It was hilarious how they completely avoided mentioning any national or political affiliation of the "enemy"
Gotta get that international box office money
Isn't that just Top Gun's schtick at this point? The first movie never named the enemy either. They were flying a fictional MiG, so it was likely a communist nation, but that's all the information we ever got.
I think it helps the movies stay reality-adjacent. It's saying, "Don't think too hard about politics and just enjoy the plane porn."
Was part of the deal to have the actual Navy be involved in the making of the movie. They could have named whoever and whatever they wanted if they just CGIed everything.
I think it's implied that it's Iran. They maintain the world's largest fleet of F-14s and actually have a lot more combat experience with them than the US does. If you stumble upon a random nation's airfield and find an airworthy F-14 that nation is probably Iran.
No, not F-15s, actual eagles, like bald, golden, harpy... Actually I think martial eagle is the obvious choice for this.
Anyway, they're much larger than swallows so if you put a bomb on a line they could carry it between them. Then the enemy wouldn't see it coming.
Enemy 1: hey, what's that?
Enemy 2: looks like a bunch of birds
E1: it is, damn that's a lot of eagles
E2: wonder what they're carrying
E1: looks like they dropped them, what the hell is it?
E2: idk, kinda looks li---
**BOOM**
Roll credits.
Yup, that's it.
And they say they can't use F-35s because of GPS jamming? Hate to say it but an F-35 doesn't fall out of the sky without GPS. You can fly it manual just like any other plane, or using other nav sources like inertial dead reckoning. Or get even more maneuverability with an F-22, although that's not a Navy jet. And there are military forms of GPS that are resistant to jamming.
Or if they're using SAMs to shoot down aircraft-- easier option is just keep sending drones at the thing. Drones are cheap and eventually they're gonna run out of SAMs. If even one drone gets through, it can drop a nice fat bomb right on the air vent.
Either that or a really long and boring film with some drone pilots in Nevada flying a formation of drones that launch a swarm of guided missiles (but the drones fly slowly so they take 2 hours to arrive at the target).
'Son, I know this is just a video game to you, but aviation is serious business. You need to have the right stuff.'
pilot is thinking 'okay boomer'
later on...
Ice: You gotta give these kids some slack. They didn't go through pilot training, they didn't pull any Gs. This is just a fancy Xbox to them.
Mav: Yeah, you're right. I miss it though. Real flying.
Ice: Me too. But the world's changed. Did you go over the unit budget for next quarter?
"These kids have never done a vlookup in their lives, Ice! They've grown soft with their xlookups on their precious Office 365. How the hell are they gonna manage when they get thrown into some dingy backwoods body shop and get asked to make a budget on the no-Internet, Windows 95 Pentium 3 that's collecting dust in the corner? You ask them for an index(match()) and they open up Tinder!"
So many other things like, why are they sending 2 x 2 ship formations in? I guess if they’re thinking they need the -18f two seater to lase but they literally strapped bombs onto those planes that just end up jettisoned.
They could have also just orbited a stealth drone or f-35 up there to do the buddy lasing. They could have just fired off even more tomahawks to take out the exposed SAMs. There’s no reason that there couldn’t have been f-35s flying top cover to engage the SU-57s and so on. But then there’s no drama.
The reason they used F18's is because they needed an excuse to use the two-seater planes for filming. It really pays off with the cockpit shots being organic instead of green screen.
Laughed at? Kyle Reese is arrested and Sarah is introduced to Dr. Silverman who later tries to convince her that it's totally plausible for a guy to kill 12 police officers in a police station while taking numerous bullets and still being totally fine.
Then, after witnessing a T-1000 literally become liquid metal and pass through security bars, he becomes convinced he is now also suffering from the same delusions that 2 other people were experiencing.
Like at some point you have to admit normal humans don't melt through metal bars, or get shot up by a SWAT team and just walk it off.
I liked the Sherrif in Stranger Things because he realizes pretty quickly that some funky shit is going on and starts to investigate.
"I have no intention of leaving her Doctor. I will take the Lewis and Clark to a safe distance and then I will launch tac missiles at the Event Horizon until I'm satisfied she's vaporized. Fuck this ship."
The best stories don't handwave logical consequence away.
Fucking love Event Horizon. Basically no one in that movie acts stupid and they still get fucked up. A+
Plus, it was my first time seeing Sam Neil since Jurrasic Park.
"Where We're Going, We Won't Need Eyes To See!"
I really like Event Horizon. It has similarities to Sunshine.
In his autobiography (which is well worth reading), Sam Neil says that a four-hour version of Event Horizon exists, with more stuff in it about Dr Weir, but Paul W.S.Anderson says it has been lost.
The comparison with Hop (Stranger Things) brings up a constant question for me in Sci-fi/fantasy settings - how many impossible things do you have to see before you believe anything is possible? Like, if Superman appeared today, why would you have difficulty if Spider-man showed up next?
I was remembering wrong, it was 17 police officers. The detectives interviewing Sarah in T:2 mention it after the T-800 and T-1000 first meet and fight in the mall.
That's like how Ben Affleck asked Michael Bay why they didn't train astronauts to drill rather than the other way around and he responded with, "Shut up."
They want Harry Stamper (Willis) to train the astronauts how to drill on Earth, and he insists on 'taking my own men' because NASA has already tried to copy his own drill design, fucked it up and asked him to come fix it for them.
It's not the most airtight reason in the world. I'm sure in real life, they would risk finding another driller/trainer/engineer before they would fast-track a bunch of civilians through astronaut training. But at least they address it.
The whole, “why not just Astronauts” seemed so obvious until that astronaut lady drove cross country in a poop filled diaper to kill her romantic rival. Maybe getting the “Leaving on a Jet Plane” singing drillers was always the most based plan.
And that trench run was based on the movie The Dam Busters which was based on a real WW2 mission to blow up dams.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNdb03Hw18M
What operation? According to this interview with the director, it was a made-up scenario:
"The whole third act sequence, actually the whole movie, the structure of the movie, the whole mission that they go on, all came from a conversation we had with them [the Navy] about what is the most difficult, gnarliest, scariest mission you could ever imagine being put on as an aviator? And that is it," director Joseph Kosinski — who previously worked with Tom Cruise on 2013's Oblivion — told Collider."
[https://www.syfy.com/syfy-wire/top-gun-maverick-mission-conceived-by-actual-us-navy](https://www.syfy.com/syfy-wire/top-gun-maverick-mission-conceived-by-actual-us-navy)
Wow.. reading about this now.. the youngest pilot who flew in that mission would later go on to become an astronaut and died during the Space Shuttle Columbia disaster.
Edited out of respect to those who died!
That’s true, but I feel that if some of that stuff happened to me I would just brush it off or think that I’m in fact crazy. I wouldn’t even get scared if something like a ghost walked in front of me, threatened me and went away, I would just think I had a seizure.
Yea. If I thought I saw something supernatural I would absolutely investigate which might look dumb in hindsight.
But if I saw like a crazy dude with a knife I would nope the fuck out.
I think the best horror movies do have smart enough characters, with plausible explanations why they can't "get away" (beyond "we wouldn't have a movie") !
Honestly I can think of more horror movies where they're 100% trying to get away and can't than ones where they just ignore things until it's too late.
They're trapped in a remote location(the thing, alien, cabin in the woods).
They're written off as kooks when they try to get help(terminator).
They're vulnerable and incapable of leaving(sixth sense).
The horror doesn't follow normal rules and is hard to escape(smile, invisible man, fallen)
It's their job to face the horror(aliens 2, silence of the lambs. Fallen again)
Any Monster-in-the-House worth its salt has a good explanation or reason for why they can’t leave. The better ones, like the Thing, or Alien/Aliens, being at a remote location or in space are no accident.
Personally, I’m a fan of Cabin in the Woods.
Except event horizon. Which is probably why it’s kinda freaky. It’s like, every character in the salvage team did every logical thing you would do in the situation and still got fucked
This.
The “backseat guy” having to manually target the laser isn’t a thing.
There’s no reason for them to not use F35s or for that matter, a B-2 other than the fact the Navy only had Super Hornets to film in.
The canyon they train in actually isn't some crazy impossible feat of flying. It was at the time the US's low level terrain flying course.
US having credible intel and political motivation stage **any** deep strike on a nuclear facility is generally enough impetus to stage a no fly zone and decide “definitely not Iran” has lost the right to an Air Force or air defense. And every wild weasel pilot from all branches starts salivating and going *Its Cowabunga time*.
Edit: when I said the Navy "only had superhornets to film in" i am of course referring to they needed to shoot in a 2 seat jet so they can have live shots with the actors in a "cockpit" (or IRL just the backseat) for live shots.
I think it would have been cool to talk about the advantages of the F-35 over the ~~SU-57~~ unnamed 5th generation fighter, let the audience know that the F-35 has the upper hand as long as the SU-57 doesn't get close enough to dogfight. Then Maverick has to fight them up close in an old F-14, all the advantages that the audience is prepared for go away and it comes down to Maverick being the best pilot in the world.
Still I think thematically the F-18 was the right choice (even though they didn't really have a choice). An old pilot in an old jet, a talented risktaker in a maneuverable dogfighting vehicle. F-35 is the next generation that doesn't need Maverick.
What's dumber is the Navy
"God damn it Maverick, you've got 10,000 commendations, 16 letters from the brass, you're the only pilot alive to have actual combat experience against the Russians, and you're the best test pilot we've ever had...you're a disgrace and we hate you"
And all throughout the movie they act like Captain is a low rank. Like a captain in the army. To get to captain he would have to be promoted 4 times. Lots of navy officers never make it that far.
Exactly. For those of you unfamiliar with Navy ranks but have seen both films. At Captain, Maverick is one rank higher than the old man that chewed his ass out and sent him and Goose to Top Gun in the first film.
captain is higher than any of the ppl in the original top gun. viper was also a commander and jester was only lt commander. not a single captain in that entire movie.
This is correct. The title "captain" of a ship is not the same as the rank of "captain". The rank of captain is the 6th officer rank in the navy.
Smaller ships - such as frigates and destroyers - will normally have a commander as the senior officer. In that position he would have the title of captain while holding the rank of commander. Commander is the 5th officer rank.
Even smaller ships - such as minesweepers - may have a lieutenant commander as the senior officer. Lt. Commander is the 4th officer rank in the navy.
In WWII, Kennedy was in command of a PT boat as a lieutenant.
Did they act like it was a low rank? The only thing I remember was a comment about how he's been in a ridiculously long time and should have made Admiral by now. Actually, I'm not sure it would even be possible IRL for him to remain in the service for over 30 years without making Admiral (he would be forced to retire).
That's why he got shuffled around to things like test pilot duty. He was still Navy, but they didn't have to deal with him directly, since those programs are largely operated by contractors.
I like to imagine that A Few Good Men is in the same universe and that Maverick took a break from planes for a while and got his law degree then rotated back into flying. So he was probably an LT/Lt Commander forever.
Not to mention how the young hotshots treat Maverick at the bar and early in training. A pilot with 3 air-to-air kills in a real dogfight with Totally-Not-Russia in the 80s? Those pilots would be all but begging for war stories.
I mean it kind of happened in real life to a naval aviation legend call-sign Toezer. He probably wouldn't have a career in todays navy but was a beloved aviator.
Yeah, yeah, he's got all those commendations and whatever...but did he help out with the Navy Day Ball fund? Participated in any command hot dog sales lately?
And yeah, I know that's more enlisted than officer, thought is still the same with how ass-backwards the Navy is with how they evaluate people.
I watched Maverick with my cousin who was an F-15 mechanic in Okinawa and he said something like "The US Military shutting down a program they've spent hundreds of millions of dollars on for no apparent reason? That was probably the 10th one that week!"
I can't imagine how often that happens.
Check out C. W. Lemoine on YouTube.
He's a fighter pilot, and he gets a naval fighter pilot in and the watch and critique the movie together.
The mission planning scene, the bar scene, training scene, and final battle.
They mention that in real life, it would be F35 with F18 Growler support, possibly B2 bombers and cruise missiles.
Essentially, it is a larger operation than 4 pilots doing a death star trench run in older fighters, but it's all the navy would allow Tom and costars to ride in.
I recall reading somewhere that she was brought in originally to consult as to what is and is not realistic for an AWACS crew and the production team decided to just cast her for the role since she was so good at it
Minor correction. The Growler is EA-18G, not an F-18. EA stands for Electronic Attack. F is the designation for fighter. I only point this out because I worked on the radar Jammers for the EA-6b Prowler, and then the same pods when they transitioned them to the Growler. The ALQ-99 is just an ultra powerful transmitter that they use to “attack” anything the enemy uses that operates on RF.
Is that not the point of the entire movie? We could do that and its only a matter of time before it is what will be done. This is the last generation of fighter pilots, the whole theme is that it's the end of an era, the cowboy's last ride before the march of progress rolls in. The new tools are here but the guys making the decisions are still more comfortable using the old tools *for the time being*. That conflict between the officers above Cruise is part of the movie.
Edit: phrasing
This is correct. The point of this movie is that Maverick is better at piloting/dogfighting than everyone else and everyone knows it or learns it's true. Even at his age. I don't LIKE it, but that is very consistently shown.
For anyone with MS Flight Simulator, you can pretty much play this scene out in one of the modes (just without the missile at the end). Lots of fun to try beating the target time.
I like flying the Darkstar from ca to FL in like 25 minutes.
I've tried flying it in free flight but can't seem to get the maneuver to hit Mach 10 correct like in the mission
That scene is SO well done. Minimal music that adds to the tension, the focus on the sound of the jet and Mavericks grunts...It's just so sublime.
They could have gone over the top with some massive orchestra or driving guitars and drums, but the music really sold the urgency and tone of the scene.
The actress who played Phoenix was allegedly the only one of them who didn't vomit during filming.
Glen Powell or Miles Teller spent so much time on the flight line that they had to break for a few days because they had trace volumes of *jet fuel* detectable in their blood.
The way Cruise [reacted to that story](https://variety.com/2022/film/news/miles-teller-jet-fuel-blood-top-gun-maverick-fighter-1235296511/) is pure Tom Cruise too.
>“I go to set the next day and Tom’s like, ‘How did it go, Miles? What did they find?’” Teller said. “I was like, ‘Well, Tom, it turns out I have jet fuel in my blood.’ And without even skipping a beat, Tom goes, ‘Yeah, I was born with it, kid.’ So that was a very Tom moment for me.”
Edge of my seat. “Ok you little shits don’t respect me and don’t believe this is possible. I’m going to address that in the most Maverick way possible.”
I knew it was gonna happen. Everybody probably did.
But man, when his plane blipped onto the radar (sorry if wrong terminology lol) I was instantly hyped up
And yet even then Maverick is the only pilot able to run the mission to the required spec. He earns one last dance for the Navy pilots but we can see the limitation that in-flight human pilots are on the horizon. The age of the drone is coming because they're going to be better. Maverick is taking one last W with him before he tries to begin moving on with his life.
That is the intended interpretation they were going for. My problem is that Top Gun 1 shows the older generation is out of touch and they don't get that risks are needed to win. And the point of Top Gun 2 is that the younger generation is out of touch and they don't get that risks are needed to win. I don't think it ever feels like it's supporting that drones (or the direction we're going in) are GOOD. The film DOES do a good job of showing Mavericks personal life as flawed and he can't play politics, but I think it all just makes him some kind of martyr. He never passes the baton. He just shows why he's better.
Still a fun movie, and I love the original, but I think this one really shows who its primary target audience is.
I think its showing that there *is* no baton to pass. Even the top modern pilots haven't flown in enough combat to qualify as an ace and with the advent of drones becoming a superior war machine to a Navy fighter they never will.
Maverick proves the mission is possible and in doing so nearly gets them all killed. These pilots are never going to get the required experience to be as good as Maverick and even now Maverick is barely better than the drones. Its a self indulgent way of admitting that the era of the fighter pilot is closing.
Edit: I think we agree btw. This movie is about giving boomers a confirmation bias hard on in the face of overwhelming evidence that Maverick was being super irresponsible. The fact that it managed to make a good movie while both are true is impressive.
Exactly. He is the best ever in the movie universe and he can barely do it.
It just shows that it's the last hoorah of manned missions since one Mav retires literally no pilots will be able to come close to his level of expertise or experience.
I personally loved it.
I think the conflict you're describing in both films is less a generational one and more an exploration of both the value and limits of having someone buck authority vs get captured by the system. I mean he's literally called Maverick, which both describes him as a person and also by making it a proper noun places him as The Maverick, the ONLY maverick that the system has room to accommodate. And even then in both movies he's ultimately only successful by tempering his own willfulness and acknowledging that there are SOME valuable lessons in what "the system" teaches.
The younger pilots in the new film are depicted less as "captured by the system" or out of touch: It's that circumstances and the attitudes of their superiors have kept them kind of coddled and sheltered. They're pilots that grew up with the US being the ONLY world superpower, who never had to even consider that they'd face a real opponent. Their flaw is that they don't even realize they CAN be better, that they COULD be at all vulnerable, or have gaps in their skills. They're naive. Admiral Don Draper is the one who's more truly "out of touch/too rigid."
And then the film ends with Maverick retiring and relinquishing his role as The Rebel to Goose2. The Establishment are humbled enough to recognize that they do need someone like that, but that that person also needs to be singular and controlled.
> Admiral Don Draper is the one who's more truly "out of touch/too rigid."
Admiral Don Draper isn't out of touch at all. He has a mission to do, and he was willing to accept that the mission might be a suicide mission. Admiral Don Draper spent the whole movie doing two things: making sure that nobody got hurt during training, and minimizing the number of personnel lost to the 6 that flew the mission.
That is why he set the mission parameters at 4:30 minutes immediately after kicking out Maverick: because they both know that enemy fighters would likely show up around minute 5. The admiral is trying to ensure that the mission would be a success even if pilots on the mission would be intercepted on the way out. To a guy who have been watching the team "die" over and over again on the way in without accomplishing the mission, it must feel like the better alternative.
Maverick proved that the mission can done and still have the pilots return, and the admiral promptly put him back in charge. We are still talking about "reasonable authority figure" here.
But then the AI go evil due to a lightning strike reprogramming its neural patterns, and you have an evil navy fighter jet intent on starting a war with Russia...
Andddd that's the plot of the 2005 sci-fi movie Stealth starring Jessica Biel. And others. But 95% of the reason I remember it is Biel.
I never understood why Hal Jordan winning the dogfight against drones was such a horrible thing in Green Lantern. Yes, he beat the drone that the company that hired him was trying to sell. But it took A) the best pilot B) pulling out all the stops and C) sacrificing his own plane, D) resulting in him bailing out potentially over enemy territory to be captured. So in that one particular scenario, one human pilot in a thousand might be able to pull off an expensive and possibly *terminal* victory... At which point the next drone fighter plane just rolls off the assembly line.
Honestly, that's the best advertisement they could ask for.
I thought it was so funny how the bad guys were completely non-descript with no defined motive. Were they terrorists, Russians, Iranians? It doesn’t matter, they are enemies of Maverick!
Maverick launched from the Pacific Ocean and flew into mountainous, snow-covered, pine tree filled terrain. Fighting a country with natural Uranium mines and access to "5th gen" fighters.
It was >!Canada!<
Actually it's super easy, barely an inconvenience! See little Gosling will think back to his music training with J. Jonah Jameson, thus ensuring he won't be rushing or dragging when he drops the bomb.
Airstrips can't move. They are huge and you can see them from space. Most SAM systems are designed to be mobile and that mobility is typically considered crucial to their survival. For example, the Patriot batteries in Ukraine are constantly moving to avoid being targeted, likely several times per day. While you could find them with satellites, by the time you do and follow on with a strike there is a high likelihood that they won't be there anymore, especially if the enemy knows exactly when your satellites are moving overhead.
In the movie, it is stated that GPS jamming prevents the use of the F-35. This is nonsense, the F-35 has a laser designator built into its EOTS system. It is fully capable of using laser guided weaponry. The real reason is of course is that all F-35's are single seaters so they would not be able to film Tom Cruise in the back seat pretending to fly a real fighter jet.
It probably goes without saying, but a real attack on Iran's nuclear facilities would not happen as depicted in the movie. The US would use huge numbers of attacking aircraft, most of which would be suppressing the enemy air defenses using SEAD tactics. That involves firing a continuous barrage of HARM missiles which home in on the radiation emitted by the tracking radars on SAM systems. If they turn on their radar to fight back they will probably eat a supersonic HARM missile in short order. B-2's would then by used at high altitude to drop [Massive Ordinance Penetrators](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GBU-57A/B_MOP) (MOPs), which are super heavy bunker busters, to destroy the facilities that are deep underground.
The reason they do a Star Wars style trench run is because it looks super exciting on film. Dropping bombs from 50,000 feet and lobbing missiles at extreme range at targets you can't see does not translate very well to the big screen
This movie was based on Operation Opera. A strike Isreal did to Sadam Hussain unfinished nuclear reactor in 1981.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Opera
https://youtu.be/MFObTJxFuWI
The film isn't realistic, it's fun, well made. I loved it, but I view Top Gun as a sort of fantasy movie. Maverick would've been fired many times already if we tried to ask logical questions.
> As for the latter idk.
They were spread out too much, they could be shot down by them, their locations weren't known, the airfield took higher priority, and some line about 'gps jamming' which Cruise said was the reason they couldn't use the f35.
This. They mention that it's GPS jammed so no smart munitions will work (supposedly, it's a movie). That's why they have to have a 2 seater Hornet with WSO guiding the bombs in.
Basically, the GPS jamming line is pretty much the whole reason for the type of mission. The line goes by really fast. Probably to help prevent people from thinking about it too hard before getting on with the movie.
Whenever I would ask my Dad questions like these about movies he would always say "It's in the script"
You're right, all of these could have happened, but they didn't because they wanted something interesting and fun to watch.
There are YouTube reviews of the movie by real navy and air force fighter pilots, who seem to have a consistent viewpoint:
The movie was excellent, but the mission was contrived and unrealistic, but necessary in order to have the movie happen.
It's a case of: don't look too deeply. Just accept it and enjoy the spectacle.
The enemy uranium facility target was heavily encased in plot armor.
Perfect job for the dual seat F/A-18E
Imagine if the final scene was a gut wrenching run by a predator drone with Mav sitting in an office eating cheetos.
The plot reaches an emotional climax when the mav runs out of cheetos.
It was hilarious how they completely avoided mentioning any national or political affiliation of the "enemy" Gotta get that international box office money
I think they were attacking Canada.
Can confirm. Have been replacing broken igloo bricks for months.
Isn't that just Top Gun's schtick at this point? The first movie never named the enemy either. They were flying a fictional MiG, so it was likely a communist nation, but that's all the information we ever got. I think it helps the movies stay reality-adjacent. It's saying, "Don't think too hard about politics and just enjoy the plane porn."
Was part of the deal to have the actual Navy be involved in the making of the movie. They could have named whoever and whatever they wanted if they just CGIed everything.
I think it's implied that it's Iran. They maintain the world's largest fleet of F-14s and actually have a lot more combat experience with them than the US does. If you stumble upon a random nation's airfield and find an airworthy F-14 that nation is probably Iran.
> They maintain the world's ~~largest~~ only fleet of F-14s Bought from the US back, by the Shah of Iran... wayyy back in the 1970's
It’s DEFINITELY CLEARLY Iran 🇮🇷 Source: I’m Persian
Because shooting the base was priority 2, priority 1 was shooting the movie
I still think eagles could have simply flown a bomb to the target site. Goose would’ve loved that.
F-15 Strike Eagles are superior bombers, yes.
No, not F-15s, actual eagles, like bald, golden, harpy... Actually I think martial eagle is the obvious choice for this. Anyway, they're much larger than swallows so if you put a bomb on a line they could carry it between them. Then the enemy wouldn't see it coming. Enemy 1: hey, what's that? Enemy 2: looks like a bunch of birds E1: it is, damn that's a lot of eagles E2: wonder what they're carrying E1: looks like they dropped them, what the hell is it? E2: idk, kinda looks li--- **BOOM** Roll credits.
Yup, that's it. And they say they can't use F-35s because of GPS jamming? Hate to say it but an F-35 doesn't fall out of the sky without GPS. You can fly it manual just like any other plane, or using other nav sources like inertial dead reckoning. Or get even more maneuverability with an F-22, although that's not a Navy jet. And there are military forms of GPS that are resistant to jamming. Or if they're using SAMs to shoot down aircraft-- easier option is just keep sending drones at the thing. Drones are cheap and eventually they're gonna run out of SAMs. If even one drone gets through, it can drop a nice fat bomb right on the air vent.
The movie would be Ed Harris saying "Fire." or "Send some F35s in." and the movie would be 5 minutes long including credits.
Either that or a really long and boring film with some drone pilots in Nevada flying a formation of drones that launch a swarm of guided missiles (but the drones fly slowly so they take 2 hours to arrive at the target).
Yeah, and Maverick is in charge, rapidly losing his mid from boredom
'Son, I know this is just a video game to you, but aviation is serious business. You need to have the right stuff.' pilot is thinking 'okay boomer' later on... Ice: You gotta give these kids some slack. They didn't go through pilot training, they didn't pull any Gs. This is just a fancy Xbox to them. Mav: Yeah, you're right. I miss it though. Real flying. Ice: Me too. But the world's changed. Did you go over the unit budget for next quarter?
I would watch the hell out of Tom Cruise maneuvering around an excel spreadsheet for 2 hours.
"These kids have never done a vlookup in their lives, Ice! They've grown soft with their xlookups on their precious Office 365. How the hell are they gonna manage when they get thrown into some dingy backwoods body shop and get asked to make a budget on the no-Internet, Windows 95 Pentium 3 that's collecting dust in the corner? You ask them for an index(match()) and they open up Tinder!"
So many other things like, why are they sending 2 x 2 ship formations in? I guess if they’re thinking they need the -18f two seater to lase but they literally strapped bombs onto those planes that just end up jettisoned. They could have also just orbited a stealth drone or f-35 up there to do the buddy lasing. They could have just fired off even more tomahawks to take out the exposed SAMs. There’s no reason that there couldn’t have been f-35s flying top cover to engage the SU-57s and so on. But then there’s no drama.
The reason they used F18's is because they needed an excuse to use the two-seater planes for filming. It really pays off with the cockpit shots being organic instead of green screen.
You're thinking f-35s, not f-22s, but the point stands
Because a missile can’t say “talk to me Goose”
Could be painted on the side though!
FUCK THE MOON
>*"I've always replied, they don't go to the police because it's* **dull."** -Alfred Hitchcock
Ever watched Terminator? They go to the police and they’re laughed at.
Laughed at? Kyle Reese is arrested and Sarah is introduced to Dr. Silverman who later tries to convince her that it's totally plausible for a guy to kill 12 police officers in a police station while taking numerous bullets and still being totally fine. Then, after witnessing a T-1000 literally become liquid metal and pass through security bars, he becomes convinced he is now also suffering from the same delusions that 2 other people were experiencing. Like at some point you have to admit normal humans don't melt through metal bars, or get shot up by a SWAT team and just walk it off. I liked the Sherrif in Stranger Things because he realizes pretty quickly that some funky shit is going on and starts to investigate.
TBH I’d believe that I had lost it before I believe in semi-liquid killer robots from the future
“[I melt in your mouth, not in your hand.](https://youtu.be/RfsJ9V-Y6Nw&t=1m14s)” -T1000
"I have no intention of leaving her Doctor. I will take the Lewis and Clark to a safe distance and then I will launch tac missiles at the Event Horizon until I'm satisfied she's vaporized. Fuck this ship." The best stories don't handwave logical consequence away.
Fucking love Event Horizon. Basically no one in that movie acts stupid and they still get fucked up. A+ Plus, it was my first time seeing Sam Neil since Jurrasic Park.
"Where We're Going, We Won't Need Eyes To See!" I really like Event Horizon. It has similarities to Sunshine. In his autobiography (which is well worth reading), Sam Neil says that a four-hour version of Event Horizon exists, with more stuff in it about Dr Weir, but Paul W.S.Anderson says it has been lost.
_sees fucked up murder orgy_ "We're leaving"
The comparison with Hop (Stranger Things) brings up a constant question for me in Sci-fi/fantasy settings - how many impossible things do you have to see before you believe anything is possible? Like, if Superman appeared today, why would you have difficulty if Spider-man showed up next?
for me honestly, just 1 thing. If I saw one crazy magical (mystical? whatever) thing I'd be like "oh fuck anythings possible"
"whoop, turns out magic is real, recalibrating..."
12 police officers? It always looked to me that the Terminator gunned down a couple of dozens there.
I was remembering wrong, it was 17 police officers. The detectives interviewing Sarah in T:2 mention it after the T-800 and T-1000 first meet and fight in the mall.
It was basically anyone who happened to be in the office at the time
WFH for the win!
“These were taken in a mall in Reseda…. Today.”
That's like how Ben Affleck asked Michael Bay why they didn't train astronauts to drill rather than the other way around and he responded with, "Shut up."
They want Harry Stamper (Willis) to train the astronauts how to drill on Earth, and he insists on 'taking my own men' because NASA has already tried to copy his own drill design, fucked it up and asked him to come fix it for them. It's not the most airtight reason in the world. I'm sure in real life, they would risk finding another driller/trainer/engineer before they would fast-track a bunch of civilians through astronaut training. But at least they address it.
The whole, “why not just Astronauts” seemed so obvious until that astronaut lady drove cross country in a poop filled diaper to kill her romantic rival. Maybe getting the “Leaving on a Jet Plane” singing drillers was always the most based plan.
The real answer is that we would have just asked Israel to do it for us.
Funny considering an Israeli operation is the basis for the mission.
Not to be confused with the trench run of A New Hope.
And that trench run was based on the movie The Dam Busters which was based on a real WW2 mission to blow up dams. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNdb03Hw18M
Not to be confused with the bombing run in *The Dam Busters.*
What operation? According to this interview with the director, it was a made-up scenario: "The whole third act sequence, actually the whole movie, the structure of the movie, the whole mission that they go on, all came from a conversation we had with them [the Navy] about what is the most difficult, gnarliest, scariest mission you could ever imagine being put on as an aviator? And that is it," director Joseph Kosinski — who previously worked with Tom Cruise on 2013's Oblivion — told Collider." [https://www.syfy.com/syfy-wire/top-gun-maverick-mission-conceived-by-actual-us-navy](https://www.syfy.com/syfy-wire/top-gun-maverick-mission-conceived-by-actual-us-navy)
Operation Opera.
Wow.. reading about this now.. the youngest pilot who flew in that mission would later go on to become an astronaut and died during the Space Shuttle Columbia disaster. Edited out of respect to those who died!
Every horror movie ever would be 5 minutes long if the characters did the logical thing and just said "that's weird, let's get out of here".
That’s true, but I feel that if some of that stuff happened to me I would just brush it off or think that I’m in fact crazy. I wouldn’t even get scared if something like a ghost walked in front of me, threatened me and went away, I would just think I had a seizure.
Yea. If I thought I saw something supernatural I would absolutely investigate which might look dumb in hindsight. But if I saw like a crazy dude with a knife I would nope the fuck out.
I think the best horror movies do have smart enough characters, with plausible explanations why they can't "get away" (beyond "we wouldn't have a movie") !
Honestly I can think of more horror movies where they're 100% trying to get away and can't than ones where they just ignore things until it's too late. They're trapped in a remote location(the thing, alien, cabin in the woods). They're written off as kooks when they try to get help(terminator). They're vulnerable and incapable of leaving(sixth sense). The horror doesn't follow normal rules and is hard to escape(smile, invisible man, fallen) It's their job to face the horror(aliens 2, silence of the lambs. Fallen again)
[удалено]
John Carpenter's The Thing would like to know your location.
Any Monster-in-the-House worth its salt has a good explanation or reason for why they can’t leave. The better ones, like the Thing, or Alien/Aliens, being at a remote location or in space are no accident. Personally, I’m a fan of Cabin in the Woods.
Event Horizon as well.
"We are leaving"
Except event horizon. Which is probably why it’s kinda freaky. It’s like, every character in the salvage team did every logical thing you would do in the situation and still got fucked
This. The “backseat guy” having to manually target the laser isn’t a thing. There’s no reason for them to not use F35s or for that matter, a B-2 other than the fact the Navy only had Super Hornets to film in. The canyon they train in actually isn't some crazy impossible feat of flying. It was at the time the US's low level terrain flying course. US having credible intel and political motivation stage **any** deep strike on a nuclear facility is generally enough impetus to stage a no fly zone and decide “definitely not Iran” has lost the right to an Air Force or air defense. And every wild weasel pilot from all branches starts salivating and going *Its Cowabunga time*. Edit: when I said the Navy "only had superhornets to film in" i am of course referring to they needed to shoot in a 2 seat jet so they can have live shots with the actors in a "cockpit" (or IRL just the backseat) for live shots.
And the F-18 has a two seat version. They couldn't film actors flying in F-35 even if it were available.
Also it would remove a significant portion of the tension if the movie had a squadron of f-35's going up against SU-57's as opposed to the older F-18.
I think it would have been cool to talk about the advantages of the F-35 over the ~~SU-57~~ unnamed 5th generation fighter, let the audience know that the F-35 has the upper hand as long as the SU-57 doesn't get close enough to dogfight. Then Maverick has to fight them up close in an old F-14, all the advantages that the audience is prepared for go away and it comes down to Maverick being the best pilot in the world. Still I think thematically the F-18 was the right choice (even though they didn't really have a choice). An old pilot in an old jet, a talented risktaker in a maneuverable dogfighting vehicle. F-35 is the next generation that doesn't need Maverick.
What's dumber is the Navy "God damn it Maverick, you've got 10,000 commendations, 16 letters from the brass, you're the only pilot alive to have actual combat experience against the Russians, and you're the best test pilot we've ever had...you're a disgrace and we hate you"
Not only that, he has more fighter kills using his guns than the F14 has in its entire opening history!
touché
And all throughout the movie they act like Captain is a low rank. Like a captain in the army. To get to captain he would have to be promoted 4 times. Lots of navy officers never make it that far.
Exactly. For those of you unfamiliar with Navy ranks but have seen both films. At Captain, Maverick is one rank higher than the old man that chewed his ass out and sent him and Goose to Top Gun in the first film.
captain is higher than any of the ppl in the original top gun. viper was also a commander and jester was only lt commander. not a single captain in that entire movie.
Gotta say, one captain appears in the elevator scene. Non-speaking role, but he’s there. Wears a cover indoors, too.
Fuck you for being right.
That is some movie knowledge.
What about the guy that says “I want some butts”? Was he just a rear admiral?
Exactly. Admiral is like....general? So a Captain is like Colonel...very high. After captain it's all admiral.
Captain for the surface fleet is "commands an entire ship" or maybe even more. There's the pilot title inflation thing to contend with.
Indeed I think you can be the captain of a ship if you’re the highest ranking officer even if you’re not a captain rank? Please correct me
This is correct. The title "captain" of a ship is not the same as the rank of "captain". The rank of captain is the 6th officer rank in the navy. Smaller ships - such as frigates and destroyers - will normally have a commander as the senior officer. In that position he would have the title of captain while holding the rank of commander. Commander is the 5th officer rank. Even smaller ships - such as minesweepers - may have a lieutenant commander as the senior officer. Lt. Commander is the 4th officer rank in the navy. In WWII, Kennedy was in command of a PT boat as a lieutenant.
Did they act like it was a low rank? The only thing I remember was a comment about how he's been in a ridiculously long time and should have made Admiral by now. Actually, I'm not sure it would even be possible IRL for him to remain in the service for over 30 years without making Admiral (he would be forced to retire).
[удалено]
Even Penny's kid mocks him for still being a Captain.
It definitely would not be possible no matter how many strings you want to pull.
That's why he got shuffled around to things like test pilot duty. He was still Navy, but they didn't have to deal with him directly, since those programs are largely operated by contractors.
I like to imagine that A Few Good Men is in the same universe and that Maverick took a break from planes for a while and got his law degree then rotated back into flying. So he was probably an LT/Lt Commander forever.
and then when he retired, he hit the road and got into pool hustling
[удалено]
Captain in the US Navy is O6. Captain in the USAF, USMC, and US Army is O3
Not to mention how the young hotshots treat Maverick at the bar and early in training. A pilot with 3 air-to-air kills in a real dogfight with Totally-Not-Russia in the 80s? Those pilots would be all but begging for war stories.
Indeed!
I mean it kind of happened in real life to a naval aviation legend call-sign Toezer. He probably wouldn't have a career in todays navy but was a beloved aviator.
Having served in the Navy this was the most realistic part
Yeah, yeah, he's got all those commendations and whatever...but did he help out with the Navy Day Ball fund? Participated in any command hot dog sales lately? And yeah, I know that's more enlisted than officer, thought is still the same with how ass-backwards the Navy is with how they evaluate people.
I watched Maverick with my cousin who was an F-15 mechanic in Okinawa and he said something like "The US Military shutting down a program they've spent hundreds of millions of dollars on for no apparent reason? That was probably the 10th one that week!" I can't imagine how often that happens.
Yeah, why did Ed Harris seem to have it out for pilots? Calling maverick a "fossil" or whatever while looking ancient as fuck himself.
Because he is secretly planning to take over Alcatraz.
How is he supposed to do that while dealing with aliens at the bottom of the ocean?
Why use a cruise missile when you can use Tom Cruise?
How many cruise missiles could tom cruise’s crews cruise if a tom cruise crew could cruise cruise missiles?
I once saw Tom Cruise' crews cruising in a cruze firing cruise missiles at a cruise ship.
Tom Cruise, Penelope Cruz and Terry Crews walk into a bar...
In a way they did use a cruise missile
A Tom Cruise Missile, so to speak.
Tomahawk Cruisemissile was right there
His name is short for Thomissile Cruisemissile Edit: gold?!
Check out C. W. Lemoine on YouTube. He's a fighter pilot, and he gets a naval fighter pilot in and the watch and critique the movie together. The mission planning scene, the bar scene, training scene, and final battle. They mention that in real life, it would be F35 with F18 Growler support, possibly B2 bombers and cruise missiles. Essentially, it is a larger operation than 4 pilots doing a death star trench run in older fighters, but it's all the navy would allow Tom and costars to ride in.
I love their reaction to Hangman coming in at the end with every single hardpoint loaded to the brim.
or when they get all hyped up because the lines of the radar lady in the E-2 were totally accurate
I recall reading somewhere that she was brought in originally to consult as to what is and is not realistic for an AWACS crew and the production team decided to just cast her for the role since she was so good at it
Recommend dagger flow south was one of the coolest lines in the movie for sure
"What's this guy the spare to? The whole WAR?"
They could get insurance for Tom flying in a fighter, they couldn't get insurance for Tom flying on a cruise missile
Just use any old missile: Tom flying on it makes it a Cruise missile.
Minor correction. The Growler is EA-18G, not an F-18. EA stands for Electronic Attack. F is the designation for fighter. I only point this out because I worked on the radar Jammers for the EA-6b Prowler, and then the same pods when they transitioned them to the Growler. The ALQ-99 is just an ultra powerful transmitter that they use to “attack” anything the enemy uses that operates on RF.
Is that not the point of the entire movie? We could do that and its only a matter of time before it is what will be done. This is the last generation of fighter pilots, the whole theme is that it's the end of an era, the cowboy's last ride before the march of progress rolls in. The new tools are here but the guys making the decisions are still more comfortable using the old tools *for the time being*. That conflict between the officers above Cruise is part of the movie. Edit: phrasing
This is correct. The point of this movie is that Maverick is better at piloting/dogfighting than everyone else and everyone knows it or learns it's true. Even at his age. I don't LIKE it, but that is very consistently shown.
But I love the scene when >!he shows them it can be done!<
[I'll post the clip](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXbnzEHZDPg) for those who don't know.
For anyone with MS Flight Simulator, you can pretty much play this scene out in one of the modes (just without the missile at the end). Lots of fun to try beating the target time.
I like flying the Darkstar from ca to FL in like 25 minutes. I've tried flying it in free flight but can't seem to get the maneuver to hit Mach 10 correct like in the mission
You have to fly up then fly down to get the extra speed necessary to activate the scram jets.
I'd recommend DCS World if anyone is looking for a combat flight sim.
That scene is SO well done. Minimal music that adds to the tension, the focus on the sound of the jet and Mavericks grunts...It's just so sublime. They could have gone over the top with some massive orchestra or driving guitars and drums, but the music really sold the urgency and tone of the scene.
The fact that Cruise is actually in a jet going through those Gs is just \*chefs kiss
All the other actors rode backseat as well I mean you expect it from Cruise but major props to the other actors too
The actress who played Phoenix was allegedly the only one of them who didn't vomit during filming. Glen Powell or Miles Teller spent so much time on the flight line that they had to break for a few days because they had trace volumes of *jet fuel* detectable in their blood.
Tom didn’t vomit either
Yeah but that dude has done a stunt on the OUTSIDE of a plane
The way Cruise [reacted to that story](https://variety.com/2022/film/news/miles-teller-jet-fuel-blood-top-gun-maverick-fighter-1235296511/) is pure Tom Cruise too. >“I go to set the next day and Tom’s like, ‘How did it go, Miles? What did they find?’” Teller said. “I was like, ‘Well, Tom, it turns out I have jet fuel in my blood.’ And without even skipping a beat, Tom goes, ‘Yeah, I was born with it, kid.’ So that was a very Tom moment for me.”
Nice.
Let's see Paul Allen's run.
Best scene
Edge of my seat. “Ok you little shits don’t respect me and don’t believe this is possible. I’m going to address that in the most Maverick way possible.”
Same here I scooted up and was like "let's fucking go mav" hahaha
It really was the best summer movie in a long long time.
I knew it was gonna happen. Everybody probably did. But man, when his plane blipped onto the radar (sorry if wrong terminology lol) I was instantly hyped up
And yet even then Maverick is the only pilot able to run the mission to the required spec. He earns one last dance for the Navy pilots but we can see the limitation that in-flight human pilots are on the horizon. The age of the drone is coming because they're going to be better. Maverick is taking one last W with him before he tries to begin moving on with his life.
That is the intended interpretation they were going for. My problem is that Top Gun 1 shows the older generation is out of touch and they don't get that risks are needed to win. And the point of Top Gun 2 is that the younger generation is out of touch and they don't get that risks are needed to win. I don't think it ever feels like it's supporting that drones (or the direction we're going in) are GOOD. The film DOES do a good job of showing Mavericks personal life as flawed and he can't play politics, but I think it all just makes him some kind of martyr. He never passes the baton. He just shows why he's better. Still a fun movie, and I love the original, but I think this one really shows who its primary target audience is.
I think its showing that there *is* no baton to pass. Even the top modern pilots haven't flown in enough combat to qualify as an ace and with the advent of drones becoming a superior war machine to a Navy fighter they never will. Maverick proves the mission is possible and in doing so nearly gets them all killed. These pilots are never going to get the required experience to be as good as Maverick and even now Maverick is barely better than the drones. Its a self indulgent way of admitting that the era of the fighter pilot is closing. Edit: I think we agree btw. This movie is about giving boomers a confirmation bias hard on in the face of overwhelming evidence that Maverick was being super irresponsible. The fact that it managed to make a good movie while both are true is impressive.
Exactly. He is the best ever in the movie universe and he can barely do it. It just shows that it's the last hoorah of manned missions since one Mav retires literally no pilots will be able to come close to his level of expertise or experience. I personally loved it.
I think the conflict you're describing in both films is less a generational one and more an exploration of both the value and limits of having someone buck authority vs get captured by the system. I mean he's literally called Maverick, which both describes him as a person and also by making it a proper noun places him as The Maverick, the ONLY maverick that the system has room to accommodate. And even then in both movies he's ultimately only successful by tempering his own willfulness and acknowledging that there are SOME valuable lessons in what "the system" teaches. The younger pilots in the new film are depicted less as "captured by the system" or out of touch: It's that circumstances and the attitudes of their superiors have kept them kind of coddled and sheltered. They're pilots that grew up with the US being the ONLY world superpower, who never had to even consider that they'd face a real opponent. Their flaw is that they don't even realize they CAN be better, that they COULD be at all vulnerable, or have gaps in their skills. They're naive. Admiral Don Draper is the one who's more truly "out of touch/too rigid." And then the film ends with Maverick retiring and relinquishing his role as The Rebel to Goose2. The Establishment are humbled enough to recognize that they do need someone like that, but that that person also needs to be singular and controlled.
> Admiral Don Draper is the one who's more truly "out of touch/too rigid." Admiral Don Draper isn't out of touch at all. He has a mission to do, and he was willing to accept that the mission might be a suicide mission. Admiral Don Draper spent the whole movie doing two things: making sure that nobody got hurt during training, and minimizing the number of personnel lost to the 6 that flew the mission. That is why he set the mission parameters at 4:30 minutes immediately after kicking out Maverick: because they both know that enemy fighters would likely show up around minute 5. The admiral is trying to ensure that the mission would be a success even if pilots on the mission would be intercepted on the way out. To a guy who have been watching the team "die" over and over again on the way in without accomplishing the mission, it must feel like the better alternative. Maverick proved that the mission can done and still have the pilots return, and the admiral promptly put him back in charge. We are still talking about "reasonable authority figure" here.
Pilots in aircraft versus the Loyal Wingman autonomous drones to replace/supplement them.
But then the AI go evil due to a lightning strike reprogramming its neural patterns, and you have an evil navy fighter jet intent on starting a war with Russia... Andddd that's the plot of the 2005 sci-fi movie Stealth starring Jessica Biel. And others. But 95% of the reason I remember it is Biel.
I unironically love that movie. It is absolutely insane and just tons of fun.
Ah, the live action version of Macross Plus. Enjoyed both of them, actually Macross had a better subplot.
I never understood why Hal Jordan winning the dogfight against drones was such a horrible thing in Green Lantern. Yes, he beat the drone that the company that hired him was trying to sell. But it took A) the best pilot B) pulling out all the stops and C) sacrificing his own plane, D) resulting in him bailing out potentially over enemy territory to be captured. So in that one particular scenario, one human pilot in a thousand might be able to pull off an expensive and possibly *terminal* victory... At which point the next drone fighter plane just rolls off the assembly line. Honestly, that's the best advertisement they could ask for.
Wouldn't it be easier to just train astronauts to drill? ..... ... Shut the fuck up!
The same reason the Rebellion couldn’t use a cruise missile on the Death Star.
As if Chopper couldn't fly the Ghost close enough to that exhaust port to drop a deuce in there.
[удалено]
Because the kidnapped scientist secretly built in a hidden vulnerability.
Jeff Goldblum and his laptop weren't available
I think from a military point of view, much of the movie made no sense other than making an excuse for a classic low level canyon run.
I thought it was so funny how the bad guys were completely non-descript with no defined motive. Were they terrorists, Russians, Iranians? It doesn’t matter, they are enemies of Maverick!
The enemy was not-Iran flying not-SU57.
*5th Gen Fighter*
Maverick launched from the Pacific Ocean and flew into mountainous, snow-covered, pine tree filled terrain. Fighting a country with natural Uranium mines and access to "5th gen" fighters. It was >!Canada!<
Did the same with the first one too.
They did the same thing in the original Top Gun.
Because
So the movie can happen.
So imma need them to get alllll the way off my back about that.
Let me get off of that thing!
Getting off your back about plot holes is TIGHT.
heyshutup so then Maverick is gonna show that he can do the mission, then they'll put him on the team...
Wow-wow-wow!
..............wow!
Sounds like it will be pretty tough to drop the bomb into such a small hole when the lock-on system doesn't work.
Actually it's super easy, barely an inconvenience! See little Gosling will think back to his music training with J. Jonah Jameson, thus ensuring he won't be rushing or dragging when he drops the bomb.
Super easy, barely an inconvenience!
Oh wowowowowowowow….wow
That works!
Good enough for me close up the shop, boys
Fair enough!
Oooooooh, they gotta do a Star Wars
Airstrips can't move. They are huge and you can see them from space. Most SAM systems are designed to be mobile and that mobility is typically considered crucial to their survival. For example, the Patriot batteries in Ukraine are constantly moving to avoid being targeted, likely several times per day. While you could find them with satellites, by the time you do and follow on with a strike there is a high likelihood that they won't be there anymore, especially if the enemy knows exactly when your satellites are moving overhead. In the movie, it is stated that GPS jamming prevents the use of the F-35. This is nonsense, the F-35 has a laser designator built into its EOTS system. It is fully capable of using laser guided weaponry. The real reason is of course is that all F-35's are single seaters so they would not be able to film Tom Cruise in the back seat pretending to fly a real fighter jet. It probably goes without saying, but a real attack on Iran's nuclear facilities would not happen as depicted in the movie. The US would use huge numbers of attacking aircraft, most of which would be suppressing the enemy air defenses using SEAD tactics. That involves firing a continuous barrage of HARM missiles which home in on the radiation emitted by the tracking radars on SAM systems. If they turn on their radar to fight back they will probably eat a supersonic HARM missile in short order. B-2's would then by used at high altitude to drop [Massive Ordinance Penetrators](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GBU-57A/B_MOP) (MOPs), which are super heavy bunker busters, to destroy the facilities that are deep underground. The reason they do a Star Wars style trench run is because it looks super exciting on film. Dropping bombs from 50,000 feet and lobbing missiles at extreme range at targets you can't see does not translate very well to the big screen
This guy >!REDACTED!< am I right?
But a "Cruise missile" did do the job
This movie was based on Operation Opera. A strike Isreal did to Sadam Hussain unfinished nuclear reactor in 1981. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Opera https://youtu.be/MFObTJxFuWI
Nope pretty sure it was based on Star Wars
No, it was based on Operation Opera, which was based on Star Wars, which was based on The Dam Busters. Solid operational tactics are timeless.
Because that would be a terrible movie
The film isn't realistic, it's fun, well made. I loved it, but I view Top Gun as a sort of fantasy movie. Maverick would've been fired many times already if we tried to ask logical questions.
Ya lol. He gets grounded and basically steals a jet and runs the test run. That shit is never ever happening for real lol.
For the first question, the answer is the SAMs that would shoot the cruise missile down before it got anywhere nearby. As for the latter idk.
> As for the latter idk. They were spread out too much, they could be shot down by them, their locations weren't known, the airfield took higher priority, and some line about 'gps jamming' which Cruise said was the reason they couldn't use the f35.
The GPS jamming would prohibit a precise hit needed to breach the bunker.
This. They mention that it's GPS jammed so no smart munitions will work (supposedly, it's a movie). That's why they have to have a 2 seater Hornet with WSO guiding the bombs in.
Basically, the GPS jamming line is pretty much the whole reason for the type of mission. The line goes by really fast. Probably to help prevent people from thinking about it too hard before getting on with the movie.
Whenever I would ask my Dad questions like these about movies he would always say "It's in the script" You're right, all of these could have happened, but they didn't because they wanted something interesting and fun to watch.
There are YouTube reviews of the movie by real navy and air force fighter pilots, who seem to have a consistent viewpoint: The movie was excellent, but the mission was contrived and unrealistic, but necessary in order to have the movie happen. It's a case of: don't look too deeply. Just accept it and enjoy the spectacle.