Collider (@Collider) June 6, 2018

Cruise’s Oblivion filmmaker Joseph Kosinski is in the director’s chair.

He's no Tony Scott, and I mean that sincerely.

otm

KERSPLODE!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSqVVswa420

glad to see they have a scene were they're on the beach oiled up like turkish wrestlers

i will definitely watch this

Can we get a Broken Arrow sequel next? Christian Slater isn't doing much these days.

oh hell yes, when you've got movies like Val Kilmer in them, you can't lose!

I plan on setting aside a weekend next summer to watch this, the Sonic the Hedgehog movie, and my VHS copy of Prefontaine, and call it my weekend of speed.

probably don't need to explicitly mention it, but I will also be consuming a vigorous quantity of methamphetamine while watching the movies

I had to look it up, but apparently there is no maximum age to be a military pilot. Would have been awesome, though, if this was about Maverick as a commercial pilot.

(Unrelated, just watched Easy Rider last night, and a lot of young Nicholson's smily mannerisms reminded me of Cruise's!)

weird to think Tom Cruise is now three years older than Jack Nicholson was when A Few Good Men was released.

Oh my god !!!
Beach volley, flight jacket and... F14 (how’s that even possible !? CGI, eh?) !!!
I’m a 10 yo boy again...

i was unenthused for about a nanosecond and rhen i saw Maverick and jets and :D

also Jennifer Connelly!

Ed Harris looks like a dusty old sphinx in that opening shot, it looks like he’s made of sand! Bad makeup/lighting job there :(

Yeah J. Connelly is a great surprise !

Harris is only 11 years older than Cruise!

man tom cruise is really dead-set on dying during a stunt on a movie shoot isn’t he

five the people what they want

My main issue with this is that F/A18s are nowhere near F14s in the cool/badass aspect.
Since they CGIed ONE F14 apparently, they should have gone all the way !

didn't know we had fans of Reaganaut Propaganda Shit here

will this one go full Trumpist? ie the big final bombing of [Whatever]istan will be recalled at he last minute.

rmde

Tom Skerritt is still around, why isn't he in this thing? Or Kelly McGillis? Or Anthony Edwards as Cruise's ghost friend who gives him advice?

On the other hand, Manny Jacinto is in it, which is good. On the other other hand, Miles Goddamned Teller is in it.

Maybe the twist is that in this one Tom Cruise is a Russian agent.

america, russia, whatever. maverick's only in it for the jazz

the original top gun is a fairly apolitical movie considering. sure, the impetus for the movie is the sort of fashy enthusiasm for gleaming new technological wonders of warfare sort of à la the italian futurists, but the actual meat of the piece is essentially a sports movie - with simpson/bruckheimer and scott's days of thunder being essentially a poor redo of top gun with the action transposed to the world of nascar.

the whole competitive, locker-room grab-assing aspect of top gun is pure fiction - irl the "top gun" course has no winner and is not a competition. the technical advisor on the picture pointed out that they didn't have their classes take place in air-hangars and there wasn't a culture of broing down in the locker room after training but simpson and bruckheimer wanted more excuses to show the planes and more excuses to see tom and val in their underwear.

there's something very high school about the whole thing. there's also nary a mention of ideology or even any half-baked geopolitical rationale for the skirmishes that take place in the movie. the enemy are clearly of the state socialist kind, with their MIGs with a star painted on them. it's also extremely homoerotic and kitschy

Maybe the twist is that in this one Tom Cruise is a Russian agent.

Nah, Chinese:

There’s a new Top Gun movie coming out. And Maverick is wearing the same leather jacket - only this time it’s Communist Party of China-approved, so the Japanese and Taiwanese flag patches are gone (screenshot on right is from the new trailer)... pic.twitter.com/gUxFNFNUKX

— Mark MacKinnon (@markmackinnon) July 19, 2019

in which miles teller sports a moustache in tribute to his dead dad, anthony edwards

http://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PLZQfnFyelTBOQ15kmHSgEbdjzLMWzZpL7&time_continue=25&v=g4U4BQW9OEk&feature=emb_title

my apologies to sic

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flURw76_UCU

ok, i haven't watched top gun in a long time, but this is how i remember the best scene:

goose has died. tom cruise is in a hot steamy bathroom back at the base. he’s in his underwear and his head hangs down over the sink. he’s defeated. the captain walks in and sees Maverick looking so down. the captain takes a piss. Maverick starts complaining and whining about life. The captain listens for a bit. then he says, “goddammit Maverick.” and Maverick looks stung but still keeps his head down like a dick. “Don’t tell me about losing Goose. Don’t tell me I didn’t love him. We all loved Goose. GODDAMMIT MAVERICK!” and he pushes Maverick hard in the chest. Maverick’s mad now. they’re both mad. the Captain storms out and Maverick looks at the door closing, breathing hard now.

now i'm going to try to find that scene and compare

hm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmAmb36jafA

top gun maverick is beautifully ridiculous and i enjoyed it quite a lot

the kilmer scene was gr8

I never saw Top Gun and am doing an oscar sweep, figured fuckit i might as well see the original if i have to see the sequel.

I'm sure everyone already knows this as I'm forty years late to the party BUT: better than average direction that makes the aerial sequences comprehensible and enjoyable, Cruise is good and there's solid acting throughout (with the exception of McGillis who seems drugged), but holy shit this script though.
Predictable and dogshit dumb, daddy-do-you-love-me-now, adolescent small dick power fantasy tech fetishism at its worst. it is also super sweaty and homoerotic as all get out. And the music and score sucks!

how dare u

faltermeyer score rules, forks drools

let the record show that my chin is dry

How did you feel when goose died? Maverick takes it pretty hard

Goose's breath taken away, then narcissist Maverick says MY BREATH is ALSO taken away BY THIS LADY

i haven't seen the new one, but i'm really hoping that they realize that Goose is actually alive, but he's been working undercover for the russians for the last 30 years, ever since his "death". maverick is forced to make a difficult decision about whether or not to kill his friend as he is also forced to make some very difficult flight maneuvers in his Boeing F/A 18E/18F Super Hornet in a once in a lifetime adventure you won't want to miss

His spirit (and moustache) are alive

maudlin and slow 'Great Balls of Fire' cover

i think there's an essay to be written (surely HAS been written) about how this film is about failing upward. white male narcissist disobeys orders and is promoted. Meets a woman who he harasses at a bar, follows into a bathroom and is rebuffed, subsequently discovers he's working with her and still refuses to stop harassing her. Disobeys orders again, faces no consequences. Fails miserably following another breach in protocol. Is dressed down by a female co-worker for acting out, throws a fit and is spectacularly rude, somehow still lands an inappropriate relationship with the co-worker. Is directly involved in the death of his co-pilot (clearly following too close in the jetstream of another pilot in an attempt to hog glory and pays the price) but is found to be without culpability. Abandons his romantic partner without notice. Finds support with his boss, his coworkers and the wife of the co-pilot, from whom he STEALS THE DOG TAGS OF HER DEAD HUSBAND AS A MEMENTO. Fails to engage on a subsequent mission and quits but returns to the academy without notice, where he is given a diploma and promptly promoted to active duty. Flies into battle and fails to engage yet again at great risk for all combatants, then returns to the dogfight and murders several people. Is promptly hailed as a hero, reclaims his romantic partner and THROWS HIS DEAD PARTNER'S DOG TAGS INTO THE SEA.

christ what an asshole

but jetfighters tho

AND VOLLEYBALL

he is late to his first date with the woman he's been inappropriately harassing because he refuses to stop playing beach volleyball!

I have all kinds of theories on how the sequel attempts to rehabilitate this nonsensical preening with gravitas. Goose's kid is in this as a flyer right? Presumably Cruise plays the Viper role now? I'm guessing there's a lot of wistful "things have changed... we didn't know any better back then" conversations over beers and a token female flyer. Expectations are super low but i have to admit this really whetted my appetite for the sequel in a "fuck how bad is THIS one gonna be?" way.

Maverick throws pottery with Tom Skerritt

never mind, i'm in

my english teacher in high school loathed Top Gun. he called it "an extended commercial for the U.S. military"

well, yeah

that’s basically on the poster lol

it sure did make the military look like a lot of fun! you do what you want and people love you, then you get to kill.

your friend dies. it makes you more attractive.

fly a cool jet, ride motor bike, wear a dope jacket covered in ridiculous number of patches
i see no prob here

you forgot the volleyball

VOLLEYBALL

and the Loggins

it’s a dumb fucking propaganda movie that is (gasp!) stupid fun! and should not be taken seriously because if you do Tony Scott will come back from the dead & haunt you with jet flyovers for the rest of yr days

i honestly didn't find it to be fun but it has zero nostalgia value to me so that may be the problem.

Yeah if you consider it from the point of view of an adult watching it for the first time now, it’s a terrible movie.
But for a western block kid in the 80s it was exciting and lots of fun !
In both cases, TG2 is a much better movie (but still just a military blockbuster).

it’s a dumb fucking propaganda movie that is (gasp!) stupid fun! and should not be taken seriously because if you do Tony Scott will come back from the dead & haunt you with jet flyovers for the rest of yr days

it’s not even a you had to be there thing though, or i didn’t think so
i would have thought the faltermeyer score + Tony Scott namecheck + subsequently followed by TEN MINUTES of “get jets ready for takeoff ad infinitum” would have been all the indication you would need without having to be ~from~ 1986 but maybe not

My favorite Tony Scott quote
(from IMDb)

During a break in the filming of the hangar scene a group of Navy officers being used as extras approached Tony Scott and complained about the unrealistic collection of patches on the flight suits of the actors. He replied, paraphrasing, "We're not making this movie for Navy fighter pilots, we're making it for Kansas wheat farmers who don't know the difference."

i absolutely AM from 1986! but i missed this until now. different strokes.

it’s not even a you had to be there thing though, or i didn’t think so
i would have thought the faltermeyer score + Tony Scott namecheck + subsequently followed by TEN MINUTES of “get jets ready for takeoff ad infinitum” would have been all the indication you would need without having to be ~from~ 1986 but maybe not

in the val kilmer doc he talks about how there was kind of a “team val” and “team cruise” on set and delivers an extremely unconvincing line that despite the gossip he and cruise were always supportive of each others’ careers lol yeah buddy ok

well i watched the sequel and i am pretty sure i hate it more than the original.

the positives are much the same as the first one: Full committal by all the actors, Cruise is an eyecatching actor and can mostly get away with the dumbest conceivable dialogue, the dogfight sequences are generally intelligible but holy shit this script though.
STILL predictable and dogshit dumb, daddy-do-you-love-me-now, adolescent small dick power fantasy tech fetishism at its worst. it no longer has the benefit of explicit homoeroticism but the music and score do still suck!

The decision to replicate not only the credits but all the main story beats, all the failson rising white narcissist savior bullshit and at least a dozen scenes note for note doesn't impress me, it only serves to show how utterly creatively bereft and unimaginative the hands on the wheel are. The inclusion of a more diverse cast and a slightly less sex pest relationship are directly undercut by Hangman's hotdog last second bailout (another bloated egotist to the rescue! let's see a woman do that!) and the cynical erasure of all the prior film's female characters. Kilmer can't even speak but he makes the cast while McGillis gets bumped for the unforgivable sin of aging.
The product being sold here isn't the military, it's fucking Tom Cruise. Why the fuck did I just watch a two hour commercial for Tom Cruise? Fuck this series.

i am glad that salahuddin got paid though.

it was dumb

but i am a sucker for the real jet fighter shit
i still go to airshows, i’m a total plane dork

You're good about not making this presumption VG, but it's worth noting that me disliking things anyone else likes is never a personal attack or a referendum on your taste or intelligence. I genuinely wish I had enjoyed this! I invested a lot of time in finally seeing the Top Guns! I tend to read the fact that you found enjoyment in something I could not as something of a failing on my part.

seriously though, how are you gonna have Ed Harris and throw him away like that? The man is a walking dusty wrinkle, let's keep him in the shot for as long as possible!

it isn’t a failing, you see these goofy movies for what they are. super dumb macho militaristic empty vessels

plane vibes are my sole reason for liking these movies & i think i have an unresolved crush on tom cruise that i havent sought therapy for

but electric guitars & barrel rolls & shit like that you can get in better quality from the van halen “ dreams” video if i’m honest

sorry for being overbearing <3

you're not being overbearing, you're defending what you like!

If i had a crush on Cruise, this would be my jam too. He's clearly really in love with himself and trying to share the joy of that experience.

vehicle fetishism rolls right off my back, even stuff like Croneberg's Crash. Mechanical obsession is sort of antithetical to my worldview.

it’s just a sports movie with planes

idk I see nothing positive about the first one; the new one is the first one done right, i.e. a Tom Cruise movie with planes.

you could not make these planes out of clay -- they wouldn't fly!

The sequel is kind of a masterpiece as far as this sort of thing goes. Resuscitation of a decades old property that holds true to the spirit of the original, builds on it in a way that doesn’t feel forced, deftly weaves in the old threads, is an honest-to-god excitingly filmed action movie that relies heavily on actual cameras and planes. And it’s better than the original.

It feels completely removed from current action spectacle. Old Hollywood in a way. Of course it’s dumb as shit and of course you won’t feel certain things if you didn’t see Top Gun as a kid. But this is maybe the first instance of nostalgia filmmaking necromancy done right.

If you’re coming at this with an arms crossed, sneering take at 80s action movie stupidity, of course you’re going to hate it. Let me put on my spectacles and sit down and watch Commando for the first time at 40 something and tell you all what a moronic spectacle it is.

Said spectacle like 8 times there, juggling work texts and hot Top Gun takes simultaneously.

But forks, aren’t you an avowed Cameron hater too? I see the divergence.

i must’ve seen top gun as a kid, i def had the vhs in my movie cabinet, but i can’t imagine i ever made it all the way through it? as an adult it’s boring but it was made by tony scott so it’s gay and beautiful propaganda

whereas maverick is a legit nailbiter in nearly every scene of plane action. also seeing it with a crowd of friends elevates it considerably. the lack of homosexuality is made tolerable by how incredulous the heterosexuality is

i def expressed all of this before on a different thread (was it last year’s sequel/franchise poll?)

Yeah, seeing this in a theater especially was really something. Like I felt the audience responding to it in a way I’ve never really experienced. Maybe partly the post-COVID cinema thing, but everyone from kids to old folks were enthralled and just buzzing walking out of it.

Also lol and on point re: the sexuality of both

I saw it Memorial Day weekend and was one of the best experiences in years.

It’s Hollywood doing its big ole dumb thing better than it’s done it in a very, very long time.

idk I see nothing positive about the first one

some great light by Kimball / Scott

I don’t know how you can watch a Tony Scott movie and see literally nothing to like. They’re beautiful at the very least.

Ready for a Maverick treatment of Days of Thunder.

I like Days of Thunder!

Me too! It’s under appreciated. And gorgeous.

Robert Duvall acts as if it's O'Neill.

The gravitas of a Harris or Duvall is crucial underpinning. No condescension, they’re in it.

None at all! One of his best.

the gravitas of a squinting skerritt

sounds like a mollusk.

circa, I've got to interrogate what "spectacle" means to you in terms of enjoyment and why it not being in CGI somehow gives you a greater thrill. Flynn's Robin Hood or even Spielberg's War of the Worlds, this ain't; it's workshopped and overwrought beyond common sense or spontaneous thrill. I'm not getting any soul or thought beyond obvious fanservice and slavish Cruise hagiography. If what's there is exciting you, more power to you; acting as if these blockbuster hoo-ha qualities are inherently recognizable, positive or even engrained within this work as a matter of fact is fallacious.

I also take umbrage with your conception of me as a curmudgeons shooting fish in a barrel in choosing to engage the work and then positioning myself as holier-than-thou in voicing my objections. I think I've been clear in my intentions to want to find things to enjoy here; I'm simply not seeing them.

oh i thought you longed to see something worthwhile in this and thought the deficiency was within yourself, but now i see finding value in this spectacle is fallacious

no, the argument that the value in the spectacle is inherent is fallacious.

i'm _inclined_ to consider my inability to enjoy this to be a failing and would love to be shown the error in my ways but "Sure it's meaningless and stupid but there's so much of it and it's executed so well!" is not swaying me to the dark side.

there is abundant spectacle to be found in Birth of a Nation (both of em!) but that's not a great selling point (for either of em!)

sidebar but has anybody talked about the obvious visual/plot/script Star Wars lifts, "Don't think, do" and the death star trench run most prominent among them

ohhhh boy

i'm _inclined_ to consider my inability to enjoy this to be a failing and would love to be shown the error in my ways but "Sure it's meaningless and stupid but there's so much of it and it's executed so well!" is not swaying me to the dark side.

― POLIZISTEN VERSINKEN IM SCHLAMM (forksclovetofu),

So don't post?

it doesn't seem to be stopping you?

I'm not sure what War of the Worlds does in your comparison. Yes, it made money and Spielberg meant it to be seen by a lot of people, but it has nothing in common with TG.

Both star Cruise, both prominently feature spectacle as the primary dish on the menu. One has a (somewhat) more coherent storyline and is filmed with an emphasis on humanity.

I liked the sequel! I didn't like the original, but I'm not going to re-post arguments in goddamn 1986; it's not a big deal. Meanwhile you ARE rehashing those arguments, plus condescending to the rest of us.

an emphasis on humanity.

lol you went to a Top Gun sequel for humanity? Most of us went for spectacle and cool planes.

xp I'm discussing the sequel and comparing it to the original, which is only appropriate considering it is (occasionally a shot-for-shot) remake.

I haven't been condescending to you or anyone else here, I just don't agree with you. On the other hand, your suggestion that I don't post because I disagree with you is explicitly haughty.

it’s like looking for the culinary value in a hotdog, or eating one for the first time and
declsiming this has no value, there’s no good flavor, it’s just salt, it’s cheap and has no value etc

no newsflash. we recognize the experience but we enjoy those things it lacks. that’s what a hotdog is. it’s lack of culinary value is satisfying, scratches an itch. that it is cheap is also a value

top gun isn’t cinemaaaa. it’s just a movie.
lack of depth/value isn’t the headline. we all know what it is.
it’s a movie hotdog

Nothing personal, forks. But it’s not like you haven’t been laying the grumpy out kinda asking for it.

It’s a matter of taste. I’m just as aware of the structure as you are, but I appreciate the artistry of this kind of admittedly goofy thing more than you do. It’s well honed. Exceptionally so. Committee driven or not, it’s impeccably crafted.

If I sit in a theater at nearly 40 years old and physically feel an audience (and myself) electrified by, y’know, CINEMA… it’s a special thing.

Also do not agree that this is just a good hot dog.

i also agree with vegemite.

the original top gun is a very silly movie in many ways. however, i have gotten so much joy in my life by thinking of it. it's hard to describe what it means to have "danger zone" in my head for the vast majority of my life. it is a uniquely postmodern thing to perpetually have in the mind, i think (no one will ask me to explain what i mean by that, thank god)

not sure how i became the movie rockist in this scenario. I love all kinds of garbage and kitsch, mass produced and small scale.

this film isn't garbage and it's not a hot dog and it's not goofy. it's a carefully constructed device built by a team of specialists at a cost of over 200 million dollars, "impeccably crafted" with the obvious intention of re-engaging the movie public in the post covid era by preying on nostalgia for the eighties (a time, I'm sure you remember, of bleak conservatism, xenophobia and warmongering), that's comes freighted with sexism, cynicism and militarism. it's the second most popular film of the year in the united states (behind another that could also easily be described in all the same terms if you switch out 80's with aughties) and is being acclaimed as a masterpiece by the motion picture academy, the critical establishment, and the vox populi. It won!

I'm not being grumpy and i'm not being condescending or placing any kind of judgement on your enjoyment or acting like i'm telling you anything you all don't already know by pointing out its significant flaws on a thread where people are meant to discuss the film. I took the time to watch the first film after literal decades of avoiding it in preparation of giving this franchise a shot, which I daresay puts me in a pretty unique position to offer an appraisal. I thought that might be worthwhile but it sure feels like you all disagree. Anyways, I've seen two movies since and I'm fine moving on.

The Cruise will be with you always

Amen

forks you are correct about the film (it’s the first McQuarrie I’ve sorta hated) but I think most ppl itt who like it have made active, conscious decisions to not care about various of the things that annoy you, wrt to this piece of entertainment, so there’s not much to interrogate

plane go fast

the gravitas of a squinting skerritt

otm

i think

firstly

that coming into a movie deciding that you are going to analyse it through if not a primary lens of then certainly let's say with one of the lenses you have knowingly engaged being that of 2023 political hot points critique is something you should tbh question in yourself if that movie is top gun: maverick

the movie is a lot better than a hot dog but lets say for instance we're going with the hot dog analogy

you are not just critiquing the hot dog as if it ought to have been a fine dining experience, you have in fact shown up to a hot dog stand dressed in smart casual attire and demanded a table before complaining that all you have been offered is hot dog.

this is with reference to your criticisms of top gun: maverick only

to have attempted the same with top gun is to have turned up to where you are aware a hot dog stand was almost forty years ago, dressed in smart casual attire and demanded a table before complaining that the hot dog you have somehow thereby obtained is old.

the standard applied is a fucking nonsense, frankly and furtermore it not only adds nothing, the possibility that it might have added anything is plainly ridiculous- you are reviewing the ghost of a hotdog. aint nobody got time to read that no matter how they feel about that hotdog stand as it existed once, were they aware of it, nor indeed how they feel about hot dogs now.

the other general criticisms arent invalid insofar as they are in some places correct but they come from a position of holding yourself above the material (and crucially everything the material promised to be) which is a cardinal sin if the point of the movie is immersion.

i dont as a rule post on ilx anymore ofc but even before that id stopped posting mean things about shite that had 100% advertised they would be shite unless people insisted they were not shite outside of threads dedicated to the shite in question

but the critique offered of top gun original is dreadfully boring as well as 100% wrong- it's a technically superb hugely entertaining ridiculous and knowingly so macho homo warthrobbing planefest

it might be that people took the politics, it might even be that some people took the character of maverick- there is btw a subtle hint in the name that i believe you may have missed throughout, ask if stuck - seriously. i believe wholeheartedly that those people are watching the movie incorrectly and if your main beef about it is that none of it makes sense or that the sexual politics- disregarding the incredible charisma of the fictional character maverick played by the famous sex symbol of the time tom cruise, for context, remember- are less than you find personally credible or laudable remember you are critiquing the movie incorrectly not just because nobody is going to disagree but really because nobody has thought about top gun as an important primer for sexual nor international relations since the day it was released at least certainly not in a manner that in any way demanded a review somehow based around that aspect in february the year of our forks 2023

now so much for the ghost of hot dog. on to hot dog: maverick

its just a brilliant film. even if you were bent towards criticising a movie based on what it wasnt- speaking of traits that render a criticism invalid- youd be straight up wrong that this movie wasnt smart, almost uncanny in how it handles itself as a sequence of nostalgic touchpoints for a film that you couldnt make today and not be subject to a million reviews of the kind you dropped in with about the original above.

it vibes man. it vibes cheesy it vibes fun it vibes knowingly it vibes like you really didnt believe it could after so long it transports all but the least willing to a state of viewing where even your few valid criticisms (for a movie released now) are subject to the massive caveat that this is top gun island where topless ass smack volleyball sessions never went away where dun dun dun dun dun dun dun dun slow motion pans let you know you're about to see some real shit baby where maverick has kept not only his liberty and his hairline but his ability to fly jets crash jets steal jets and shoot jets where jennifer connolly runs a bar just to keep herself in yacht and classic porsche money while awaiting the arrival of a cheshire cat cosplaying richard gere for forty odd years and theres no real need to think about any of that because you bought the ticket to top gun island having been there only a week ago and hating it and you sat there fuming that you still hate it but everyone around you has grins just like that same cheshire cat and each of them is totally immersed thinking

son of a bitch i think theyre gonna try to pull it off those crazy bastards they are gonna try to pull it off holy shit they might actually pull it off OH MY GOD THEYVE PULLED IT OFF

and this same cycle of incredulous disbelief occurs im going to say at least six times maybe ten during the movie with a crescendo mission that genuinely ranks up there with anything an action movie has put on screen in decades in terms of im moving in my seat ducking rocks here and i havent breathed in going on two minutes.

and that is the correct way to watch these movies.

dont call it a comeback

<3 u deems

Booming post. Post of the year.

The original still sucks :). I sat google-eyed and enraptured during the new one, which couldn't exist without the original.

hi darraghmac! i know you don't post much here anymore but it's mighty good to see you

The only analogy I could think of was Beau Travail.

Ok I truly don’t know ILX at all anymore

hi deems I’m not posting in this thread and I haven’t watched either of these movies I’m just saying hi

Ok I truly don’t know ILX at all anymore

― عباس کیارستمی (Eric H.),

Cut! Print it! What happens in the next reel? Do I get dragged off screaming to the snake pit?

but if I’m going to try to contribute basically as Tim says you sometimes have to put on your good time hat and if you are going to make the structural critique of the proverbial hot dog instead of wearing your good time hat as well you might as is your privilege it pays to be aware that everyone with the good time hat on knows the structural critique a lot of the time and could ably make it themselves so ultimately the structural critique addresses not the movie but the existence of the good time hat

since art does not remonstrate with us cf “what art is like” Tamen Harvard UP 2012 at some level of meta-critique the critic’s critique is always critique of the critic herself and an accounting for what happened to her when she ate that hot dog

which is to say and I say this a lot that a lot of time and frequently on this and other message boards someone will say “my arm hurts” and my instantaneous and sometimes angry impulse will be to say “what are you talking about my arm doesn’t hurt” and that’s the most important thing I’ve learned about myself from posting on the internet

i couldn't be more over this back and forth at this point but deems:

1) you've confused my actual means of thinking about things with "2023 political hot points critique"; i posted my genuine response on watching this which is that i find it offensive and stupid. sorry if that puts me in an ecosystem you consider underexamined but i get by alright.

2) your suggestion that there is "a right way to watch a movie" can fuck off and suggests that you are the one approaching this work with an agenda, not me.

3) your presumption that i am some sort of conceptual strawman interacting with the film on the eighth dimension while i pick my teeth with old issues of the paris review is a super weird projection. i watch and listen to and engage with 8 metric fucktons of media on a weekly basis and i come to all of it with presuppositions and yet i'm constantly surprised and caught off guard virtually daily. i expected this to suck and it did but that hardly caps my inability to engage with it in any way. Neither film entertained me or excited me and it's not because i was shut off to them or because they weren't Cocteau or because I can't enjoy boneheaded propaganda or because i can't recognize the things it does correct. It's because they are both bad films and because i didn't watch the first one when i was 12. if i have a thesis worth defending wrt to the sequel it's that it is nothing without nostalgia and i'm proof thereof. that's an interesting optical illusion as far as i can see, looked at with one eye slightly askant and you can see all the holes in it.

4) there is nothing "brilliant" about following the pattern of an earlier film to evoke nostalgiac response and there is nothing "brilliant" about the points they chose. it's paint by numbers simple and effective only insofar as you are enjoying the process of watching someone painting by numbers, which you seem to, so great? Weird that you get so much exhilaration out of it, but you do you.

6) all this metaphoric obfuscation of the film as hot dog or vibe or anything other than commodity is so much bullshit. i could have just said "hey these movies suck. i watched them and they're empty nonsense". I think I will: These movies suck. I watched them and they're empty nonsense. They evoked no emotional, adrenal or intellectual response out of me and that's because they are both bad, both on their own or in tandem. They did not entertain me or excite me and it's not because i was shut off to them or because they weren't Cocteau or because I can't enjoy boneheaded work or because I can't understand the time they're a part of or what they represent or their simplistic metaphors. It's because they are both bad films.

7) please enjoy watching your bad film your correct way as it seems to be bringing you joy but please browbeat somebody else next time as it's not appreciated. it's one thing to bring your own ideas to the table and it's another to fling them directly at other people's head as if you have sovereign right to defend THE SECOND MOST POPULAR FILM IN THE UNITED STATES as if it that championing serves anybody other than your sense that you have deep insight into the plane goes up high movie.

silby making good points but i'm pretty sure UP came out in 2009, not 2012

Darraghmac divebombing into this thread with an epically long post to rescue it from banality kinda reminds me of the way Glen Powell as Lieutenant Jake "Hangman" Seresin swoops dramatically into the climactic final action sequence of the 2022 American action movie "Top Gun: Maverick."

Unfortunately Darraghmac is lacking a badass fighter-pilot nickname; please remedy this forthwith.

"Pedant"

Not bad! Solid choice.

I confess I was trying to work up some kind of Kenny Loggins riff but wasn't getting far. "Highway to the Darraghzone" is too long. Dangermac?

my top gun handle would be "pipsqueak"

*pipsqueak's plane is the very first to go down in battle*

"goddammit pipsqueak! you little...you little...ya shrimp. ya pipsqueak, i loved ya, i did. you little tiny asshole rookie. ya beanpole. ya thin mint, i hated you so much, you small man. ya lil guy. ya lil pipsqueak i'm so sorry"

darraghmac otm

forks your original post was just 'this movie sucks' as far as I'm concerned no matter how much you long-windedly complain that it wasn't.

forks its all love

but im right

really i just wanted to work in frankly/furtermore

frankly my dear

fwiw i enjoyed your first post about cruise being a sex pest, forks, it’s not something people usually bring up and it’s true (and yes you can be a sex pest while also being v good looking and charismatic) .. i have a soft spot for this sort of beatdown cf my own “takedown” of aragorn as a fraud in the fellowship of the ring BUT then unfortunately you decided to score these movies along a “suck / do not suck” axis which is the wrong way to think about them imo

i have not seen maverick btw but my 11yo son did with some friends (having never seen top gun; til now i haven’t been letting him anywhere near those venetian blinds with berlin playing over the top) and he loved it. same as he loved stranger things without having seen ET etc

ienjoyhotdogs wrote this on thread scientology & celebrities on board I Love Everything on 19-Aug-2014

realnaming not cool

― duff paddy (darraghmac), Tuesday, August 19, 2014 1:01 PM (4 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

BUT then unfortunately you decided to score these movies along a “suck / do not suck” axis which is the wrong way to think about them imo

This absolutely belongs in a different thread but something I've been thinking about while flipping through the "how old is ILX" thread and writing in two dozen others: i'm eying middle age with a fairly well-rounded life to show for it. Most of you don't actually know me but I am, by literally anyone's standards, a remarkably well-culturally travelled, overeducated, curious, thoughtful guy. That's not to toot my own horn or act like I'm any better than whoever you are; those are just statements of fact. Yay me!

Separately, I've been posting on ilx about almost everything I've been thinking about for over two decades. I'm surely capable of casual online dumbfuckery and jackanapes galore but, with embarrassing exceptions, mostly confined to the first decade of the millennium, I've made a heartfelt effort to not forget that there are humans on the other side of the screen and to be kind and patient first. Being treated as if I'm a dolt isn't something I would put up with in any other place on the internet but this forum and the reason I choose to make that exception has become incredibly difficult for me to clarify or put words to. On the rare occasions that anyone's tried that shit with me in real life, I've quit jobs and voided contracts and broken up friendships.

On post-COVID ILX, I am getting the sense of being treated like a dolt and seeing other people treat each other as if they're dolts far more often than usual. Perhaps it feels more noticeable because there are increasingly fewer of us. Sometimes that behavior stems from more hot blooded issues like politics and gender and culture shift and sometimes it boils over in conversations about (checks notes) how fast a top ten list is produced or fucking "Top Gun II".

I'm not mad about it exactly (in a corncob kinda way) and I'm certainly well aware that ILX was violently mean spirited in its youth. But seriously, almost all of us here are now at least in our thirties and the majority of us are well past 40. Aren't we finally over shit stirring and ad hominem and snark and unfocused aggression and derision and bad faith readings of one another's jotted off texts? Is that all there is? In the one digital space where quite a few of us have devoted more time than any other on the internet, couldn't we make it a rule to give each other the benefit of the doubt and approach conversations as something other than batting practice? I'm aware everybody has history with one another and there are various feelings, hard and otherwise. But couldn't the expectation reasonably be that, moving forward and until proven otherwise, people that you've known even glancingly in common fellowship for over a decade will be expected to approach the table with good will? Or is "lol nothing matters" and demanding that you're right on opinion-based conversation in this space, in what has got to be the least complicated of relationships, going to be a lifetime ethos?

Just typing all this out is probably a sign it's time for me to direct more of my attention to more productive obsessions. Or maybe it's just February.

i'm willing to bet that Maverick is a great movie if you're 11. Turning Red is also a great movie if you're 11. The latter was a far more enjoyable and believable work for me and it was a cartoon about a girl who turns into a panda.

If you'd like me to loop that all together, I'd suggest that the hyper-prevalency of discourse-as-jousting, the social acceptability of brusque dismissal because "you're right", associating your emotional life with junkfood culture, and allowing communication via postcard to be our primary method of friendly conversation all feed into one another. but that's chapter 7 and i don't wanna get ahead of myself.

not to underline my "its all love" post above any further forks i hope that my long entry itt can as a post be read as such without anyone seeing any serious rancour in it

but

i have to point out explicitly that imo your takedown of the two movies does in many ways suggest that anyone who watches them while leaving aside the elements you havent are remiss in doing so

the discussion as to what can and cannot be left behind in analysis of anything is ofc a fraught and personal one and furthermore the intent and pitch of the creators doesnt absolve all sins but again i have to invite you to consider whether top gun and top gun maverick are movies which fail so utterly on the elements that they promise and are obviously prioritising such that a primary analysis of them based on the elements you have instead chosen has much merit

i can only repeat, it doesnt!

its entirely possible to watch movies wrong. any thread on a movie on ilx demonstrates this

for my part thats in no way a personal attack, youve just watched these two wrong and in watching them wrong and bringing it here in such high brio (no bad thing imo) youve raised a defence of watching them right, sorry if that feels like an asskicking for my part its not meant to

not to underline my "its all love" post above any further forks i hope that my long entry itt can as a post be read as such without anyone seeing any serious rancour in it

i have to point out explicitly that imo your takedown of the two movies does in many ways suggest that anyone who watches them while leaving aside the elements you havent are remiss in doing so

Beyond that, I can tell you definitively that you've misunderstood me, either because of poor writing on my part or your own presumptions: I'm not attempting to hector or be instructive by pointing out (for instance) that Cruise in both films is an unlikeable social miscreant who evokes no sympathy or interest; that just seemed obvious on the face of it. You don't have to see it the same way and I surely wouldn't mind if you didn't and christ on a cracker i feel like I've said that eighteen times already.

its entirely possible to watch movies wrong. any thread on a movie on ilx demonstrates this

for my part thats in no way a personal attack, youve just watched these two wrong

I lived through the 80's in America. I owned the (very bad) NES Top Gun cartridge. I slow danced to "Take My Breath Away" in junior high. I've seen literally hundreds of popcorn movies in the theaters and on video and at drive ins and on television and etc et al. I know how to both watch this movie in the sense that it's asking me to watch it, how to read it within multiple contexts, how to take it on face value and how to listen internally to how I'm responding to it and then stay true to that response. I know the right way to watch motherfucking Top Gun. Being told that I don't is as offensive to me as it would be to you if I informed you that you don't know how to properly read The Chronicles of Narnia. You're not applying an asskicking, you're just being rude and entirely incorrect and you should probably be aware of that.

you're also now reading my posts wrong :-*

nb you watch top gun with your heart not yr eyes man

my heart found this pap rancid and rejected it as the soulless cash grab/tom cruise midlife crisis it was. maybe your heart needs glasses.

speaking of reading a post wrong, you may have missed "i know... how to listen internally to how I'm responding and then stay true to that response."

i get that there are elements of these fast plane go fast go bang films that are speaking to you on a gut level. i understand why they are speaking to you at a gut level. they do not speak to me and, presuming you don't think I'm putting you on or you're not just fucking with me, it would go a long way for me that you can voice they are not a truth universally acknowledged.

otherwise, i'm coming back in to the Banshees of Inisherin thread and OH the opinions I'll have

you're doing the thing you say deems is doing

"fast plane go fast go bang"
"soulless cash grab"

etc - these are all such snooty condescending ways to describe something other people love

it doesn't mean those things aren't true for you, in your gut, but read what you said again about civility!

ive addressed all of that forks and tbh we are discussing this on different levels of anger and commitment to the bit (not that i wish my inputs here to be painted as insincere) which im not sure either of us are enjoying as we ought talking about movies on ilx

ive no issue with thoughts on banshees going into a banshees thread!

again perhaps i'm being overly dry. Though honestly at this point, the snarl of what this franchise represented to me as a kid and as an adult, disliking the tone of the conversation, feeling like my buttons have been too pushed, and being frustrated by not being able to be clearly heard given how hard I'm trying are all adding up to logorrhea and fixation in a way that's scooting into the chemical. And I genuinely don't care much about the films one way or the other, except that I think they're probably not good for the soul of the country. I do care about the community though, so probably time to punch out.

(Banshees is not very good, which I said already, but for totally different reasons and I dunno that it’s worth much more consideration)

are you people still here?!

Now I will probably need to catch the remake. Maybe even the original.

Only thing I thought was good was that baseline from Take my Breath Away. But there's more.

I am cultured and smart btw.

that’s just like, your opinion, man

It is nothing but it is MY nothing!

i don’t know if anyone on ilx knows my real life but i’m smart, i have all these things that i know and i’ve done that prove i’m smart, and that means i can’t ever be wrong, and if you’re telling me i’m wrong or that i’m approaching something incorrectly that’s being condescending and i’m going to write several endless posts about it

i know poptimism doesn’t graft directly onto movies but being baffled that ppl would respond to and want to defend their enjoyment of the most popular movie in the country doesn’t strike me as different from enjoying and defending [pop star]. i’m aware tom cruise is evil tho

for the record i am a huge idiot and i approach all media as a huge idiot

QED

Or maybe it's just February.


this ain't nothing when you live in a northern city

I’m hearing this is the thread for the real culture appreciators. May I perhaps opine here?

Forks ftw for reals

(Even more so for the Banshees takes)

The notion that Banshees is unduly praised on here does not remotely match with the reality of the thread. That thread is always accepting haters!

I wouldn't know, I unbookmarked it pretty much the day after I saw it

Eric, you've got to stop thinking of yourself as one of the hundred neediest cases.

During a break in the filming of the hangar scene a group of Navy officers being used as extras approached Tony Scott and complained about the unrealistic collection of patches on the flight suits of the actors. He replied, paraphrasing, "We're not making this movie for Navy fighter pilots, we're making it for Kansas wheat farmers who don't know the difference."

fwiw i was once acquainted with a navy pilot who was an extra on top gun and can absolutely see him doing this. he also said that kelly mcgillis was a huge bitch, which made me like her a little bit better

lol, yeah that all tracks

I'm gonna talk about why I think they suck. You're gonna talk about why you think they don't. That's all fine!

yeah that’s not how a conversation works. if you don’t like something, you can say your bit about why you didn’t think it worked, etc.
if you stick around, then either: a.) you’re willing to see someone else’s point of view and be convinced that you like it or b.) you really think other people are wrong and they should come around to your point of view

let me assure you: I read what you wrote, forks, and you have definitely been heard. I don’t get what the end game is here — we’re all swayed and we think Top Gun and the sequel suck? it’s wild to me that you made the point you carved out a significant amount of time in your life to watch both movies. like, dude, there’s like four hours of movie if I’m doing my math right. are you factoring in the number of minutes you spent torrenting them and the time spent arguing on a message board?

imo top gun: maverick doesn’t subvert or refute the tom cruise successful hero formula in that he always saves the day, but unlike some other AAA action stars, he’s willing to have his characters wear their flaws on their sleeves (in the first act, he’s always triumphant and redeemed in the final act)

tg: maverick is, if anything else, about a middle-aged man who has failed to progress beyond his greatest loss and triumph, which were always sides of the same coin. the ending of the first movie leads us to believe he’s redeemed himself, that he’s no longer going to carry the death of his friend. he can grow up, move on, and progress through life.

this seems to be the case on the surface when the sequel begins, but then you realize — he’s a test pilot because his self-image hasn’t progressed one bit. he’s got no wife, he’s avoiding his peers, people repeatedly question why he’s still a low-ranking pilot instead of an admiral or mentor. it was bizarre to me when they showed him repeatedly posting on a message board about how he knows all kinds of things about all kinds of planes, has flown more types of planes than anyone else, and definitely isn’t posting his way through a mid-life crisis before he managed to be the first guy to hit mach ten in that new prototype but this might have just flown over my head, much like the fifth generation fighters in the movie’s conclusion

tl;dr sometimes you have to recognize there’s more to life than getting the girl, being the fastest pilot, and owning a cool motorcycle. but at the end it looks like maybe this time he keeps the girl, becomes a mentor/father figure, reconciles with his best friend/rival, and finally figures out how to age with dignity. pretty decent plot imo

Tom Cruise is 60 years old. He's been in approximately 53 movies.

So.

If this is his "midlife crisis" he's going to die when he's 120, and he'll probably be in at least another 50 or so movies.

Strap in, it's gonna b e a bumpy ride.

tom cruise plays a man of indeterminate age in most things these days

Apologies if I've said this before but: in the year 1983, my (Unitarian Universalist) Sunday school class got to vote on what movie we would see as our end-of-year treat. There were nine (9) votes for "Risky Business" and one (1) vote for "Terms of Endearment."

So yes, I first viewed the breasts of Rebecca de Mornay in the company of my church youth group. This was a formative experience and nothing before or since will ever rise to those heights of absurdity.

One of these days I am going to find out who voted for "Terms of Endearment." It has become my life's mission.

Eric, you've got to stop thinking of yourself as one of the hundred neediest cases

There isn't enough to keep me as busy as I should be, really

This absolutely belongs in a different thread but something I've been thinking about while flipping through the "how old is ILX" thread and writing in two dozen others: i'm eying middle age with a fairly well-rounded life to show for it. Most of you don't actually know me but I am, by literally anyone's standards, a remarkably well-culturally travelled, overeducated, curious, thoughtful guy. That's not to toot my own horn or act like I'm any better than whoever you are; those are just statements of fact. Yay me!

this is the funniest thing that has been posted on ilx in years

otm

if anyone thinks I’m a dolt (a word no one uses imo!) they’re keeping it from me. but I don’t think the reaction here was without precedent when people were talking about how a tv show hit them in personal, close to home ways and forks bombed in to shit on it without reading the recent posts (Bad Sisters iirc) without context gives that precedent. forks, you have maybe inadvertently been threadshitting for a while

I feel like things are pretty honest these days in these parts and internet communication is still messy but has a lot of prior work to contemplate.

the initial premise here was weirdly flawed. I was too young to watch Top Gun as a kid, but it was culturally omnipresent. I held myself as above the Bruckheimer school and perceived imperialist war machine crap for years, and also only watched the original in full a week before watching the sequel. I guess I’m a unicorn! But I seldom am, so it’s probably millions of us.

if anything, the past couple years have taught me you can do things guilt-free outside of the perception of imaginary cultural arbitrators. you can watch a dumb thing that makes you feel nice before bed. you can realize having the perfect playlist is dogshit compared to just sitting in a park or quietly making pottery.

there are no points to be traded in when you die, no one is going to squeak out their last gasp saying they wish they’d watched that obscure but acclaimed in small circles movie

This disagreement over the 2022 Top Gun Sequel has striking parallels with another disagreement over an Anglo-Irish Treaty

is there significant space between forks being wrong about a movie and "threadshitting"

yes

is engaging with him strongly on the former good

yes

is just flinging out the latter ok

no

is the point of the whole exercise to be able to disagree and entertain ourselves- id have said so

perhaps im wrong

honestly I think I could have diffused this situation had I pointed out "furtermore" soon as I read it but was too in my cups/beside myself at the time, anyways thank you for that

have not seen either top guns but I suspect everyone is otm in their own special way, I do think it is bullshit that kelly mcgillis wasn't involved on account of the crime of...being an old lady, we can't all look like jennifer connolly, or tom cruise who is older than my dad yet looks younger than me, somehow

He eats placenta for breakfast.

is just flinging out the latter ok

no

Watch that much TV

if you dont care about the hot dog sequel you are wrong

I had a hot dog the other day for the first time in about 16 years, it was fine

Aren't we finally over shit stirring and ad hominem and snark and unfocused aggression and derision and bad faith readings of one another's jotted off texts?

to clarify, I don't think there was any threadshitting in this thread

you have to stay very continent while in the Top Gun thread or things get real bad when you do that 180 degree inversion after bombing the undisclosed enemy country

it seemed weird to me that they were bombing Norway in that film

i hope you'll stay, forks. i hope i didn't add to the bad feelings with what i said upthread - i was just trying to be funny.

i don't understand pop culture or really criticism in general, even after 20 years on this board, so i try to stay out of the serious discussions about it. if i were the millionth person to talk shit on something like the MCU (the massive popularity of which alienates me as a human being) it would be a complete train wreck. similarly, i am completely incapable of talking about something like top gun. i enjoy reading everyone else's takes though

(and even then, now i re-read what i posted and am afraid that it will be misunderstood and people will hate me for it. i am not sitting on a throne judging MCU and pop culture; i am a bird that just flew into a window, again)

The Oscar for Best Sound goes to...'Top Gun: Maverick' #Oscars #Oscars95 pic.twitter.com/zog6ZAvNjf

— The Academy (@TheAcademy) March 13, 2023

Finally watched Maverick last nite... it was seriously one of the dumbest movies I've ever seen!! If I were a screenwriter, I feel like I would have been embarrassed to even pitch most of the plot points; let alone write them down; let alone put them in the actual movie!

FWIW, I don't even like the first Top Gun that much (re-watched that one recently, as well) – but this made it look like The f'in Godfather!

Even the best aspects (IMO) of the first movie – terrific aerial photography; making air combat feel "exciting" – weren't really present here, because it felt so totally unrealistic (I don't know how "realistic" Top Gun actually was, but it at least feels that way). Once the actual dogfighting finally happens in Maverick, the movie has long since entered the realm of pure fantasy. (Also, with regard to the actual mission itself – do they think no one remembers Star Wars??)

Anyway, kind of shocked this was so widely loved – I feel like I have a good tolerance for "dumb fun," but this wasn't really "fun" (beyond laughing at it)!

I can't stand the first one, even the flying sequences.

the empire lost in star wars

which was also, come to think of it, pure fantasy!

Yeah, it was good fantasy!

well i wont be disagreeing with a word of that pan obv

obv