Top Gun: Maverick (2022) is one of the best '80s throwback movies I have seen in a while. From the recreations of the opening and ending credits' letter fonts and '80s style editing choices to the return of Harold Faltermeyer to compose the movie's original score alongside Hans Zimmer and Lady Gaga (she writes and performs an original song titled "Hold My Hand" that plays during the end credits), this film somehow does the impossible: make me care about the characters from the first Top Gun (1986). First off, I am admittedly not a huge fan of the original Top Gun, as it feels like both a commercial for fighter jet planes and an '80s music video with fast-paced editing and a high-octane soundtrack that happens to star Tom Cruise and Val Kilmer. While I respect those nostalgic for that movie, I could not emotionally relate to the film or its characters. Fast forward to seeing the long-awaited sequel in the theater, and my mind miraculously changed (about the characters). Some spoilers are included in this review, so with that out of the way, on with the review.
The movie follows U.S. Navy Captain Pete "Maverick" Mitchell (played by Tom Cruise) thirty years after graduating from Top Gun (the Navy's Strike Fighter Tactics Instructor program), where he is assigned to instruct a new generation of Top Gun graduates, including Lieutenant (junior grade) Bradley "Rooster" Bradshaw (played by Miles Teller), the son of Maverick's late best friend, Lieutenant (junior grade) Nick "Goose" Bradshaw (played by Anthony Edwards in the original), who blames Maverick for his father's death in combat. What follows is a passing of generational passing-of-the-torch from one generation of fighter pilots to the next, with plenty of fast jets and well-choreographed and edited aerial sequences and dogfights to boot.
Tom Cruise is in top form in this film (so to speak), and of all the films I have seen him in recently, this is his strongest performance yet. Also, the character development given to his character Maverick and Tom "Iceman" Kazansky (played again by Kilmer in a heartfelt cameo) is remarkable. The exploration of Maverick's internal struggles on whether he is suited to teach the younger pilots is emotionally compelling to watch; given how over thirty years have passed since the original, he is older and (slightly) wise enough not to pass down his past mistakes to his trainees like Rooster. Speaking of which, Rooster's initially estranged relationship with Maverick is riveting to watch (Teller's performance is equally strong, by the way), and seeing them learn to trust each other during combat had me more invested than the drama in the original film, which I honestly cannot remember.
The rest of the cast (including Glen Powell, Jennifer Connelly, Jon Hamm, and Ed Harris) is incredible, with each of them getting their respective times to shine. My favorite performance came from Powell as Lieutenant Jake "Hangman" Seresin, whose overwhelming charisma and charm made him a show-stealer, despite his character fundamentally being the new Iceman. Connelly works well (chemistry and character-wise) with Maverick as his new love interest, Penny Benjamin, although it does speak to Hollywood's longstanding tradition of replacing female actresses with younger and more profitable names by not bringing back Kelly McGillis while bringing back Val Kilmer (McGillis' character is shown via stock footage from the original, though). Returning to the performances, there is surprisingly more Jon Hamm in this movie than I expected. Still, he delivers solid work as Vice Admiral Beau "Cyclone" Simpson, the profoundly skeptical commander of the Naval Air Forces, who is critical of Maverick's every move as an instructor. Finally, Harris makes a brief, but memorable cameo appearance at the beginning as Maverick's superior, Rear Admiral Chester "Hammer" Cain, the head of the "Darkstar" scramjet program, where his character survives Maverick's take-off in a "Darkstar" aircraft (based on the Lockheed Martin SR-72) without flinching (the sequence was miraculously done practically in one take).
Part of what makes much of this movie work is the surprising level of emotional resonance, which is a testament to the story by Peter Craig and Justin Marks and screenplay by Ehren Kruger, Eric Warren Singer, and Christopher McQuarrie. For instance, Maverick's reunion with a terminally ill Iceman (who, like Kilmer in real life, has lost much of his ability to speak due to his battle with throat cancer) is incredibly heartfelt as he types much of his thoughts onto a computer and whispers his last words to his old friend and former rival. While this movie is recently-made, it maintains just enough technical, tonal, and emotional '80s qualities to feel like a thirty-plus-year-old film, or at the very least, a proper continuation of one (there is even a reprise of Kenny Loggins' "Danger Zone" during the opening credits). From the extensive use of practical fighter jets to the actors flying and filmmaking themselves (the actors had to learn how to light, direct, and edit themselves when operating the numerous 6K resolution cameras placed inside the cockpits), this movie does an exemplary job at putting the audience in the jets' cockpit and experiencing the white-knuckled twists, turns, and adrenaline that real-life fighter pilots experience on the field.
As stated earlier, Top Gun: Maverick is a generational passing-of-the-torch from one generation of pilots to the next but through the eyes of Tom Cruise and his daredevil-level passion for entertaining the masses at any cost. Cruise is undoubtedly an old-fashioned Hollywood diva with an appetite for repeatedly throwing himself into the face of death, and I find the final result to be an emotionally profound yet (to an extent) incredibly petty excuse for justifying Cruise, his need to perform death-defying stunts, and his past instances of outlandish antics. Simultaneously, this movie is a culmination of everything Tom Cruise has worked toward throughout his career. Regardless of my views on Cruise, I cannot deny that this is a well-made and well-crafted showcase of a movie.
As for my issues with both this movie and the original, they stem from a sociological standpoint on how the films were and will inevitably be used by the United States Army, Air Force, and Navy as a recruitment tool, i.e., imperialistic propaganda. The intentionally vague foreign adversaries and ambiguously identifiable nationalities prove that this movie was made to enforce and uphold the United States and its nationalist military complex. While this movie is well-produced, directed, acted, and undeniably entertaining, the original Top Gun and Maverick's inherent glorification of the American military complex cannot be ignored nor minimalized, as they continue to promote and uphold the United States' colonialist and imperialist status quo by maintaining the country's war machine tactics of exerting its power and dominance over other countries that they deem inferior while committing what are considered war crimes overseas.
Reviewing this film has left me torn about supporting content that supports war propaganda. However, the silent Soviet drama Battleship Potemkin (1925) is a prime instance of an essential cinematic classic and state propaganda that has been and continues to be cited by film historians and filmmakers to this day. Will historians note this movie to the same extent as Battleship Potemkin? That question is yet to be determined. Although in the meantime, this movie can be viewed as one thing: a fast-paced and thoroughly thrilling and entertaining Tom Cruise flick.
Final Score: 9 out of 10
Commenti