This really works here, as Cruise looks older for sure, but sill in great enough shape to jump in a $57 million plane and not just be trusted to fly it, but to fly the hell out of it. It doesn’t hurt one bit that at 59-years-old, Cruise still looks better than the 25-year-old version of most men. The man simply goes into every role with full gusto, doing his own stunts, acting like he’s fighting for his next gig, and fully committing to the character.
Say what you want about Tom Cruise (and there is plenty to say) but there is not another man in Hollywood who is both so fully committed to and so active in his work.
While not unique, this premise allows the film to feel fresh compared to the original while still retaining all the awesomeness that makes it “Top Gun.” Pro – Squirrel poop When a highly specific mission becomes necessary, Maverick is given a final chance to train the next generation of world-class pilots. Having failed to get promoted through self-sabotage and poor decisions, Maverick is one mistake away (and the protection of his old buddy Iceman, Val Kilmer) from washing out of the Navy completely. Instead of a reheated version of the first movie that would have likely followed in the first few years after it’s release, this film finds the titular star at the tail end of his career. The huge gulf in time actually works in the film’s favor. Perhaps an even bigger shock is that not only does “Top Gun: Maverick” live up to it’s famous older brother, it surpasses It in every regard. Yet, fighter jet movies are almost non-existent, and fans of “Top Gun” had to wait 36 years for this film. It’s even more shocking that a film as successful as “Top Gun” took so long to produce an easy crash-grab sequel. It’s actually shocking that Hollywood doesn’t just produce a fighter jet movie every five years. More than 30 years later, Pete “Maverick” Mitchell comes blasting back onto the big screen in “Top Gun: Maverick,” the sequel to 1986’s “Top Gun.” Pro – The need for speed
0 kommentar(er)
