Top Gun: Maverick (2022)

[Lee A Stewart]

Paramount Releasing Both ‘Top Gun’ Movies in a Limited-Edition 4K Blu-ray Disc Steelbook Collection Dec. 6

https://www.mediaplaynews.com/paramo...lection-dec-6/

[Benoit Blanc]

Originally Posted by Joeker

I cant pull off the Aviator sunglasses look so I got the Ray Bans Hangman wears during the football game

Or at least I think I did if the internet gave me the right info

Are you kidding? The internet is never wrong.

[LordoftheRings]

IMAX China to Screen Top Gun: Maverick Knock-Off, Born to Fly

[LordoftheRings]

Originally Posted by Poya

That chart isn't reliable. Inflation has jumped pretty high over the past 2 years. Black Panther would be around $900m now.

Black Panther / 2022 ticket price ... Top lifetime adjusted gross for inflation:
$715,038,755 - Box Office Mojo

Not quite around $900 million like you said above...$185 million less.
_____

Maverick stands @ around $707 million @ the end of today.
I think it will make another $8 million by the end of its run...88% guaranteed.
_____

4K HDR IMAX | Trailer - Top Gun Maverick (2022) | Dolby 5.1 - YouTube

[Poya]

Originally Posted by LordoftheRings

Black Panther / 2022 ticket price ... Top lifetime adjusted gross for inflation:
$715,038,755 - Box Office Mojo

Not quite around $900 million like you said above...$185 million less.
_____

Maverick stands @ around $707 million @ the end of today.
I think it will make another $8 million by the end of its run...88% guaranteed.
_____

4K HDR IMAX | Trailer - Top Gun Maverick (2022) | Dolby 5.1 - YouTube

Box Office Mojo stopped being reliable years ago and again, inflation has indeed leaped for tickets.

[LordoftheRings]

Originally Posted by Poya

Box Office Mojo stopped being reliable years ago and again, inflation has indeed leaped for tickets.

If you find a reliable source be my guest. ...Share the love, share the data.

Screenshot_20220915-175609_Chrome.jpg

Black Panther is a 2018 flick (4 years). It made $700 million.
There is no way that with inflation adjusted it's worth $900 million.
$715 million yes, that's more realistic.

Mojo numbers are used by Wikipedia for all films.

Screenshot_20220915-145650_Chrome.jpg

[StarWarsIsAwesome123]

Now that the movie's box office run is finally heading towards the finish line, I think we can quit the penny counting now.

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by LordoftheRings

Black Panther is a 2018 flick (4 years). It made $700 million.
There is no way that with inflation adjusted it's worth $900 million.
$715 million yes, that's more realistic.

[LordoftheRings]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

And Gone With The Wind is worth ...
They should re-release it on Christmas, just for fun of competing with Avatar 2.

[LordoftheRings]

Originally Posted by StarWarsIsAwesome123

Now that the movie's box office run is finally heading towards the finish line, I think we can quit the penny counting now.

You sound like my uncle Ralph.

[unberechenbar]

Originally Posted by LordoftheRings

And Gone With The Wind is worth ...
They should re-release it on Christmas, just for fun of competing with Avatar 2.

Has Gone with the Wind gotten any rereleases recently?

[bluearth]

This film is a great example of what's possible when a filmmaker takes what's normally considered a 'popcorn' movie and takes it seriously. It's the underlining sense of realism that elevates the stakes in Top Gun Maverick. There's big personalities in the movie but they aren't the over the top stock caricatures found in the first film and most popcorn flicks. In filmmaking there's a fine line between too little and too much. This film straddled that line perfectly.

The execution of this film is absolutely sublime. Supreme pacing. I can't remember the last time I watched a movie and didnt check the time a single time before this one. The blocking and editing of the film's stunts was so well done. There was no problem at all following all the action. You knew where all the planes were and every action they made was readily understandable and easy to follow.

Of course it wont win best picture, because you know movies are serious art and we cant have fluff like Top Gun winning. But everyone knows which film they had the best time with this year.

5/5

[Just_Discovered_3D]

Originally Posted by bluearth

This film is a great example of what's possible when a filmmaker takes what's normally considered a 'popcorn' movie and takes it seriously. It's the underlining sense of realism that elevates the stakes in Top Gun Maverick. There's big personalities in the movie but they aren't the over the top stock caricatures found in the first film and most popcorn flicks. In filmmaking there's a fine line between too little and too much. This film straddled that line perfectly.

The execution of this film is absolutely sublime. Supreme pacing. I can't remember the last time I watched a movie and didnt check the time a single time before this one. The blocking and editing of the film's stunts was so well done. There was no problem at all following all the action. You knew where all the planes were and every action they made was readily understandable and easy to follow.

Of course it wont win best picture, because you know movies are serious art and we cant have fluff like Top Gun winning. But everyone knows which film they had the best time with this year.

5/5

I appreciated that the film made the jet action easy to follow, as I recall it that's a big improvement over the original Top Gun.

I wouldn't gild the lily with the realism though, as the explanation given to justify the mission got plenty of eyeballs rolling. Sure, the point was to do Star Wars, but with jets, and that was pretty cool.

But why do they need to fly in under the radar when they have openly attacked the airfield? It's not a stealth attack. Which brings me to the real eye-roller, the line about GPS jammers blocking stealth aircraft.

It is a minor detail, but I wish the writers had come up with a more plausible line. The more I mull this over, the more I wonder if giving no justification would have been better.

[bluearth]

Originally Posted by Just_Discovered_3D

I appreciated that the film made the jet action easy to follow, as I recall it that's a big improvement over the original Top Gun.

I wouldn't gild the lily with the realism though, as the explanation given to justify the mission got plenty of eyeballs rolling. Sure, the point was to do Star Wars, but with jets, and that was pretty cool.

But why do they need to fly in under the radar when they have openly attacked the airfield? It's not a stealth attack. Which brings me to the real eye-roller, the line about GPS jammers blocking stealth aircraft.

It is a minor detail, but I wish the writers had come up with a more plausible line. The more I mull this over, the more I wonder if giving no justification would have been better.

There's videos on youtube of former F18 pilots picking the entire film apart for all its inaccuracies. One of the most obvious ones is the pilots wearing non-tinted visors at midday.

Im thinking realism more in the sense the film played out more like a war drama in the same vein as Black Hawk Dawn, Dunkirk, Apocalypse now, or even Zero Dark Thirty. Basically it felt like a 'based on a true story' movie whereas a film like the original was obviously made tongue in cheek.

[Socko]

Originally Posted by StarWarsIsAwesome123

Now that the movie's box office run is finally heading towards the finish line, I think we can quit the penny counting now.

[LordoftheRings]

Originally Posted by unberechenbar

Has Gone with the Wind gotten any rereleases recently?

1998 ... But don't despair it's coming back next year, in 3D!

《3D》https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0031381/releaseinfo

[LordoftheRings]

* As of yesterday Maverick is worth roughly $706,875,000 (domestic)
Globally it's pushing towards $1.5 billion, but it won't get there.
It'll end up somewhere between $1.460 and $1.480 billion (near the middle more or less my best guess).
__________

Now, just for the heck fun of it ... playing with numbers and inflation and all that jazz ...

Screenshot_20220916-092422_Chrome.jpg

Screenshot_20220916-092715_Chrome.jpg

Screenshot_20220916-092914_Chrome.jpg

Screenshot_20220916-093029_Chrome.jpg

Screenshot_20220916-093438_Chrome.jpg

[RossyG]

In France they don’t measure box office takings, they add up the tickets sold. It makes direct comparisons across decades possible.

Why can’t America (and the UK) do this?

[trevrox]

Originally Posted by RossyG

In France they don’t measure box office takings, they add up the tickets sold. It makes direct comparisons across decades possible.

Why can’t America (and the UK) do this?

How do we account for the inflation in the population then?

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by RossyG

In France they don’t measure box office takings, they add up the tickets sold. It makes direct comparisons across decades possible.

Why can’t America (and the UK) do this?

Explain the difference between the BO take and total revenue from tickets sold?