Have people really become so starved of traditional blockbusters that they think Top Gun: Maverick is something special? This genre was everywhere in the 80s and 90s.
It follows very closely in the footsteps of the original. In fact a couple of scenes are shot-by-shot tributes. But it rarely stretches itself.
The only scene that adds a new angle is at the very end, where dogfighting results in US airmen on the ground behind enemy lines, who have to find an unconventional way of escaping. This final mission is the best part of the film overall.
But generally speaking it doesn't have the charm or energy of the 1986 original. Top Gun focused on young pilots who were building their lives, finding their friendships, and facing up to rivalries. Maverick gives us an older Captain Pete Mitchell who doesn't really have anything to prove. And the younger cast don't really have enough screen time. Adding a female pilot to the mix, while more contemporary, drains all the crude machismo out of the situation. But that crude machismo was part of the charm.
By far the worst part of Top Gun: Maverick is the introduction of Jennifer Connelly as the love interest. Thankfully she is age-appropriate for Cruise, but her character is so obviously a substitute for Kelly McGillis' Charlie that it becomes embarrassing. She seems to be living in the same beachfront house, and even drives a classic silver Porsche (a 911 this time instead of a 356). It just isn't a convincing romance and could have easily been left out of the whole film.
Best moments are the flying scenes, with their slick combination of real footage and CGI. Again, these are clearly inspired by the formula created in Top Gun, but with an extra layer of slickness and complexity that makes them feel modern yet still suspend-your-disbelief realistic (take note, superhero movies).
There is a brief yet touching appearance from Val Kilmer (who has been battling cancer in recent years), and Glen Powell and Miles Teller both put in decent performances. But overall the cast just isn't as engaging as in Top Gun.
Top Gun: Maverick delivers what we should expect from a big budget production with a talented cast. But it doesn't deliver anything beyond that. It's good. But not THAT good.
It follows very closely in the footsteps of the original. In fact a couple of scenes are shot-by-shot tributes. But it rarely stretches itself.
The only scene that adds a new angle is at the very end, where dogfighting results in US airmen on the ground behind enemy lines, who have to find an unconventional way of escaping. This final mission is the best part of the film overall.
But generally speaking it doesn't have the charm or energy of the 1986 original. Top Gun focused on young pilots who were building their lives, finding their friendships, and facing up to rivalries. Maverick gives us an older Captain Pete Mitchell who doesn't really have anything to prove. And the younger cast don't really have enough screen time. Adding a female pilot to the mix, while more contemporary, drains all the crude machismo out of the situation. But that crude machismo was part of the charm.
By far the worst part of Top Gun: Maverick is the introduction of Jennifer Connelly as the love interest. Thankfully she is age-appropriate for Cruise, but her character is so obviously a substitute for Kelly McGillis' Charlie that it becomes embarrassing. She seems to be living in the same beachfront house, and even drives a classic silver Porsche (a 911 this time instead of a 356). It just isn't a convincing romance and could have easily been left out of the whole film.
Best moments are the flying scenes, with their slick combination of real footage and CGI. Again, these are clearly inspired by the formula created in Top Gun, but with an extra layer of slickness and complexity that makes them feel modern yet still suspend-your-disbelief realistic (take note, superhero movies).
There is a brief yet touching appearance from Val Kilmer (who has been battling cancer in recent years), and Glen Powell and Miles Teller both put in decent performances. But overall the cast just isn't as engaging as in Top Gun.
Top Gun: Maverick delivers what we should expect from a big budget production with a talented cast. But it doesn't deliver anything beyond that. It's good. But not THAT good.