Top Gun Maverick Reviews

StPaulDad said:
That usually encompasses the world of unattractive, rules-following, PRT-challenged support folks, right? The ones that have been ashore in the same desk in Norfolk so long they're on the city council? Maybe I should have joined the Navy....
Click to expand...
I was focusing on typical promotion patterns for unrestricted line officers who are expected to hit command at certain points in their career or promotions stall. I always allow for special people though - and “special” can include a spectrum of variations. .

Restricted line and staff corps officers have some command opportunity, but more often significant career milestones which are not necessarily command roles. They too can have a spectrum.
 
Oh my…there are some unforgettable descriptors in that review which I would love to read aloud (declaim!) in its entirety to close military friends after we had a few glasses of wine, in my best PBS documentary voice, or maybe Morgan Freeman’s voice. I think we would be ROFLOAO.
 
I don't know about that. If the 2nd one is half as stupid as the first, I may end up agreeing with Brett.;)
 
Confirmed. That movie was worse than the first. I get the suspension of belief here, I really do. This one was so incredibly stupid as to be comical, however. I have to compare notes with @Capt MJ 's husband, because of the aluminum cloud ridiculousness. Hoo boy. :p
 
I get it, but I can't do it. I mean, it was truly awful.

Loved Stripes, by the way. :)
 
Gonna have to disagree with OP on this one. I consider myself pretty vicious when it comes to movie reviews and most sequels get a thumbs down from me. But Top Gun Maverick was so entertaining and so much fun I'm watching it again next week.

I would argue the simplistic storyline and buildup to the climax helped make the movie worthwhile. I think the only part where I had to raise my eyebrows was when he gets into the F-14...seemed like a stretch to get in one of those and defeat two "5th gen fighters".

Its a good movie. No "wokeness" or urge to shove down some social justice statement down the audience throat. Just simple fun. It felt like a traditional action movie that makes you feel proud to be an American. And thats what I was looking for!
 
justdoit19 said:
Not everyone is a fan! First ‘bad review’ I’ve seen. I haven’t seen the movie myself.

www.militarytimes.com

This angry critic gave ‘Top Gun: Maverick’ just half a star

Not everyone is a fan of "Top Gun: Maverick."
www.militarytimes.com www.militarytimes.com
Click to expand...
After reading that screed which seemed at time to be more political than movie review, I do wonder if he saw the same movie that I watched. He went on and on about Iran and real world agreements but strangely enough, the movie that I watched had the scene of action in a snowy area that was clearly NOT the middle east. This could also account for the possible presence of 5th gen aircraft.

I thought it a good movie and friends who were Naval Aviators liked it as well. This includes one who was IN several scenes in the prior version and walked the Red Carpet at the Hollywood premiere of this one.

Note to @Heatherg21 : Carriers have landed planes without forward landing gear in the past. Lots of heavily damaged planes have been recovered and then some pushed overboard due to being "totaled".

 
Hubs and I just saw it. What a great time. So good. Thoroughly enjoyed it. Lots of good juju. Completely disagree with grumpy pants’ review up there 👆

Did not realize the Val Kilmer tie in to real life. Yet another “moment”.

www.usmagazine.com

Top Gun’s Val Kilmer’s Health, Throat Cancer Battle Through the Years

Val Kilmer reprised his role as Iceman in ‘Top Gun: Maverick’ after battling throat cancer — read more
www.usmagazine.com www.usmagazine.com
 
Saw it again last night, this time with DS. I’m not normally one for sequels, much less the second viewing of a sequel. But I must say I enjoyed it as much this time as I did the first. And it came down to two things:

First, it was simply and purely entertainment. No political slant, nor thinly veiled screed, nor need to preach the latest virtuous angle. Also no gratuitous sex or violence.

Second, knowing that the pilot actors actually went up in F-18s for hours to film their scenes; that they actually pulled Gs; that they actually experienced those rolls and twists and turns with the cameras rolling. Yes, they were handsomely paid, but they also put themselves out there.

It’ll never be recognized as a high cinematic achievement or lauded for its painstaking accuracy. And that’s OK. That’s not what I paid for. And I wouldn’t mind seeing it a third time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top