site banner

Friday Fun Thread for September 8, 2023

Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.

3
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

So I finally saw Top Gun: Maverick. I kind of loved it.

What can I say, it had characters that looked and acted recognizably human, with comprehensible motivations, and a story that mostly made sense, that wasn't just a CG cartoon. It's a low bar to cross, but few movies seem to these days.

As far as Best Picture-nominated movies go, Maverick deserved it less than Tár but more than Banshees of Inisherin or EEAAO.

The bar is basically in the Earth’s core for a mainstream Western film.

I liked Miles Teller’s performance in Whiplash, but found him annoying in Top Gun. I’m cringing as I type this, but I would had maybe preferred even like a Harry, Styles or Potter (Daniel Radcliffe), in that role.

Tom Cruise’s character could had also done better than a single mother. The whole Demi Moore character and her daughter side plot could had been cut out. Okay, Tom Cruise can jump out of ${Something} and/or roll. Thanks, but I think I’ve scene seen this scene before.

The beach-side mudball handegg/rugby game broke suspension of disbelief. I get that it was a homage, but the boys are taking “Playin’ with the Boys” seriously or the Token Female can participate without getting demolished. Choose one.

It’s kind of sad yet hilarious that it was somewhat of a plot twist and subversion of the current zeitgeist that the handsome cocky blonde guy was actually a loyal, genre-savvy, and courageous ally to the protagonists all along.

Overall, I enjoyed it, especially relative to other mainstream films. When viewing, the movie could be easily improved by putting to 1.25 or 1.5 speed the talking scenes involving Jon Hamm and/or the middle-aged black guy.

I half-expected Hamm’s character to say at some point: “So this is why they call you Top Gun: Maverick.”

It’s kind of sad yet hilarious that it was somewhat of a plot twist and subversion of the current zeitgeist that the handsome cocky blonde guy was actually a loyal, genre-savvy, and courageous ally to the protagonists all along.

That really stood out to me. I remember hoping he would show up to help at the end and was quite pleased at how it turned out. It was notable because that kind of character is usually made the villain.

Before going into Maverick I thought it would be a "legacy character passes the torch to the young, diverse successors" plot, as these sequels tend to be. The movie even teases this for a long time before surprising you with the opposite. One could say it... subverted expectations.

Tom Cruise movie trivia is always a hoot. In Mission Impossible: Fallout, he memorably broke his angle filming a stunt, but pushed through to finish the scene in absolute agony so as to not ruin the shot.

I liked the movie as a popcorn flick, but it had problems for me.

First of all, it went nearly beat for beat along with the original. It seemed like every scene in the movie was cribbed from the original Top Gun in ways that didn’t really try to hide that’s what they were doing. Both had sortsball in the sand, both had the piano singing thing.

Second was that they never bothered to give Rooster anything of his own. He was Rooster son of Goose. And everything about him was Rooster son of Goose who does something like Goose and therefore Maverick must be reminded that Rooster is the son of Goose. He’s not much deeper than that.

I think there's an earnestness to good adventure movies which no amount of navel-gazey arthouse stuff can match. Sure, people tell themselves that the latter kinds of movies are more realistic or incisive about the human condition. But that's a cheat, really. Top Gun shows its artifice on its sleeve, and asks of us that we believe in heroes. And of course heroes exist. How could we have been so blind, with our vain and subtle navel-gazing? Top Gun clarifies the obvious truths about living, and does it in a way which delights people. That probably takes a lot more skill than putting a clever idea to screen poorly. I will gladly side with the plebians here.

It felt like a movie made by someone who only wanted to entertain an audience. Like at every point they said "what would look cool or be fun?" and you think that the movie doing a "pass the torch to the younger generation" but nope, Tom Cruise is like "I will save the day" and does (with good help, satisfying like when Han Solo rescues Luke in A New Hope). Great sound, great jet footage.

It felt like a movie made by someone who only wanted to entertain an audience.

I mean, I'm ok with that? Yes please? I keep thinking about what the alternative is, and it's basically just culture warring. So yeah, I'll take a single minded obsession with being cool or fun any day.

Reading the trivia on IMDB about the film was hilarious though. Like the beach football scene. There were two bits of trivia with that which cracked me up. The first was that they kept it a mystery when they would shoot the scene, so the actors all stayed on a good diet and kept hitting the gym to be beach body ready for it. The second is that after they finally filmed it, and it was one the last scenes to be filmed, everyone binged and went nuts. Then Tom Cruise decided the footage wasn't good enough, the actors didn't do enough macho flexing, they weren't buff enough, and they had to do it again. So back everyone goes to the gym to get beach body ready again for the second take.

I should have clarified, it was refreshing to watch a movie that wanted me to have fun, and not preach to me or annoy me. I am glad it wanted to entertain, and wish more movies had that as their sole aim