TOP GUN: MAVERICK starring Tom Cruise (2020) 4 4

[jcjames]

On 9/5/2022 at 10:33 AM, Bosco685 said:

 

 

 

...the only film to ever be No. 1 at the domestic box office for both Memorial Day and Labor Day holidays"

 That is some mighty long legs!!!

Wonder if it was #1 over July 4th weekend also?

If so... trifecta! 

 

 

Edited September 5, 2022 by jcjames

[Bosco685]

 

[Underground44]

Why does Gooses’ son dress and act the same as his dead father? Who does that except for a serial killer?

[media_junkie]

On 9/7/2022 at 9:48 AM, Underground44 said:

Why does Gooses’ son dress and act the same as his dead father? Who does that except for a serial killer?

You just hit upon the plot for Top Gun 3.

[Bosco685]

Quote

In an interview with Entertainment Tonight, Hamm noted that the Tom Cruise-led sequel is the only film to top the box office on both Memorial Day (when it premiered) and Labor Day.

 

“That’s unprecedented in many ways,” Hamm said. “It’s one of the only top five [films] that doesn’t have somebody in a cape or on a spaceship. It’s a story about real people, it’s got a lot of emotional resonance, people are really responding to it.”

 

Hamm is referencing “Maverick’s” No. 5 slot on the all-time domestic box office. Since its debut, the film has grossed over $1.4 billion worldwide and $700 million in the U.S., landing it just behind James Cameron’s “Avatar,” Marvel’s “Spider-Man: No Way Home” and “Avengers: Endgame,” and Disney’s “Star Wars: Episode VII – The Force Awakens,” which is the country’s highest grossing movie ever.

 

“It couldn’t have happened to a nicer movie,” Hamm added, praising the film’s cast and crew. “It’s so nice to see that happen to that younger generation of actors too, who really get to experience this and build on it and have their career blossom because of it.”

 

[Bosco685]

The Energizer Bunny of 2022 cinema.

 

[▫️]

On 9/9/2022 at 11:49 PM, Bosco685 said:

 

And now he’s doing Fletch. Not sure how I feel about that with the first movie being so near and dear to my heart. I hope he pulls it off.

[THE_BEYONDER]

On 6/6/2022 at 9:30 PM, jcjames said:

My brother had the same reaction. He said he teared up 3 or 4 times. 

I saw it over the weekend, definitely good entertainment. The flight sequences and dogfighting were outstanding. At times Maverick looked and reacted like the old fossil he was becoming as part of the storyline, and then other times he soared (literally). Enough parallels with the original to stoke the nostalgia, the opening into was very cool too. The reality of Val Kilmer's condition elevated those scenes with Mav beyond acting or film. 

Only weakness was Jennifer Connolly's character, she really served no purpose to the story or to Mav it seems. No chemistry. Ah well, nothing's perfect. 

9.0  VFNM

 

This is a good summary.  Really enjoyed this movie.  Had all the action and feels one could ask for.  But as you said, Jennifer Connolly was out of place & shouldn’t have made it past the cutting room floor. 

[Bosco685]

 

[Bosco685]

 

[bronze_rules]

Really hope this comes to Paramount Plus soon.

[Bosco685]

[Bosco685]

 

[Bosco685]

[Axelrod]

On 10/11/2022 at 6:14 PM, Bosco685 said:

Yeah, well, that's cute, but "entertainment over logic" is not, in fact, a great policy for the writer's room.  I might go so far as to say it's a godawful policy.  

Top Gun Maverick's exceptional success does not change or validate this.   

[Bosco685]

On 10/11/2022 at 9:34 PM, Axelrod said:

Yeah, well, that's cute, but "entertainment over logic" is not, in fact, a great policy for the writer's room.  I might go so far as to say it's a godawful policy.  

Top Gun Maverick's exceptional success does not change or validate this.   

If entertainment is restricted by extreme scenario facts, then movies like Skyfall, John Wick, Nobody, Die Hard and many others get picked apart into fact check obscurity.

That's the point DeKnight is making. Even with his Spartacus Starz series, there were critics that were so fixated on representing history accurately with an individual that little is known of his origins. And with the show Vikings based on the Norse legends of Ragnar Lodbrok (Lothbrok in the show) there were historians that spent more time critiquing History Channel's misrepresentation of events. Yet even those critics noted there was value in making the show reach millions of viewers to share the stories of Viking culture and key events.

[Axelrod]

Well, the phrase wasn't "Entertainment over historical accuracy,"  or even, "Entertainment over physics".  I could get behind those (for the most part.  Re-writing history and defying physics can go overboard).  

Just not "Entertainment over logic."  That's dumb (literally!) 

[Bosco685]

On 10/12/2022 at 8:34 AM, Axelrod said:

Well, the phrase wasn't "Entertainment over historical accuracy,"  or even, "Entertainment over physics".  I could get behind those (for the most part.  Re-writing history and defying physics can go overboard).  

Just not "Entertainment over logic."  That's dumb (literally!) 

If you say so

[Cat]

I think it's a fine line between both, and knowing when to ride either side of it. 

[D84]