Forum menu
Fricking great.
Got to see it today before the gobby little shitgoblins were off school to ruin it.
I'll see it again in a couple of weeks for sure.
Is his face ok though? I struggle with all the Botox
gobby little shitgoblins
Forget the film, that's the best thing anyone's said yet! 😂😂😂
You lot are quick off the mark.
I'm normally first in the queue but waiting until tomorrow.
It's been 2 years delayed so I'm happy just to wait a bit longer.
Any thoughts on the IMAX (not shot in IMAX - Sony Venice) or 2DX versions?
Never even heard of 2DX, fake wrap around thing.
Soundtrack thoughts? Hans Zimmer and Harold Faltermeyer ...
Any Tony Scott tributes?
A brilliant way to spend 2 hours .. just like in 1986 but newer ..well almost . Same cheeseyness but in a good way .. so many dem feels moments..
Brilliant but 5th gen fighter ?? well thats about 6 left in the world now then 🙂
its basically just the deathstar run from starwars a new hope, even with yoda quotes and the bit with vaders tie fighter.
and also missing the point that a mission of that sort is literally what drones were made for.
jolly silly fun though
Omg I loved that so much!
Any Tony Scott tributes?
Yup, at the end
Thoroughly enjoyed it. Hits all the right spots.
Minor criticism: as good as the flying is there are just too many close ups. Needs to breath a little in the landscapes.
Opening was a fantastic homage!
Top gun ish…
I thought that was brilliant!
Off to see the film on Sunday - 1st ever IMAX experience, which caused a big suck of breath looking at the ticked price...
Yes 16.99 here! But enjoyed the big screen nonetheless at Sheffield.
It's not even shot in IMAX..cheeky sods.
It’s not even shot in IMAX..cheeky sods.
I vaguely recall seeing a promo clip somewhere saying it was....
Not that I'd know the difference.
and £35.90 for two tickets!
That used to be a week's wages!!
The Guardian review was just quite hilariously brilliantly written, regardless of the rating
That is, indeed, very funny!
Any thoughts on the IMAX (not shot in IMAX – Sony Venice) or 2DX versions?
According to Sony, the Venice is IMAX certified.
That James Corden film was excellent!! Can't wait to see the film now...
IMAX certified is just marketing stuff.
A venice camera is just a 6k camera blown-up to IMAX. I own one of the IMAX certified cameras.
This is not the same as being shot on an IMAX camera capable of equivalent (65mm) 12K of equivalent digital detail etc.
You still get a decent quality blow up. But not really IMAX in the proper sense same as the Dark Knight or Dunkirk.
The projecter is often uprated to 4K.
IMAX have just effectively lowered the allowance of spec to suit more 'regular' cinema cameras.
It looks great though.
But just see it at the biggest screen you can irrespective of IMAX.
That is, indeed, very funny!
I though the Val Kilmer reference in the review was uncaring at best, verging on straight up nasty.
Really enjoyed it. Well worth going to see. Although it does get really silly at the end - Top Gun meets Impossible Mission with a bit of Behind Enemy Lines.
Opening was a fantastic homage!
I'm not going to lie, at the first BONG of the Top Gun theme, I actually welled up a bit.
It was great. Stupid, but great. Which is exactly how it should be.
I’ve been avoiding this thread all week! Just got back from seeing it and absolutely loved it. My 12 year old (who loved the first one) said this is is his new favourite film - I’m so proud 🙂
Saw it last night and it was every bit as brilliant as hoped.
Super cheesy, wonderfully nostalgic and hit all the right notes. The first 10 mins were immense, and it continued in that vain. First film in ages that I want to see again in the cinema.
I’m not going to lie, at the first BONG of the Top Gun theme, I actually welled up a bit.
Just returned - I found it oddly emotional, not helped perhaps by our IMAX being turned up to 11, the afterburner moments where shaking the place! All the right good things though for our age group, an excellent homage to the first, and brilliant for 13yo Jnr who loved it - with a choice of Army or RAF cadets in 2 years he's made his choice already!
with a choice of Army or RAF cadets in 2 years he’s made his choice already!
I’m sure the Navy will be thrilled 😆
Loved it, wanted to go straight back in and see it again
Just missing You've Lost That Loving Feeling
Just watched the original with the kids to warm them up for the main event tomorrow (in 4DX). I really can’t bloody wait.
Just back, was a great nostalgia driven 2 hours that was complete fantasy and suspending the brain stuff, as always, Tom Cruise just likes to do fun action stuff, realism is for others, he does like doing that weird run in every movie as well though, and there's plenty here as well!
I think overall they made this one even sillier than the original, and thankfully they really never took themselves that seriously when doing it, which made it fun, nostalgic and silly, but with those heartwarming moments where they put some real crowd pleasers in.
Enjoyable at some levels but the aviation geek in me was cringing at some of the scenes. That "Nighthawk" thing he was flying at the start only had side windows ffs and don't get me started on the SAM's.
and don’t get me started on the SAM’s.
Awww.... Go on, I'm interested as I have no clue about them.
he does like doing that weird run in every movie as well though
If he doesn't do "the run" or ride a motorbike then it's not a proper TC film!
The SAM's (surface to air missiles) shown in the film look like the Soviet era S-125.
These are radar guided with a range of about 35km. The film shows them locking on to planes at very short distances whereas their minimum engagement range is around 3.5km. The missiles are also fooled by flares being pumped out by the US planes - that would only work for heat seeking missiles such as the Sidewinder rather than radar guided missiles like the S-125.
Some of this missiles explode quite close to the US planes and would, in real life, severely damage them down due to the large proximity warhead on the missile. In the film the planes carry on flying without any issues.
If this mythical country that the US are attacking has fifth generation fighters (F22 and F35 equivalents) then they would surely have better SAM's such as the Russian Pantsir which can engage at short ranges and could deal with low flying aircraft better than the S-125.
I guess the S-125 looks cooler though so that's what they went with.
I stole most of this info from the site at the link below. It is worth a read after seeing the film if you are a plane nerd.
https://www.aerotime.aero/articles/31116-top-gun-maverick-answering-aviation-questions
Enjoyable at some levels but the aviation geek in me was cringing at some of the scenes. That “Nighthawk” thing he was flying at the start only had side windows ffs and don’t get me started on the SAM’s.
Yeah, but that's the fun, he took a $200 million prototype and achieved the test point, but then kept pushing and crashed it, he also managed to go through that security checkpoint at about 40mph!
I think the SAMs were there for show and the last bit, they also appeared to miss the 20 TLAMs that flew past them ;o)
The film also used the phrase 5th generation a lot, but then had those aircraft have the absolute opposite strengths and weaknesses of a 5th gen aircraft!
But again, it's switch brain off fun that's basically having modern aircraft having WW1 dogfights!
@Cletus, that link does have a few of the good bits, and it doesn't even touch on the fact he walked away from a mach 10 ejection 😂
When they were explaining the TG mission did anyone else think it sounded remarkably similar to the 622 squadron film?!!!
(Low flying through valleys with AA on top and a very steep climb out after dropping the bombs)
When they were explaining the TG mission did anyone else think it sounded remarkably similar to the 622 squadron film?!!!
633??
Are you on about 617 squadron, i.e. the dambusters?
Well that was bloody amazing - full on 4DX silliness - absurdly over the top and worth every penny because of it.
But one of our kids (who watched the original last night) said she preferred it over Maverick.
But one of our kids (who watched the original last night) said she preferred it over Maverick.
They're so close together in terms of what they do, the original was pure 80s though, the new one has just had so much thrown at it in terms of funding and backing, it's just a bit more polished, especially with so much emphasised on the flying, you can tell the USN have seen the benefit of having this movie tied to them!
Yes I agree, but just interesting that a 12 yr old enjoyed the 80s original over the more polished new film.
633??
FFS... yeah! (622 was the prequel .... obvs!)
This was always the film to give cinema a good bump.
Can't see it lasting long term. It's been a dire two years for the pictures.
Shame but I think cinema is heading downwards now.
We went on Saturday evening to the prime 8:30 showing and it cant have been more that 20% occupied at best. We were amazed how quiet it was
Saw it last night - pretty decent overall. Really enjoyed the opening scene - nice homage to the original film.
Fairly underwhelmed by IMAX (first time), didn't seem any different to a normal screen to me - other than endless IMAX adverts / promos before the film repeatedly telling us how much better it was.
Was flipping loud though - we both wore ear plugs!
When they were explaining the TG mission did anyone else think it sounded remarkably similar to the 622 squadron film?!!!
Nope, blowing up the first Death Star is what came to mind for me.