Directed by:
Joseph KosinskiCinematography:
Claudio MirandaCast:
Tom Cruise, Miles Teller, Jennifer Connelly, Jon Hamm, Val Kilmer, Bashir Salahuddin, Charles Parnell, Glen Powell, Monica Barbaro, Lewis Pullman (more)VOD (4)
Plots(1)
After more than thirty years of service as one of the Navy’s top aviators, Pete “Maverick” Mitchell is where he belongs, pushing the envelope as a courageous test pilot and dodging the advancement in rank that would ground him. When he finds himself training a detachment of TOPGUN graduates for a specialized mission the likes of which no living pilot has ever seen, Maverick encounters Lt. Bradley Bradshaw, call sign: “Rooster,” the son of Maverick’s late friend and Radar Intercept Officer Lt. Nick Bradshaw, aka “Goose.” Facing an uncertain future and confronting the ghosts of his past, Maverick is drawn into a confrontation with his own deepest fears, culminating in a mission that demands the ultimate sacrifice from those who will be chosen to fly it. (Cannes Film Festival)
(more)Videos (13)
Reviews (16)
One of the movies of the year and one of the best sequels ever. Joseph Kosinski isn't a standout directors for me, Only the Brave is a big emotional hit, Tron was interesting and Oblivion was mediocre, but Top Gun: Maverick is definitely his best and most ambitious work to date. We've been waiting a long time for the film and the trailers already indicated that it was going to be one hell of a ride, but I didn't expect it to hit me and pull me in so much, as fighter jets aren't exactly the stuff I seek out in movies. Everything here is just right from the performances (Tom Cruise is excellent and really cool, Jon Hamm, Miles Teller and Glen Powell are also great), the precise technical side caught up to perfection, great dialogues, emotional scenes, decent pacing, occasional humour, great music with Lady Gaga's final song included, intense tension and great action from the training to the 30 minute finale, which is built up ad absurdum – I stopped breathing there and lost track of time. The story itself may not be sophisticated, but that doesn't matter at all. The film has heart, balls, juice and drive and won't leave anyone cold, certainly not anyone who loves movies. What Le Mans 66 is to racing movies, Top Gun 2 is to aviation movies. Definitely the best movie with fighter jets and with The Northerner for me the movie of the year so far. Story 4/5. Action 5/5, Humor 3/5, Violence 0/5, Fun 5/5 Music 5/5, Visuals 5/5, Atmosphere 5/5, Suspense 5/5, Emotion 5/5, Actors 5/5. 9/10.
()
An inexplicable phenomenon in the form of a film that does not advance the genre forward, does not stand out in terms of acting, repeats itself like a song, and visually quotes a decades-old original scene by scene – and yet critics, viewers, children, and grandparents all nod their heads in agreement and struggle to admit that they just saw the film of the year. Honest action, where screws visibly fly off fighter planes and oil drips, a cliché seen a hundred times, which quakes with every emotion, and the essence of the 80s, extracted to the core, still works a couple levels better at every moment than it did in 1986. Top Gun: Maverick is the opposite of fan service because it brings us back to a fandom that most people only halfheartedly like, and not many would include it among their favorites. And yet it crushes us with nostalgia for times we didn't experience, forcing us to melancholically ponder fates we didn't know for three decades, and we honestly go in any direction it shows us, wondering why we never became pilots.
()
In Mission: Impossible – Fallout there were several sequences when the film crossed the line of fiction and built an exalted monument not only to its protagonist, but also to the actor who portrayed him. Top Gun: Maverick works simultaneously at the levels of fiction, reflective adoration and meta-commentary. Thus, when the line “The end is inevitable, Maverick. Your kind is headed for extinction” is uttered and Maverick responds, “Maybe so, sir. But not today”, it’s not just the title character or Tom Cruise, as the last thoroughbred Hollywood star, speaking for himself, but also for the 1980s blockbuster model. All of the warning lights are blinking red, alerting us that this old/old-world colossus shouldn’t be able to stand up to the bigger, faster, more finely tuned competition made with the latest hardware and software. We constantly have the feeling that this isn’t how it’s done anymore, that the time for that has passed, that everybody wants something more sophisticated, more advanced and more contemporary. But here it is simply confirmed that it is not the machine that matters, but the pilot. Of course, there are cheesy camp and crypto-queer levels to the film, but judging by the audience’s reaction, these are not flaws, but part of a delightful viewing experience, as the film doesn’t just wink at the viewers, but looks them right in the eye with its hard-to-resist gaze. Also, following Žižek’s analysis of Rammstein’s music and concerts in relation to Nazism, we can even say that the second Top Gun gives us a passive experience with Scientology (though, unlike in the case of Rammstein, this is not all based on caricature and it certainly does not subvert the reflected ideology). Tom Cruise can be condemned and hated for a number of things, but unlike other megalomaniacs of our time, he cannot be denied the recognition that he is without equal in his field, i.e. in cinematic spectacles. Not because of the massive paydays that he receives or how he fleeces his subordinates, but rather because he can tear down everyone for the perfectionist vision that he has worked so hard to create. Top Gun: Maverick proudly shows off its banal and obsolete engine, which should be in the salvage yard, but the living awe generator working the stick squeezes more power out of the old beater than anyone before him. ___ Footnote: In a handful of melancholically dreamy moments and plot motifs, Cruise’s ode to flying evokes Miyazaki’s understandably more poetic and multi-layered monument to fighter aces, Porco Rosso.
()
Of course, the biggest attraction of the new Top Gun is not the supersonic fighter jets, but Tom Cruise in thrall to his own acting legacy. As is usually the case with legacy sequels, 90% of the plot is a copy/variation of the events of the first film (the opening and closing credits are practically identical). Whereas Cruise was a student in the first Top Gun, this time he’s an instructor (and stand-in father) who shows the novices how it (aerial manoeuvres and action movies) is supposed to be done. Thanks to his emphasis on the human element (repeating the line that what matters is the pilot’s skill, not the machine’s capabilities), he saves the day (and the action genre, which he is breathing new life into). Nevertheless, he remains a rebellious outsider who rides the (same) motorcycle, wears the (same) leather jacket, doesn’t respect authority and doesn’t read manuals. At the same time, however, he obediently serves the military-industrial complex, so his rebelliousness is only superficial. Because Maverick chose to go his own way (just as Cruise’s career comprises a separate universe that is not part of the dominant comic-book multiverse), he has not put down roots and remains a solitary figure (which is constantly emphasised by how he observes the other characters from afar rather than coexisting with them). Like the most recent Bond film, Top Gun: Maverick is packed with nostalgic looks back at the past, admitting one’s own vulnerability and coming to terms with the fact that our time on earth is limited (Cruise will soon be 60 years old). Seeking out and pondering the parallels between Maverick and Cruise by going through his filmography and reflecting on his image as a star was truthfully more entertaining to me than the numerous aerial scenes, which, with the exception of the last one, which takes place over a snow-covered landscape for the sake of variety, are interchangeable, with such rapid cuts that you can’t really enjoy them much anyway (it’s worth seeing the film in IMAX mainly for the sound). The same is true of the variation on the legendary volleyball scene. The game of (American) football on the beach is shot predominantly against the sun, chopped up with a lot of unnecessary cuts and absolutely asexual. I guiltily admit that watching it made me long for Scott's advertising-video aesthetic and shameless objectification of semi-nude male bodies. I would have found such stylisation more appropriate for a blockbuster heroic, action-melodrama that basically takes place completely outside of any real socio-political context, in a world that exists solely for the purpose of showing off aerial acrobatics and Tom Cruise’s smile. 75%
()
Tommy negotiated a 20% cut of every ticket sold, clever boy, and with himself as producer he serves us a fairytale that is beautifully filmed, but with a plot that is cliché as hell. Fighter jets have never been so sexy, in the cockpit shots you can totally see the effects of overload on the actors' faces, every extra mach – nostalgia is fine if you know how to work with it – but it all goes follows classic predictable Hollywood notes, you can guess exactly what will happen in the next scene, there is no moment of surprise, this film can only dream of some surprising twists. I was thoroughly bored for the first half, and in fact for the rest of the film. The only one who gave me the creeps was Val Kilmer, especially if you know about his health. The final praised action set-piece looked like a CGI cut scene from “Call of Duty”, the only thing missing was a gamepad in my hands. I think the current 92% here is nonsense.
()
Ads