Top Gun: Maverick

Discussion in 'Visual Arts' started by ScramMan2, May 24, 2022.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. ScramMan2

    ScramMan2 Forum Resident Thread Starter

    Location:
    Portland OR
    I have been waiting for this one for 2 years. Going Friday @ 4:20 using the old fart rate! Opening day. I made sure I was off duty that night.
     
  2. MikaelaArsenault

    MikaelaArsenault Forum Resident

    Location:
    New Hampshire
    A few local theaters here are having an early access event.
     
  3. Boom Operator

    Boom Operator Forum Resident

    Location:
    Sherman Oaks, CA
    It was a long 14-month shoot but I’m so glad the picture is finally coming to theaters.

    I sure hope you enjoy it!


    ~Huck

    [​IMG]
     
  4. Jack_Straw

    Jack_Straw Forum Resident

    Location:
    Wichita, KS
    The first one sucked, so I don't expect this one to be any better. A vacuous film in an era of vacuous culture. The only thing the original was good for was using as a surround sound demo - it was one of the first movies that had a really good quality soundtrack with discrete content in the rear channels. Otherwise, the worst of '80s dreck.
     
    L.P., smilin ed, lbangs and 2 others like this.
  5. lbangs

    lbangs Senior Member

    I am sitting on the fence over this one.

    On the plus side, the early reviews are extremely positive.

    On the other side, I'm with @Jack_Straw on the original. It is bad. I was a thirteen year old boy watching it in the theater, and if it bored me to tears then, it will never work for me. A more recent partial rewatch annoyed me even more.

    Should I stay or should I go?

    Shalom, y'all!

    L. Bangs
     
  6. Spaghettiows

    Spaghettiows Forum Resident

    Location:
    Silver Creek, NY
    Well, I wouldn't say it was among the worst movies of the 80s, but I did fall asleep watching it on two occasions. I never could get through the whole thing without dozing. The first time, my girlfriend at the time was angry at me because we were watching at one of here friends' places, and the friend's boyfriend loved the movie so it made me look like a tool, in her eyes. I tried watching at again several years later and still fell asleep and never went back to it since. Considering how it was described as an "high-level action" film, it was surprisingly devoid of excitement.

    I would actually bet that the sequel is better than the original, based on my recollections.
     
    MikaelaArsenault likes this.
  7. Chris DeVoe

    Chris DeVoe 3 months since last false death report!

    Because it's the new 800 lb gorilla, there's virtually nothing else opening to use our 3 AMC A*List tickets on, so we'll probably see it.

    I never saw the original at the time, but I did catch it when they brought it back shortly after the theaters reopened and there was nothing to put on the screens.

    It didn't seem to make a whole lot of sense because in modern warfare, "fighter jets" never get closer than a couple of miles from each other. All this stuff of whooshing around each other, practically wing tip to wing tip, only applies to air shows. You don't use machine guns when you have air-to-air missiles.
     
    MikaelaArsenault and Deuce66 like this.
  8. Ken_McAlinden

    Ken_McAlinden MichiGort Staff

    Location:
    Livonia, MI
    Simon A and MikaelaArsenault like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine