Airport From United States of America, joined Aug 2009, 1395 posts, RR: 9 Reply 1, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 2702 times:
It is very true that Tony Scott, the original creator of Top Gun, now expresses his desire to make a sequel, after turning down the idea numerous times. My reaction was initially "No way", but then I read what it would be about...
(From ComingSoon.net)
"Scott explained that his plan for the follow-up is to chart the development of the Air Force fighter pilot into the present day, inspired partially by a young Air Force pilot he met on a flight who runs drone simulations. In contrast to Tom Cruise's character in the first film, the sequel will explore the evolution of the remote-control pilot.
Still unconfirmed is whether or not Cruise will return to his star-making role of Maverick as well as when, exactly, the sequel will move forward. As it stands, the script for the film appears to still be in the research phase (with Christopher McQuarrie approached to write the first draft) and Scott made clear that it would not be his very next production."
This and a few other things I read about it seem to indicate that Top Gun 2 would be a TOTALLY different film than the first Top Gun. Where the first Top Gun was glorious 80s fun, the second one would explore how the actual pilot aspect is going away in favor of unmanned drones and high-tech gadgets. Personally, I think there could be a really good dramatic approach to take the story if they went the right direction with it, as well as being a fun movie.
dragon-wings From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 3920 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 2702 times:
If you remember the end of the original Top Gun movie Maverick said he wanted to go back to Topgun and become a instructor there. So I guess if there was a sequel to the original they would have Maverick as a instructor on the F-18?
ltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 12333 posts, RR: 12 Reply 3, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 2651 times:
Please, no more remakes, 'sequels' or movies from old TV shows. Far too many of them are poorly made, have to be made more PC, overpay for actors who don't deserve it.
With Top Gun 2, I bet now Cruse's character would be an executive of a military aircraft maker or with a lobbying group for them, long retired. The position of Cruse would have to be a lesbian fearful of being booted out of the Air Force due to DADT. They would ignore the reality of drones that have killed 1000's of innocent civilians because of the disconnect of 'video game' operation of them since they remove the human element that they can see the death they cause that manned fighters can and decide they have a target that may cause more harm than good. I don't think the idea of obsoleting glamour fighter pilots will play well either with many scared about the issues of technology and more jobs lost to machines.
KevinL1011 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2964 posts, RR: 51 Reply 4, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2640 times:
Two threads now. IMO, both should be in Polls and Preferences.
KiwiRob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 5291 posts, RR: 3 Reply 5, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2628 times:
According to IMDB a sequal was written immediately after Top Gun was released, but not produced for a number of reasons.
"A script for "Top Gun 2" was completed shortly after the release of the film, but it broke down in pre-production because 1) the military's technology had become updated and they didn't want camera crew anywhere near their new aircraft and 2) Tom Cruise did not want a sequel and finally agreed to star in one for a very high amount that was deemed "unaffordable." The script followed the further adventures of Maverick as an instructor at the Top Gun academy, the twist being a cocky female reminiscent of himself joining the team.
Link this trivia "
ANITIX87 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 3233 posts, RR: 14 Reply 8, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 2476 times:
Quoting aloges (Reply 7): Please, no! The original was pathetic enough.
Careful. I'm sure I'm not alone in thinking this comment should get you banned. You can't be an aviation fan and not adore Top Gun.
TIS
www.stellaryear.com: Canon EOS 50D, Canon EOS 5DMkII, Sigma 50mm 1.4, Canon 24-70 2.8L II, Canon 100mm 2.8L, Canon 100-4
RussianJet From Kazakhstan, joined Jul 2007, 6288 posts, RR: 23 Reply 9, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 2474 times:
Quoting aloges (Reply 7): Please, no! The original was pathetic enough.
How could you!!!! Hang your head in shame!
If there is a second chapter, I hope that it also has a scene at the end where the hero is hoisted onto everyone's shoulders, and in the split second his head disappears out of shot a pair of sunglasses magically appear on his face. Lovely stuff!
aloges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8357 posts, RR: 47 Reply 10, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 2440 times:
A sequel to movie-length US Navy recruitment ad featuring a love story cheesier than a cheddar factory plus a couple of F-14 clips that are ruined by a constant stream of "Maverick, Maverick!" and "Goose! Goose!" blabber? No, thanks!
Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
photopilot From Cuba, joined Jul 2002, 2439 posts, RR: 20 Reply 11, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 2423 times:
Quoting aloges (Reply 7): Please, no! The original was pathetic enough.
Quoting ANITIX87 (Reply 8): You can't be an aviation fan and not adore Top Gun.
Actually, YES you can.
Quoting RussianJet (Reply 9): How could you!!!! Hang your head in shame!
Stand tall...... because TG was full of hype, US jingoism, poor special effects (think of the Head-to-head Mig "photo" shot), and such obvious technical mistakes as to make it comic book laughable. The ONLY pilot that could actually enjoy Top Gun are those pilots flying cargo planes full of rubber dog-feces out of Hong Kong!
It was a pathetic movie. I grew up in a brown and black shoe US Navy town and not one of the pilots I knew were anything close to the dope 'Maverick'. The flight scenes were lame as was most of the movie. The only thing worth looking at was a very young Meg Ryan and Kelly McGillis
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
PWM2TXLHopper From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 1217 posts, RR: 1 Reply 16, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 2305 times:
Quoting ltbewr (Reply 3): With Top Gun 2, I bet now Cruse's character would be an executive of a military aircraft maker or with a lobbying group for them, long retired.
Or perhaps, a cargo pilot for Fedex or UPS flying rubber dog sh*% out of Hong Kong? Just like the Admiral threatened to do to him after he buzzed the tower at Mirimar NAS.
BMIFlyer From UK - England, joined Feb 2004, 8810 posts, RR: 62 Reply 17, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 2292 times:
Quoting aloges (Reply 7): Please, no! The original was pathetic enough.
No, it was cheesy - in a good way - and full of male innuendo.
Quoting RussianJet (Reply 9): How could you!!!! Hang your head in shame!
I concur!
Quoting photopilot (Reply 11): Stand tall...... because TG was full of hype, US jingoism, poor special effects (think of the Head-to-head Mig "photo" shot), and such obvious technical mistakes as to make it comic book laughable. The ONLY pilot that could actually enjoy Top Gun are those pilots flying cargo planes full of rubber dog-feces out of Hong Kong!
Top Gun was produced in the "80's". For the period it was released it was everything the 80's was all about. I loved the movie, and the soundtrack
airportugal310 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3065 posts, RR: 2 Reply 18, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 2289 times:
I was just watching it on TNT or some channel like that...the irony of it all
fridgmus From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 1383 posts, RR: 11 Reply 20, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 2276 times:
Tom who?
filler filler filler
The Lockheed Super Constellation, the REAL Queen of the Skies!
Wingscrubber From UK - England, joined Sep 2001, 834 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2248 times:
I'm going to take a different tact here and say that AIRWOLF would convert well to a modern action movie.
Not quite sure how a Top Gun II will fair... I always thought that was just recruiting propaganda for the US Navy.
Maverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 4744 posts, RR: 6 Reply 22, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2218 times:
Quoting photopilot (Reply 11): Stand tall...... because TG was full of hype, US jingoism, poor special effects (think of the Head-to-head Mig "photo" shot), and such obvious technical mistakes as to make it comic book laughable.
Which is what made it so good. Classic 80s cheese.
And you have to admit it was better than Iron Eagle.
AustrianZRH From Austria, joined Aug 2007, 1264 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2157 times:
Quoting Airport (Reply 23): No, the Admiral threatened to do that to him if he screwed up JUST THIS MUCH. *holds up hand*
You forgot the cigar stump in his hand. And it was after he took a plane he doesn't own, the taxpayers do back up on low fuel to bring Cougar back home to the carrier .
WARNING! The post above should be taken with a grain of salt! Furthermore, it may be slightly biased towards A.
25 PC12Fan: I just love it when people criticize the content of a movie. That's why they call it a movie kids, not a documentary. I personally loved Top Gun as we
26 aloges: There are a lot of movies that need to be criticised for their content. Top Gun is a rather harmless example, others are not.
27 PC12Fan: True. I just had tunnel vision with Top Gun I guess.
28 Silver1SWA: That's not very "Top Gun", now is it? Considering the title is named after the NAVY fighter weapons school. This idea sounds like crap. Oh no you did
29 MCOflyer: Top Gun had a budget of 15 million and grossing 350 million, Top Gun did well despite the limited budget. I can only hope the new movie has a similar
31 fridgmus: Or maybe the producers could just lease a few MiG-29's from a former Warsaw Pact country?
32 DEVILFISH: I'm guessing they'd build mockups of these..... .....and run computer simulations to appeal to a much younger, cyber-raised audience. But who would th
33 RussianJet: Only that will I consider a fair criticism of this classic. As for everything else, the fact that it is one of the silliest and least credible, chees
34 TheCommodore: One of the worst Hollywood flicks ever to star the dwarf, IMHO. Just terrible
35 flybyguy: You got that right. Today's Hollywood goes for spectacular explosions and larger than life effects while coming of with a profit... so if there is a
37 EMBQA: So.. if it follows a true time line 'Maverick' would have....1) long ago been forced out with force reductions, 2) long ago been forced to leave with
39 Cadet985: That wasn't an Admiral.....he was a Commander. Watch the movie and look at the rank insignia, it's a silver leaf. The highest rank I recall seeing in
41 Airport: LOL, funnily enough both were produced by the same producer, Jerry Bruckheimer, who also produced Armageddon, The Rock, Con Air, and Crimson Tide. Ch
42 EMBQA: How much do you think a Lt or CDR makes in the US Navy..?? Besides, with jet time most don't need to do the regional path. Back then most of the guys
43 MDShady: As long as they include a beach volleyball scene backed by a Kenny Loggins tune, I'm all for it.
44 Pyrex: While I don't disagree that movie was excruciatingly horrible, to say the least, Tom Cruise was not in it (I guess Jerry Bruckheimer thought he was a
48 PC12Fan: Damned shame the F-20 naver made it to service. Yeager called it the best fighter he'd ever flown. Although I disagree, that's pretty damned funny!
49 DEVILFISH: Makes we wonder if it would have helped its cause if the Tigershark starred in Iron Eagle in turn... ....though a "real" flying aircraft might have b
50 fridgmus: Now that would have been great! I believe the aircraft used in "Iron Eagle" were Israeli F-16's. Hollywood whipped out that checkbook and there you g
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined May 2001, 3289 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 5291 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Nov 2003, 1880 posts, 
From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8357 posts, 
From Kazakhstan, joined Jul 2007, 6288 posts, 
From Cuba, joined Jul 2002, 2439 posts, 
From UK - England, joined Feb 2004, 8810 posts, 
From Austria, joined Aug 2007, 1264 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
