Top Gun: Maverick (2022)

[makaveli21]

Originally Posted by BluBonnet

I think, firstly, there's a difference between "the point" of the movie and the thematic significance of what happens in the movie. Secondly, you're now the one who sounds like you didn't watch the movie. It repeatedly shows the Navy allowing him to do whatever the heck he wants. That's not even up for discussion. From the beginning of the movie to the end of the movie, the Navy just lets him do whatever he wants.

Which is obviously in stark contrast to the first one, where he was just happy at the end to be Iceman's wingman.

Those are perfectly accurate observations for anyone who has watched the movies. It's not even a matter of opinion.

So you clearly have an agenda to push, because this is literally just wrong. The Navy just "lets him do whatever he wants," to the point where it is repeatedly pointed out that if it wasn't for Iceman he would have been discharged a long time ago, and then as soon

[Show spoiler]Ice dies he is removed from his job

.

I've found that people that say things like "that's not even up for discussion" and "It's not even a matter of opinion" are often trying to cover up for the fact that want they are saying actually is up for discussion and a matter of opinion. You are clearly not interested in having any sort of productive conversation; please continue to push your inane arguments and half-baked ideas, but I won't be reading them as you'll be on my blocked list.

[Farerb]

[BluBonnet]

Originally Posted by makaveli21

So you clearly have an agenda to push, because this is literally just wrong. The Navy just "lets him do whatever he wants," to the point where it is repeatedly pointed out that if it wasn't for Iceman he would have been discharged a long time ago, and then as soon

[Show spoiler]Ice dies he is removed from his job

.

Is having an intelligent discussion an "agenda" now?

Look, at the end of the day, for any number of reasons, the Navy ultimately very much let Maverick do whatever the heck he wanted. At first it was because Iceman was protecting him, sure. But even after Iceman's gone, when Maverick has supposedly been "removed" or whatever, he still gets on that plane to do the trial run for the mission and the Navy... *checks notes* ...yup, still pretty much lets him do whatever he wants to do. And then Hamm's character has a word with him in his office and tells him... *checks notes* ...yeah, for all practical purposes, they're still going to let him fly in the mission. Do you notice a trend here? Yeah, in every single situation, for a variety of reasons and under several justifications, they still let him do pretty much everything he wants to do.

And that's why the movie completely undermines the "lessons" he had supposedly learned in the first movie. You know, the one where he went from being told his ego was "writing checks your body can't cash!" to Iceman telling him, "you can be my wingman any time!"

All of the above is pretty much factual. I didn't say that the movie was bad just because of the thematic incongruity between the two movies. Indeed, the evidence is indisputable that people by far and large can enjoy the movie just fine in spite of (or maybe because of? Not really sure) those thematic incongruities.

So if they don't spoil the movie for anyone, why are you so bothered by someone having pointed them out? Clearly here the response on your part is disproportionate to the innocuous comment that preceded it.

Have a nice Father's Day!

[StarWarsIsAwesome123]

[Guy87]

I loved the sequel...but yeah Maverick has learned nothing since the first movie.

[Show spoiler]...and then passes that lesson of "don't think" on to Rooster

[StarWarsIsAwesome123]

Not every movie needs to have some big lesson or revelatory character arc though. It also doesn't warrant all the spam in this thread.

[makaveli21]

Originally Posted by moreorless

The comments about the test crash seem pretty much that way to me, I don't really see how you can say the film presents the test crash as him putting others in danger when to me it seems pretty clear it doesn't. Your argument seems to be based on the idea the films presentation of events was wrong and perhaps it was(although the film does seem to point towards it happening in a very isolated area) but really is realism that important in such a situation in such a film?

Agreed--I don't think it takes a huge leap in logic to assume that he didn't put others in danger. That would have certainly been brought up in the scene with Ed Harris' character, and not even Ice could have saved him if there was some collateral damage from his actions.

[Britbuffguy]

Seems like this movie is so popular, only ONE user didn't like it, and every time I check this thread, they're still here trying to convince the other 99% they're wrong.

Maybe just admit the movie wasn't for you and move on?

[StarWarsIsAwesome123]

Originally Posted by Britbuffguy

Seems like this movie is so popular, only ONE user didn't like it, and every time I check this thread, they're still here trying to convince the other 99% they're wrong.

Maybe just admit the movie wasn't for you and move on?

This is the same person that gets all sensitive and uses the ignore button whenever someone dunks on a movie they're gaga over, and yet they're doing the EXACT same thing to a much larger degree in this thread.

[kylor]

Can Maverick come out to play? Asking because he's currently living rent free in BluBonnet's head.

[kylor]

If Maverick can't come out to play that's fine I guess.

[John1701D]

Originally Posted by kylor

If Maverick can't come out to play that's fine I guess.

[BudBaxter]

Originally Posted by Britbuffguy

Seems like this movie is so popular, only ONE user didn't like it, and every time I check this thread, they're still here trying to convince the other 99% they're wrong.

Yep. This is like the Bizarro version of the Eternals thread

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by BluBonnet

And that's why the movie completely undermines the "lessons" he had supposedly learned in the first movie. You know, the one where he went from being told his ego was "writing checks your body can't cash!" to Iceman telling him, "you can be my wingman any time!

TOP GUN (1986)

ICEMAN
You can be my Wingman any time.

MAVERICK
Bullshit. You can be mine.

Undermining what, now?

[BluBonnet]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

TOP GUN (1986)


Undermining what, now?

They're buddies at the end of the movie ... after having been rivals initially.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by BluBonnet

They're buddies at the end of the movie ... after having been rivals initially.

....and how is this undermined in Top Gun: Maverick?

[StarWarsIsAwesome123]

[BluBonnet]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

....and how is this undermined in Top Gun: Maverick?

How many times have I explained it already?

[Ruined]

Would like to see this get a 2nd IMAX run, I'd be in.

[kylor]

Sometimes it's not the quantity of an explanation but the quality.