Friday, June 10, 2022

“Top Gun: Maverick” MEGA REVIEW


When I consider blockbuster movie sequels over the past 20 years, there are few I have anticipated more than “Top Gun: Maverick,” the follow up to the 1986 hit “Top Gun.”

We’d heard rumblings about a sequel for many, many years. I wasn’t convinced it would ever happen. Sure, Tom Cruise has proven himself to be near immortal as he has pushed the limits of his body — and old school practical effects — in the terrific “Mission: Impossible” franchise. 

I just wasn’t convinced that Hollywood would want to create a franchise from a single film firmly rooted in the 1980s Cold War, Reagan-era pastiche. 

And if they did, I was worried it would lose all of charm the original movie imbued (see 2012’s “Red Dawn” reboot). 

After a three-year wait (the film’s original release date was July 12, 2019), “Top Gun: Maverick” has finally been catapulted into theaters. 


The timing of the film’s release couldn't be better. 

The theatrical box office has taken a hit in the past 24 months. Some have been ready to relegate the movie-going experience to the annals of nostalgia in this so-called “new normal.”

And while there have been some recent blockbusters (like 2021’s “Spider-Man: No Way Home”), you sometimes wonder if Marvel movies (and their ilk) are the only films mass moviegoers care about seeing on the big screen anymore. 


Leave it to Hollywood’s last true movie star to change the narrative. 

“Top Gun: Maverick” recalls a bygone era in the world of summer blockbusters. It is a film that avoids an agenda (thankfully) and reminds viewers how much fun movies can be when you don't need a “cheat sheet” to know what’s going on. 

I’ve already seen the movie twice (my brother-in-law took me for the second time a couple days ago). 

When I was a teenager, I remember eagerly anticipating the summer preview issue of Premiere Magazine. The editors would typically predict how each film would finish at the box office, and it was fun to learn about all the upcoming releases.

During those years, there were relatively few sequels. The summer movie season wasn’t dominated by a single genre (for example, “Forrest Gump" made ~$330 million in the summer of 1994 and finished second that year to “The Lion King”).

When I saw “Top Gun” in 1986, it was with my friend Mike Bartholet at Omaha’s Indian Hills Theater — in an auditorium that seated 810 patrons and featured a huge, wraparound screen that was originally built in 1962 to showcase films in the widescreen Cinerama format. 

It was an amazing experience. I was 13 at the time. You felt like you were in the movie. What teenage boy didn’t want to be one of those buff pilots zipping around the skies in an F-14 Tomcat?

“Top Gun” is the quintessential ’80s movie. It was built for the MTV generation and features one of the best movie soundtracks of the era (at no time in history has a hit soundtrack — and the resulting radio and music video airplay — been more important to a movie’s marketing than it was during those years). 


While “Top Gun: Maverick” certainly pulls on that nostalgia, it also feels effortlessly modern and fresh. 

Cruise collaborated with his screenwriter/director pal Christopher McQuarrie (one of the most fascinating scribes in the movie business) on the script (Ehren Kruger and Eric Warren Singer are also credited). The directing duties were helmed by Joseph Kosinski, who worked with Cruise on the sci-fi flick “Oblivion” and helmed Disney’s underrated “Tron” sequel “Tron: Legacy.” 

“Top Gun: Maverick” finds our titular protagonist Captain Pete “Maverick” Mitchell (Cruise) testing experimental planes (and avoiding promotion) at a naval facility in China Lake, California. As the movie begins, the aircraft he is testing (the “Darkstar” scramjet) has the set goal of reaching a speed of Mach 10. 


But irascible Rear Admiral Chester “Hammer” Cain (Ed Harris) — nicknamed “The Drone Ranger” — wants to shut the program down and shift financing to unmanned aerial vehicle programs. 

Maverick (being Maverick) decides to launch one last flight before the admiral’s arrival. Not only does he reach Mach 10 benchmark, he pushes the needle beyond. The move provokes the ire of Cain, leaving our hero in hot water and his future as a pilot in doubt.  

“The end is inevitable Maverick,” Cain tells Maverick as he scolds him for the stunt. “Your kind is headed for extinction.”

“Maybe so, sir,” replies Maverick, “but not today.”

That exchange pretty much embodies the spirit of “Top Gun: Maverick.” It is also likely why moviegoers over the age of 40 — who comprised 55 percent of the opening weekend box office (according to Variety) — have been singing its praises. 


As much as the first “Top Gun” celebrated youth, “Top Gun: Maverick” celebrates experience and the wisdom gained with age. 

At the behest of friend and former TOPGUN class rival Admiral Tom “Iceman” Kazansky, Maverick is sent to NAS North Island to serve as a TOPGUN instructor for an elite group of pilots assigned a seemingly “impossible mission” (see what I did there) behind enemy lines to bomb an unsanctioned uranium enrichment plant. 


To be honest, the whole thing felt like they were training for the Death Star trench run in “Star Wars: Episode IV — A New Hope,” but I didn’t mind a bit (and I don’t think anyone else in the theater did, either). 

What was nice about having a hook like that in the story is that there was more “meat” (and more at stake) in “Top Gun: Maverick” than there was in the 1986 movie. The creators of the original often mention that it was essentially a “sports” movie — the fighter pilots being the talented athletes. 


The pilots Maverick is tasked with training are likable. Granted, Cruise gets most of the screen time in the movie, but there are some notable performances. 


While much of the focus is on Lieutenant Bradley “Rooster” Bradshaw (Miles Teller), son of Maverick’s friend and RIO Nick “Goose” Bradshaw (Anthony Edwards), some of the other members of the team stand out. 

In particular, Glen Powell’s turn as Lieutenant Jake “Hangman” Seresin was noteworthy. A number of people online have compared Hangman to Iceman in the first movie, but when you analyze the character point-for-point, he actually seems more akin to Maverick. 


Powell is an actor I recognized, but I couldn’t recall what he’d been in before (he played John Glenn in 2016’s “Hidden Figures” and was one of Stallone’s band of mercenaries in “The Expendables 3”). I have a feeling we’ll be seeing more of him in the future. “Top Gun: Maverick” will definitely increase his profile. 

I also enjoyed the team of Lieutenant Natasha “Phoenix” Trace (Monica Barbaro) and Lieutenant Robert “Bob” Floyd (Lewis Pullman). 


As the first female pilot to be featured in a “Top Gun” movie, it was nice to see Barbaro make the most of a fairly limited role. 

It should be noted that Lewis Pullman is the son of actor Bill Pullman. The elder Pullman also flew an F-18 Hornet on a deadly mission as President Thomas Whitmore in the 1996 movie "Independence Day." 


What was nice about the “Bob” character is that he didn’t look like a model who had just jumped out of the pages of a fashion catalog. (I mean, there are already plenty of pretty people in this movie.)

The look of the original “Top Gun” was inspired by the work of Bruce Weber (the photographer behind brands like Calvin Klein, Ralph Lauren, and Abercrombie & Fitch), and presented a more “idealized” view of a military officer. 

In addition to the aviators, Jennifer Connelly plays Penny Benjamin (a character mentioned in passing as being an “admiral’s daughter” Maverick once had a relationship with in the early stages of the original “Top Gun”). 


Penny owns the Hard Deck Bar (where all the pilots hang out) near the base. She is a divorced mom with a teenage daughter. 

(Note: During the movie, a song selected on the jukebox in the bar is number “86,” an homage to the original movie’s year of release.) 

As a love interest, I liked her dynamic with Cruise. As someone who turns 50 this year, I appreciated seeing two actors in their fifties — both incredibly well preserved — rekindle an old romantic relationship. 


It could have been overly melodramatic, but the filmmakers chose to take a light touch with the relationship. As a result, they achieved just the right tone. 

Obviously, the *real* star of any “Top Gun” movie is the mix of amazing flight sequences. Filmed in cooperation with the United States Navy (at a reported price of ~$11,000 per hour), the aerial combat sequences in “Top Gun: Maverick” are gorgeous. 


I love the fact that Cruise is committed to practical effects. We’ve all seen far too many modern movies with CG fighter jets — and those computer-generated images just don’t look or feel real. 

A pilot named Mark Scott — who graduated from a local high school here in the Omaha area — helped film some of the flight sequences featured in “Top Gun: Maverick.” I saw the story profiling Scott (a former Navy air-wing strike operations officer) on a WOWT newscast. He also appears as an extra in one of the movie’s bar scenes. 


As I mentioned earlier, the first “Top Gun” movie had a terrific soundtrack packed with pop hits. I originally owned the soundtrack on cassette tape and have Kenny Loggins' “Danger Zone” as a 45-rpm single (see picture below). Not long after, I purchased the soundtrack on CD. 


The soundtrack for “Top Gun: Maverick” is geared more toward the instrumental. Harold Faltermeyer’s “Top Gun Anthem” is featured prominently, with additional instrumentals by Lorne Balfe. That said, there are a couple of fresh pop licks by Lady Gaga and OneRepublic this time around.


The standout single (in my opinion) is “I Ain’t Worried” by OneRepublic. The song features a whimsical vibe in the spirit of Kenny Loggins’ “Playing With The Boys” on the original soundtrack (not a surprise since both songs were the backbone of a similar sequence in each movie). Trust me, the tune will be stuck in your head for days: 


There is also Lady Gaga’s “Hold My Hand.” The single (which plays over the movies mid-credit sequence) is power ballad done in the spirit of Aerosmith’s “I Don’t Want to Miss a Thing.” It’s a solid song, but is surprisingly “forgettable” compared to some of her famous hits: 


Overall, I wish they’d been able to craft a few more fresh pop standards for the soundtrack. I know that isn’t the trend today, but songs like Loggins’ “Danger Zone” and Berlin’s “Take My Breath Away” became two of the definitive Top 40 hits of the 1980s. 

As some of you know, Bridget and I are big UNO Maverick Hockey fans. Not only do we run a fansite for the team (mavpuck.com), but we’ve attended each and every home game during the program's 25-year history (crazy, but true). 

In the early years of the program, they played Faltermeyer’s “Top Gun Anthem” and Loggins’ “Danger Zone” (along with audio clips from the movie) during the pregame festivities. 

Sadly, the program shifted away from that over the years, but Coach Mike Gabinet (a former player in the program) pays homage to that tradition with the team’s postgame locker room tradition that awards players “Maverick” and “Goose” flight helmets for a standout performance: 


In addition, the president of the University of Nebraska system is former naval aviator Ted Carter. The Naval Academy grad (who served as superintendent of his alma mater prior to his current stint in Nebraska) was a lieutenant at the Navy Fighter Weapons School (TOPGUN) when the original “Top Gun” was being filmed.

A recent article in the Lincoln Journal Star discusses how Carter was tasked with entertaining Cruise during the movie’s production. Carter told the LJS: “They said ‘Go out and meet Tom Cruise, get him really drunk, and then we’re going to throw him in the swimming pool the next day so we can show him how hard this is.’”

Like Goose in the movie, Carter (call sign “Slapshot” because he played hockey at the Naval Academy) was a RIO (radar intercept officer) in the Navy. The article is worth reading and provides the perspective of a real-life graduate of the Navy Fighter Weapons School (TOPGUN), along with insights into Cruise and the movie. 

Speaking of the Naval Academy, Bridget and I attended a conference in Annapolis, Maryland, in 2016 — our hotel was just up the road from the institution. I purchased this “Maverick” T-shirt at a gift shop near the school: 


The “Top Gun” shirt below came from my brother and sister-in-law. They purchased it for me during a trip to Las Vegas last year. It’s one of my favorites and it was very thoughtful of them to get it for me: 


I’ve worn one of the shirts to each of my two viewings of “Top Gun: Maverick” — it’s obvious I need more themed shirts so I can attend additional showings.😉 

The early success of “Top Gun: Maverick” illustrates that movies driven by star power — and built for U.S.-centric audiences — still work in today’s marketplace. It also shows that “cinematic universes” — where audiences have to watch 20+ movies to understand what is going on — are NOT required to make a compelling movie-going experience. 

It’s also nice to see a movie geared toward a decidedly “older” demographic having box office success. 

At one point in my life, I was attending (at minimum) one movie per week at the theater. The movie-going audience has never been “monolithic.” Movie fandom is a tradition that is passed down from generation to generation, and this is a film that various ages can enjoy together. 


If this movie had been released back in 2019, I’m not sure it would have had nearly the success it is enjoying this year. “Top Gun: Maverick” has seemingly hooked onto something intangible in the current cultural zeitgeist. 

And timing is everything. 

After the global malaise of the past two years, people needed a reason to go back to the movies. They needed to be reminded about why they loved the communal movie-going experience in the first place. 


Movie theaters needed this. Movie fans needed this. The near universal praise of “Top Gun: Maverick” shows the unifying force movies can provide, if done right. 

More than anything, “Top Gun: Maverick” is a fun time at the movies. It doesn’t take itself too seriously. It is a likable movie that reminds viewers what made the theatrical experience exciting in the first place.  

For me, that makes it perfect.


No comments:

Post a Comment