Top Gun: Maverick
- Thread starter Mr Webber
- Start date
IMO there could be a better-than-expectations movie in this but they won't have the guts to do it.
Take it a notch more realistic & less cheesy than the original (but not a total night-n-day difference). Have Maverick be older instead of the usual ageless 21st-century Tom Cruise. Don't let the studio force any idiotic frustrating choices when casting the younger pilots they will be training.
Drones-or-human-pilots is the obvious subject they should hinge the plot on. They seem to be aware of that.
Take it a notch more realistic & less cheesy than the original (but not a total night-n-day difference). Have Maverick be older instead of the usual ageless 21st-century Tom Cruise. Don't let the studio force any idiotic frustrating choices when casting the younger pilots they will be training.
Drones-or-human-pilots is the obvious subject they should hinge the plot on. They seem to be aware of that.
Just have Maverick come out of the closet, it's all good now.
Riceball
Master Member
You still would, it's not like in animes where you see swarms of missiles and people just jink a bit to try and dodge all the while fighters are dropping out of the sky at an alarming rate. Those missiles will be detected and once they get within a certain range you can bet the planes on the receiving end will start doing all sorts of maneuvers to try and dodge those them. Eventually they'll close to short range where they'll start to maneuver like crazy to get a lock on with their short range missiles, this might even happen at longer ranges after the initial volley is launched as they try to break radar lock. So, yes, there would almost certainly still be dogfights.
NAS Fallon Nevada is where the Naval adversary training moved to and continues, the military still trains in such tactics so they would not
do so if there was not thought to be a need.
I think fervently that the pilot's training could make all the difference if we ever find ourselves in massive air campaigns again.
Drones and beyond visual range weaponry will be part of that, but a human being that has mastered his craft and knows his weapons could
write history in the sky... again.
As for Miramar......
Miramar is a Marine base now, Navy long gone. I see the F-35 Marine variant coming and going from Yuma sometimes, tons of Hornets some in the Super flavor, a rare Harrier, and
the Air Force has had A-10s visiting lately, along with occasionally an F16 that could be California ANG. Lots of typical Marine helo traffic including V22.
do so if there was not thought to be a need.
I think fervently that the pilot's training could make all the difference if we ever find ourselves in massive air campaigns again.
Drones and beyond visual range weaponry will be part of that, but a human being that has mastered his craft and knows his weapons could
write history in the sky... again.
As for Miramar......
Miramar is a Marine base now, Navy long gone. I see the F-35 Marine variant coming and going from Yuma sometimes, tons of Hornets some in the Super flavor, a rare Harrier, and
the Air Force has had A-10s visiting lately, along with occasionally an F16 that could be California ANG. Lots of typical Marine helo traffic including V22.
CB2001
Master Member
Not to mention... It was one of Tony Scott's films. Since he's no longer with us, this film would be completely pointless.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Mr Webber
Master Member
How do you mean?
CB2001
Master Member
This was a Tony Scott film. Without him, the sequel wouldn't be remotely the same, thus completely pointless. He'd make sure that the film had a solid story as well as his visual flare and excellent directing. Top Gun was a Tony Scott film, first and foremost. And that film has Scott's fingerprints all over it. Without it, it'll just be another poorly rendered Top Gun wannabe.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Mr Webber
Master Member
I see your point but not as strong on it, without knowing where they are going to take it, there would seem to be a number of suitable possible replacements. His nephew may want to step up to the occasion. James Gunn`s take would be interesting.
CB2001
Master Member
I have nothing against Mr. Gunn. I love Guardians of the Galaxy (have not seen Volume 2 yet).
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Mr Webber
Master Member
It will probably come down to who can tolerate Tom and Jerry the most.
If you go by the first Gulf War, then Serbia, and through the 2003 Iraq attack (war?) then it's mostly NATO planes whacking down anything that flies with missiles. I don't buy that it would be any different with Russian pilots flying (we beat them in the Korean War and Vietnam). So while it hasn't happened in a while, it's not out of the realm of possibility. The F-35 has a ridiculously low amount of ammo for it's gun though. The F-35B (USMC version) doesn't even have an internal gun, it has to use a gun pod like early F-4s in Vietnam. I'm not sure when the last official dogfight (as in close in, maneuvering) took place, probably in one of the Israeli wars.
Capn_Jack_Savvy
Sr Member
Let's hope they don't do a ID4 type sequel in which alien technology is now incorporated into our new F-Somethings!!
Hell do a prequel, go back to Vietnam era and show why the missle era still needed cannons and dogfight training was still relevant.
Sure have pop tunes... from the sixties! F-4s are sexy as all hell, and some are still flying unlike the F-14, well a few in Iran I guess.
Cruise can be a museum tour guide in the beginning as they fade back into the sixties. LOL
I could watch that.
Sure have pop tunes... from the sixties! F-4s are sexy as all hell, and some are still flying unlike the F-14, well a few in Iran I guess.
Cruise can be a museum tour guide in the beginning as they fade back into the sixties. LOL
I could watch that.
CT1138
Sr Member
Maybe it's just me, but I could never get into Top Gun. I've seen it several times now, and it just never leaves an impression on me. It seems like a mediocre Tom Cruise flick where he plays the cool rebel without a cause who can do no wrong, much to the ire of his commanding officers. The film is probably much better in through nostalgic eyes, and I'm just not from the 80s. I find the entire thing extremely dated, and not in any good ways. From the catchphrases, to the hair, the music... It's like trying to watch something that was puked from somebodies memory of the 80s. Everything terrible from a fashionably terrible decade. Coupled with the fact that I don't care much for Tom Cruise in the first place, a sequel that was never asked for will be an easy pass to me.
Jedi-72
Sr Member
I think the last real air-to-air engagement was when our Tomcats shot those Libyan Migs down in 1989. The Migs inexplicably engaged the F-14s. The Tomcats kept turning away and the Migs kept turning back into them. They finally engaged and put em down.
I was very disappointed by the MTV schlock it was then believe me, dude would have been grounded so fast in real life. LOL
Laspector
Master Member
I am from the 80s and I could never get into this movie. Yeah, there is some good eye candy if you are an aviation buff, but otherwise I thought it was a pretty crappy cookie cutter movie. Never liked it.
And despite what some people say, not all of it was live action planes. There was a Cinefex way back that showed several models and miniatures being used for the film.
And despite what some people say, not all of it was live action planes. There was a Cinefex way back that showed several models and miniatures being used for the film.
Last edited:
Similar threads
