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.

Totally the Death Star, even down to the ludicrously simplistic cartoon of the bomb going into the shaft. Must have been a totally deliberate homage.

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.

As I put earlier it’s because IMAX has been modified to include regular digital cinema cameras – so you’re not really getting much extra unless it was shot on IMAX 65mm cameras, which this wasn’t.

It’s a bit of a marketing thing ultimately. Cinema is dying and they’re are 4 different ways to see TG.

Regular, IMAX , 4D and Screen X. It’s like when they revived 3D to get bums on seats. I think Manchester have a fancy dual laser projector which would up the resolution.

Just see it on big screen. That’s the most authentic experience.

Sometimes the biggest screen will be IMAX like Sheffield Cineworld.

Totally the Death Star, even down to the ludicrously simplistic cartoon of the bomb going into the shaft. Must have been a totally deliberate homage.

Yeah, that did bring some double nostalgia, the way the paveways went down the hole, how Luke, i mean Rooster lost his R2, er i mean targeting pod, it was just pure fun, i think it was all more by design than plagiarising 😁

As I put earlier it’s because IMAX has been modified to include regular digital cinema cameras – so you’re not really getting much extra unless it was shot on IMAX 65mm cameras, which this wasn’t.

Wouldn’t affect the screen size though, which didn’t seem any different….

We saw it on Saturday on the big screen at Rheged and it was pretty busy, we missed out on the Friday slots.
It was a good fun couple of hours, my 15 year old was really excited as she loves the first one. I was surprised how many elderly people were there but they would have been in their 30’s and 40’s when the first one came out.

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!

The 5th gen aircraft were su-57s which are definitely 5th gen by any reasonable definition. They are less stealthy than Western 5th gen e.g. F35, F22 but still have a much more reduced signature compared to 4th or 4-plus gen fighters. They’re much more manoeuvrable than F35 for sure and probably F22, but the Russians typically place more importance on super manoeuvrability due to a combination of doctrinal differences and not being as good at making stealthy things.

Regarding the sams, S125 is a bit old school, but there’s some heavily upgraded versions knocking about, to the point where they’re basically a different system and have a different western designation (sa3 for the original, sa26 for the most modern upgraded variants). Even if they were sa3s, there’s still plenty in service around the world and it wouldn’t be that inconceivable that they’d still be in use by a military that can also field a few su57s and fund a nuclear weapons program (e.g. the Russians have small numbers of new stuff but a lot of old kit held together with gaffer tape).

The engagement time was way too quick, i.e. the delay from the aircraft popping out the valley to the missile launch. Can’t remember specs for minimum engagement range for sa3/sa26 but agree it looked questionable. Again, can’t remember the warhead size/lethal blast radius either. I wasn’t really paying attention, just turned my brain off and enjoyed the action, but I think the engagement geometries looked a bit poor for the sams a few times so not inconceivable that the planes could be outside the fragmentation cone.

The use of flares against radar guided missiles was the most glaring inaccuracy for me. If I was being kind and fancied some mental gymnastics, you could argue that if you were actually flying that mission, you’d be jamming all the sam acquisition and tracking radars. If they were sa26s, they could still attempt to engage using thermal/optical tracking system so flares could potentially break track, but the whole engagement would play out differently in that scenario.

Lack of a point defense system (like a pantsir as suggested) was pretty unlikely. You’d sit a few in the crater in reality and they’d make life very difficult, though hitting any of the aircraft isn’t guaranteed while they’re doing 10g and only exposed briefly.

The whole mission stretched credulity a bit, but other than the flares I think it’s all pretty forgivable and the writers did a pretty good job of contriving a scenario that delivers some awesome flying scenes. It would have been a lot less fun to watch if they’d done it the way it probably would have happened in real life (a crap load of tomahawks or similar and some stand-off radar jamming from a few electronic warfare aircraft would be my first choice)

Used to have a job doing lots of thinking about this sort of thing

Just a reminder – it wasn’t a documentary…

Just a reminder – it wasn’t a documentary…

Saw it today and absolutely loved it. Great homage to the original. Glad it didnt take itself too seriously. Great flight scenes. Could’t care less about how true it was to real life. As noted its a film not a documentary. Just a great couple of hours of escapism and nostalgia. I was annoying my wife on the way home flicking the windscreen wipers on whilst claiming to be ‘switching to guns’ 😂

The 5th gen aircraft were su-57s which are definitely 5th gen by any reasonable definition. They are less stealthy than Western 5th gen e.g. F35, F22 but still have a much more reduced signature compared to 4th or 4-plus gen fighters. They’re much more manoeuvrable than F35 for sure and probably F22, but the Russians typically place more importance on super manoeuvrability due to a combination of doctrinal differences and not being as good at making stealthy things.

Regarding the sams, S125 is a bit old school, but there’s some heavily upgraded versions knocking about, to the point where they’re basically a different system and have a different western designation (sa3 for the original, sa26 for the most modern upgraded variants). Even if they were sa3s, there’s still plenty in service around the world and it wouldn’t be that inconceivable that they’d still be in use by a military that can also field a few su57s and fund a nuclear weapons program (e.g. the Russians have small numbers of new stuff but a lot of old kit held together with gaffer tape).

The engagement time was way too quick, i.e. the delay from the aircraft popping out the valley to the missile launch. Can’t remember specs for minimum engagement range for sa3/sa26 but agree it looked questionable. Again, can’t remember the warhead size/lethal blast radius either. I wasn’t really paying attention, just turned my brain off and enjoyed the action, but I think the engagement geometries looked a bit poor for the sams a few times so not inconceivable that the planes could be outside the fragmentation cone.

The use of flares against radar guided missiles was the most glaring inaccuracy for me. If I was being kind and fancied some mental gymnastics, you could argue that if you were actually flying that mission, you’d be jamming all the sam acquisition and tracking radars. If they were sa26s, they could still attempt to engage using thermal/optical tracking system so flares could potentially break track, but the whole engagement would play out differently in that scenario.

Lack of a point defense system (like a pantsir as suggested) was pretty unlikely. You’d sit a few in the crater in reality and they’d make life very difficult, though hitting any of the aircraft isn’t guaranteed while they’re doing 10g and only exposed briefly.

The whole mission stretched credulity a bit, but other than the flares I think it’s all pretty forgivable and the writers did a pretty good job of contriving a scenario that delivers some awesome flying scenes. It would have been a lot less fun to watch if they’d done it the way it probably would have happened in real life (a crap load of tomahawks or similar and some stand-off radar jamming from a few electronic warfare aircraft would be my first choice)

Used to have a job doing lots of thinking about this sort of thing

As someone that doesn’t give 2 shits about the inaccuracies of a film, that’s often trotted out, that was a genuinely fascinating read!

No chance of finding out what your old job was I guess? 🙂

No chance of finding out what your old job was I guess? 🙂

He could tell you, but then he’d have to kill you… 😉

Went with Mrs Kilo to see it last night, she had seen the first one and loved it, I hadn’t and thought it was a pretty lame story and not that exciting.

No chance of finding out what your old job was I guess? 🙂

His last names Putin, best leave this one alone 😉

Seems no one else has picked up on the fact that “Penny” the bar owner, is Penny Benjamin of “history of high speed passes over two control towers and one Admiral’s daughter” fame… The Guardian missed it and in fact so did my mate who I went to see it with and we have watched the original probably 100 times. Amateurs!!!

Didn’t go unnoticed in the Howard household 😊

Penny totally obvious to me. Was surprised I got right to the end of the thread before someone else raised it.

Best trick for me was maxing the raid scene as a sort of finale, and after being sucked into that and the whole crew down scene, completely overlooking that the original star of the show hadn’t appeared yet…

…cue Tomcat!!!

Sure I’d seen it in the trailer, they mentioned it in the dialogue but for an 80’s plane nerd that was my highlight and it gave Mav and Goose Jr so much story latitude. Brilliant. And swing wings.

+1 for picking up on the Penny Benjamin thing. Also loved the ‘buzz the tower’ with the F14 moment right before the dodgy carrier landing with broken nose gear.

Absolutely bloody brilliant. Saw it in 4DX and want to go again.

Seems no one else has picked up on the fact that “Penny” the bar owner, is Penny Benjamin of “history of high speed passes over two control towers and one Admiral’s daughter” fame

I thought it was so obvious it didn’t need mentioning! I know people have nerded on about various elements of the military and aircraft use was inaccurate. I’m cool with that. The fact that Goose’s son had been cryogenically frozen seemed a bit more obvious glitch (he was about 4 in the original and 36 years later appears to still only be in his late twenties, early 30s. On that theme, Jennifer Connolly is currently 51. If she is playing a version of Penny Benjamin of the same age then 36 years ago Penny Benjamin was……..eww! Awkward!

Thought it was ace though.

Yeah, i think that’s why they added the ‘pulled his papers’ and set his career back 4 years, to try and make the age line up a little. To be fair it was a key part of the plot, same with Penny being the love interest that was set up for the audience to have that happy ending after he was grounded.

Watched it last night and absolutely loved it.

Opening sequence exact recreation of Top Gun. Same music, same shots, same font on the titles! Only thing missing was the magnificence of the Tomcats. I was more than willing to overlook their replacement with the Hornets.

However:

Best trick for me was maxing the raid scene as a sort of finale, and after being sucked into that and the whole crew down scene, completely overlooking that the original star of the show hadn’t appeared yet…

…cue Tomcat!!!

Sure I’d seen it in the trailer, they mentioned it in the dialogue but for an 80’s plane nerd that was my highlight and it gave Mav and Goose Jr so much story latitude. Brilliant. And swing wings.

Oh my!! That was fan-bloody-tastic!!!

Linky to how the F-14 was able to join the party, on the ground at least.

So many references and tie-ins to Top Gun all very well executed.

Only one way to introduce the F-14 too. Coulda walked up to it, coulda glanced at it side on, but nah… 100% badass mode like dis

It’s not a tornado, but it’s ok 😁

Great fun.

Ed Harris looks like one of my testicles.

Just seen it in an empty cinema, could have taken the IMAX option but that was hour later. Thought it was ok, kept thinking back wondering what I was doing in ’86.
Could have slotted in the Berlin sing.

Just the right amount of enjoyable nonsense!
Both the kids, 10 & 12 thought it was the cheeseiest thing that they had ever seen, with 12 taking a particular dislike to Pointless Penny. Probably due to diversion from burgeoning interest in boys and kissing. However, when pressed, both admitted to enjoying it. As did Mrs Snr & I.
And we went to a new cinema, with a ‘spoons across the road. There’s some parallels there. Nothing life changing, but perfectly enjoyable value for money fare.
Just right for a bank holiday afternoon.

Holy shitballs, that was awesome! Had seen F14 in the trailer, and it stood out a mile when they mentioned it in the mission brief, just a matter of waiting till it got call into use!

Genuine “oh no….” stomach drop when that third su-57 appeared and the ejection handles didn’t work.

Enjoyed the flying scenes. The actors took extensive flying lessons and two have achieved their licenses. They had to operate the cameras in the cockpits and much is filmed authentically. Cruise flew the mustang of course.

Tomcat? This was at the real Top Gun museum at Miramar (which is not now Top Gun). It’s probably as airworthy but they don’t have an F-14 yet. 🙁

Personally, I didn’t see why they didn’t just send in a drone. Or tomahawk or ten. Short film though.

Sounds like I’m I a minority, but I didn’t like it. Great flying scenes but totally predictable story line and just felt really contrived.

Best dumb movie I’ve seen in ages. So stupid, but so great. I’d much rather they’d given the age defying potion to Kelly McGillis than Tom Cruise though.