Hector A. Ruiz

A few days a go I watched what is arguably the most anticipated film since the pandemic, the most anticipated film of 80s nostalgia, and the most anticipated action packed film of any action film fan. Pretty much the most anticipated film in years. This review is free of spoilers.

I will start saying that generally speaking, Top Gun: Maverick was not a dissapointment. It actually was a great experience, but like Tron: Legacy, it left the following thought in my mind: “Is this it?” Unbeknownst to me, Top Gun Maverick’s director happened to be Tron Legacy’s director. Hence probably why throughout the film I kept getting this weird feeling: “This movie somehow feels very similar in tone and structure to Tron: Legacy.” After leaving the theater and critically disecting the film, I realized that the overall experience was also similar to Legacy.

Since I believe A.O. Scott from the New York Time’s already wrote what may be one of the best reviews of the film, I will simply share a quick summary of the what I liked and did not like of the film:

I liked:

• Tom Cruise. He’s terrific in his role and simply nails it. He has the magic, aura, presence and he perfectly plays Pete Mitchell, now a 50-year-old whose ego keeps writing checks his body cannot cash.
• The film felt like a real movie. No major CGI, actual stunts, great action sequences. It was great to feel that exciting feeling in a movie theater again.
• It was good to see Val Kilmer.
• Tom’s introduction at the beginning. Say what you will, but it was nice to see him thank the audience for being there.

I did not like:

• The new characters were mediocre. Definitely not on par with Iceman, Slider, Hollywood, Viper or Jester. They were one-dimensional and other than Rooster, they did not seem to have any distinct personalities.
• The line “Fifth-generation fighters.” I guess this was because of political-correctness, as it was probably inappropriate to say “Sukhois.” My issue here is that every time they said “Fifth-generation fighters“, it kind of took me out of the movie. Does our army refer to enemy aircraft as “Fifth-generation fighters” instead of calling them by their names?
• The ending was a little dragged, forced, and could have done better. It felt as if they ran out of ideas and came up with whatever they could to wrap the movie up.
• Jennifer Connelly’s character was predictable and useless. She added nothing to the plot.

Is it better than the original? No. Is it a fun film to go see in the theaters? Absolultely.

HR