Yeah my Traci Lords / Ginger Lynn porno somehow disappeared about the time my roommate moved out in college. Then again technically it’s CSAM, so maybe he got arrested for it.
Which is weird because they are the same movie…
Same. I appreciate Top Gun. But if I get to choose, I’m picking part 2 every time.
Maverick has zero air bites. Top Gun wins.
3 Likes
Plus young Kelly McGillis was fire. I’m sure she’s still fun. They didn’t bring her back for the sequel because she said nah, I’m fat and happy.
Also is there any modern way to read the ending as anything other than these two definitely **** asap.
Everyone should be able to find someone who looks at them the way these two look at each other.
1 Like
I think the original Top Gun did better with its exploration of heterosexual undertones than Maveric did by far.
2 Likes
Lol that’s funny. I guess they have a point that’s real too. Male on male experiences are certainly more acceptable today than back in the era of part 1, so that would make part 1 more hetero coded and Maverick an invitation for Chads across the earth.
Been a minute since I’ve rewatched Top Gun, but Maverick did hold up beautifully on rewatch, so I’m confident it wasn’t just a fun one-off nostalgia trip. For a completely substanceless film, it was peak execution.
1 Like
If you remove any nostalgia element (which is easy to do if you’re a “youth” according to the above definition), then it’s really not close between Maverick (expertly executed fun movie) vs the original (very boring)
(Although I may have my own biases, as I’m admittedly much more partial to the current “cinema’s last god” than the 80s “young brat” version of Tom Cruise)
2 Likes
Totally agree. Maverick is a top tier action film. The original is actually pretty bad.
Enough with the Top Gun hate. It’s definitely of its time (An Officer and a Gentleman is the closest thing that comes to mind), but it holds up for more than nostalgia reasons. It’s well shot, has a killer soundtrack, and has strong performances. The script isn’t too deep or surprising, but it still gives us stand out scenes and memorable lines (“I feel the need, the need for speed.”).
Also it’s a reminder of a time when Hollywood was churning out tons of original movies instead of focusing on franchises and other pre-existing IP. If we look at this year, Sinners is the only hit that’s original. Everything else is the Minecraft Movie or Mission Impossible 8 or Final Destination 6. (Yes, this last part is a nostalgia reason.)
4 Likes
Look at the top 10 releases for 1986. There are a few sequels, but most are original. This also reminds me how far ahead of its time Aliens was. Finally, I have no knowledge of Ruthless People.
1 Like
Both Guns are jet fighter porn. Skip the scenes with the plains in them and neither movie is all that interesting…
Ruthless people was pretty good. Danny Devito and Bette Midler chewing the scenery.
I saw 9 of those movies in theaters.
Airplane movies are a valid and storied genre, going at least as far back to the first Best Picture winner, Wings (1927)
1 Like
I’m not anti-porn, and I liked both of the Top Gun movies, I just got tired of the stupid shit between the jet scenes.
1 Like
And it was the Airplane trio behind it.
I remember watching it but couldn’t tell you much other than dark comedy.
Worth a rewatch
3 Likes
Fair to say that lifting out the movie’s central concept would gut a whole lot of movies.
2 Likes
Ruthless People gave us the Dominator MX 10s. Fuck yeah!
2 Likes