Can't believe no one's seen this snippet

[serverandenforcer 33]

Yeah, they could have Jessica Biel fresh from her experiences flying the F/A-35 Talon and ejecting over north korea. That'd make ME cocky. Plus, she could ditch that pretty boy Josh Lucas. Just as long as we don't see Cruise putting the moves on her. Innapropriate relationship anyone?

 

Actually, scratch Biel, she's 0.5 inches taller than Cruise. Can't have that, can we?

 

Cruise could wear platform shoes. Or, have him stand on a step ladder for every scene that they have those two together. But IMHO, Biel is more hype than what's she's worth. Maybe Michelle Rodriguez or Eva Mendes

[+Klavs81 4]

Cruise could wear platform shoes. Or, have him stand on a step ladder for every scene that they have those two together. But IMHO, Biel is more hype than what's she's worth. Maybe Michelle Rodriguez or Eva Mendes

 

Not to typecast her or anything, but Katee Sackhoff from Battlestar Galactica might be good.

 

But I guess being typecast as a tear-assing girl fighter jock ain't all bad, maybe we'll get a lot more fighter-pilot oriented movies.

[+Gocad 26]

Hopefully they'll get some of the technical aspects of the film correct.

 

Of course they will.

Wink, wink.

[gbnavy61 1]

All I can say is this sounds like a horrible idea. Hollywood has been out of original ideas for some time now, but they still insist in destroying good movies by making s**tty sequels. Ugh.

 

As was said, Top Gun's star is no more - and no, that wasn't a reference to Tom Cruise now being a total whack-job. No Tomcat = lame movie. Super Bug just doesn't have the soul. It's a cool jet, but c'mon - there's no comparison in sheer bad-assery.

 

Mav, this is not a good idea.

Edited July 22, 2008 by gbnavy61

[eraser_tr 29]

Scarlett Johansson yummmmmmmmmmmmmmm. Then the vollyball scene would be better spent watching than getting a soda

 

Inappropriate relationship? as if charlie wasn't?

 

Ack there was someone else who was worthy of mention I saw in a movie just recently, but what she was in and her name escapes my mind, I just remember stunning eyes and a body to die for.

[+allenjb42 4,127]

Never mind just one female pilot.

 

How about a whole squadron of them? It could be In Like Flint. But with planes!

[eraser_tr 29]

VF-any number "Foxes"

[+Klavs81 4]

Ack there was someone else who was worthy of mention I saw in a movie just recently, but what she was in and her name escapes my mind, I just remember stunning eyes and a body to die for.

 

Jack Black?

[ironroad 218]

This is horrible and after reading that article I want to throw up.

 

A Top Gun sequel...

 

Now I admit the first Top Gun sucked in realism department but it did have excellent filming, decent flight scenes, and the crew worked very well together.

 

This is going to be a flop! Just like when they tried to do a remake of "The Dirty Dozen" 20 years later (IMHO befouled one of the greatest films of all time.)

 

They are either going to try and do every flight scene in 3d of poor quality and lets not forget that Top Gun (as movie goers know it) does not even exist anymore. I can see it now, crew shows up and says "Hey can we get some shots of your Tomcats in front of the Fighter Town USA hangar?" The MP kicks the camera man in the nuts, slaps the taste out of the producer's mouth, and then chokes Tom Cruise.

 

So....better luck with Fallon or Lamore with Hornets?

 

This is why I have stopped going to the movies, do not listen to any new music that comes out, and really do not watch much tv. It is all remakes and rehashed garbage with hopes of using a "name" to sale a half-baked idea and more advertisement contracts.

 

 

What pains me ever more is that no matter how much crap the media puts out (knowing that it is crap) people still but into like mindless drones.

Edited July 23, 2008 by ironroad

[serverandenforcer 33]

This is horrible and after reading that article I want to throw up.

 

A Top Gun sequel...

 

Now I admit the first Top Gun sucked in realism department but it did have excellent filming, decent flight scenes, and the crew worked very well together.

 

This is going to be a flop! Just like when they tried to do a remake of "The Dirty Dozen" 20 years later (IMHO befouled one of the greatest films of all time.)

 

They are either going to try and do every flight scene in 3d of poor quality and lets not forget that Top Gun (as movie goers know it) does not even exist anymore. I can see it now, crew shows up and says "Hey can we get some shots of your Tomcats in front of the Fighter Town USA hangar?" The MP kicks the camera man in the nuts, slaps the taste out of the producer's mouth, and then chokes Tom Cruise.

 

So....better luck with Fallon or Lamore with Hornets?

 

This is why I have stopped going to the movies, do not listen to any new music that comes out, and really do not watch much tv. It is all remakes and rehashed garbage with hopes of using a "name" to sale a half-baked idea and more advertisement contracts.

 

What pains me ever more is that no matter how much crap the media puts out (knowing that it is crap) people still but into like mindless drones.

 

 

So I take it you wont be seeing this if it comes out?

Edited July 23, 2008 by serverandenforcer

[firehawkordy 34]

I hated Top Gun, I doubt I'll watch a sequel. The only thing accurate about it was that some one talked Tom Cruise into wearing a big watch. The joke being the size of a pilots watch is inversely proportional to his personal equipment. Ask an Aviators wife/girlfriend/both for verification.

 

The only two things good about it were

 

1 It was the best recruiting tool the Navy could have ever hoped for at the time

 

2 NATOPS officers would take the flight scenes put them on a video and make the aircrew watch and point out all the safety violations that Maverick did. I think there were like 20+ in one flight alone.

[FastCargo 412]

Top Gun just makes me cringe every time it's mentioned...it's an extremely DATED movie.

 

It's all but unwatchable...even the flying scenes. The Final Countdown has actually aged better...

 

FastCargo

[SayethWhaaaa 245]

Now I admit the first Top Gun sucked in realism department but it did have excellent filming, decent flight scenes, and the crew worked very well together.

 

Isn't it the only instance of a rolling scissors on film, during the dogfight at the end? I think Ice has something like 5 F-5s on his 6. You see it for a split second...

 

I reckon Ironroad's right about it though. If it gets made, you'll see sh*tty, implausible CG everywhere (because it's "cheap") and paper thin plot. It'll bomb, no pun intended. Look at the films that heavily involve aircraft in the past 5-10 years. The Aviator not withstanding, they all sucked at the box office and were usually pretty weak. I mean Stealth lost something like 60 million and only grossed around 12 million on it's opening weekend.

 

Now I'm curious. When was it anyone here saw a good movie with aircraft? I think I with FC thinking that the Final Countdown was probably the last one I saw...

[ironroad 218]

The last time I saw CG done very well in a movie with flight scenes was 13 Days and We were Soldiers. Black Hawk Down had excellent chopper ops, but other than that...

 

A little 3d here and there is good, I do not think anything has come close to 13 Days (hoped they would have used the recon scenes more), but even if the 3d or even the actual cinematography were excellent, you can not pick up Top Guns storyline after 21 years and expect magic out of it. You could bring in Brando, Gable, Stewart, Wayne, Marvin, Sinatra, McQueen and Brownson, and you still couldn't get anything out of it. So much of it is cliche now.

 

Btw, what class would one put Flight of the Intruder, I liked it, but I do not understand how the managed to get a "love scene" in the movie.

[+Julhelm 266]

Wow, remakes of Topgun AND Red Dawn? When are they going to remake Rocky IV?

[+Jug 99]

Isn't it the only instance of a rolling scissors on film, during the dogfight at the end? I think Ice has something like 5 F-5s on his 6. You see it for a split second...

 

I reckon Ironroad's right about it though. If it gets made, you'll see sh*tty, implausible CG everywhere (because it's "cheap") and paper thin plot. It'll bomb, no pun intended. Look at the films that heavily involve aircraft in the past 5-10 years. The Aviator not withstanding, they all sucked at the box office and were usually pretty weak. I mean Stealth lost something like 60 million and only grossed around 12 million on it's opening weekend.

 

Now I'm curious. When was it anyone here saw a good movie with aircraft? I think I with FC thinking that the Final Countdown was probably the last one I saw...

The Blue Max, High Road to China - there are still some out there. It is just hard to stretch a Sergio Leone long stare into a 2 or 3 minute dogfight. Are there enough short people in Hollywood to do a Top Gun sequel with Tom Cruise. Even most of the female leads are taller these days. I can visualize Tom slow dancing with Gwenyth Paltrow whispering sweetly into the lower part of her boobs and her constantly whispering back, "What'd you say?". Could make a powerful scene???!!!

[+Julhelm 266]

There is a pretty decent B-movie starring Jürgen Prochnow (of Das Boot fame) called Interceptor that involves the midair theft of a couple F-117's. That's probably the last good air movie I ever saw.

[Longestpants 1]

I don't know about you guys, but Battle of Britain was the last good flight movie I saw.

[+Prowler1111 14]

..I´ll add Megan Fox as the chick/hotshot/steam hot female pilot...

And do any one of you remembers the SNL gag about Iceman being a retired USN pilot flying for Delta? it was hillarious!

Prowler

[sparkomatic 7]

- Eh...Top Gun was cool in 1986...it was a movie and was very popular...Navy recruiting went up like double digits that year.

 

- Tom Cruise has brought in over $9 billion (about 32 Euros at todays exchange rate) in his career

 

- McGillis has had a very hard life...please read her biography and, in that frame, she still looks great

 

- The vast majority of the ticket buying public does not care if it is accurate, they want cool and sexy and besides every one on this forum will watch it at least once...that is still revenue

 

- Ejections are still very dangerous and people die despite ejection seats...the movie again was not a documentary...one reading the news this week knows that fatalities still occur

 

- I have always been impressed with the "trivia" (obviously do not know if it is true or not, but has been listed on reputable web sites) that the director wanted the sun on the other side of the carrier for the very famous opening scene...the Captain refused, saying it would cost $15,000 to turn the boat around (which makes me question the validity of the story) and the director paid the sum on the spot. If it is true, then it is one of the coolest film making stories every...if it is poop, it is still one of the coolest film making stories ever

 

- "Blue Max" is one of my all time favorite movies, any genre, period. One might also enjoy (but must make a commitment since it is over 6 hours long) "Piece of Cake". Also consider "Dawn Patrol" and "Call to Glory".

 

- While not a movie, certainly worth your attention since you are on this forum is the book (I know, nobody reads any more) "Bury Us Upsidedown"...you will laugh, cry, hate, and want to hug those guys (in a mission-focused, combat-oriented way of course).

 

- "So long and thanks for all of the fish!"

[Nesher 629]

yeah.. so the news on the TV...

if the navy helps them a little they might have a chance for a good flick.. and help the navy with recruting people !!

[JediMaster 451]

They like to use CG now for safety reasons. It lets them do things that are far too dangerous for "real". Of course, in TG they used large flying models for some of those things and they looked damn good, but it's hard to convince a studio to anything between "real" and "CG." So if you can't do it for real, they CG it.

 

I actually thought the flying scenes in Flyboy were excellent, although the rest of the film was forgettable. Forgetting the whole "every German in a Dr.I" thing, it was stunning to watch and the BS factor was low. Stealth had a nice camo Flanker on screen but that was it. The Talon itself was an uber joke.

[eraser_tr 29]

Actually the talon was probably one of the least BS aspects of that film. Northrop has a design patent that looks damn near identical.

[KingAlbert 0]

In all likelihood, Hollywood will screw up the sequel. When I first watched the original, I was 13 years old. I credit the movie for sparking my interest in aviation.

 

For those of you who think that a sequel without the Tomcat won't be worth a thing: you are getting old! I bet that back then Aircraft buffs where saying: "Hey a movie with that new F-14 fighter must suck, an F-4 Phantom is way much cooler"

 

And for those of you who think no good aircraft movies are being made: check out Les Chevalier du Ciel (Sky Fighters). Sure the storyline was implausible in some occassions but the real life shots of the Mirage 2000 were fantastic.

 

The flight sequences from the film were all filmed with actual planes and aerial photography, without the use of CGI.

 

In order to capture the high-speed maneuvers, a specially-designed camera was attached to a Mirage 2000 aircraft which then tailed the 'star planes' as they flew, for only another Mirage 2000 could actually fly at speeds that matched the planes being filmed. The traditional film camera, which was specially constructed with lenses facing forward, backward, to the side, and downward, was installed inside an empty fuel pod and built by Dassault, the aircraft consortium which constructed the Mirage 2000.

 

Using a digital HD camera had been considered early on, but because of its size, it was simply too large to be squeezed into the tank. Because of space requirements, the pod camera could only hold 4 minutes of film, which had to be specially shielded from the elements and sealed in an airtight compartment to prevent the pressure and temperature differences at altitude from damaging it. In addition, the camera could not be controlled by hand, as it was located within the tank, nor could it be controlled electronically by wire, as the tank had to be easily detachable from the plane so it could be swapped from one Mirage 2000 to another on refueling to prevent the daily shooting schedule from falling behind. Thus, a special radio control system was devised, so that the pilot of the Mirage 2000 could activate the camera at will. However, this too had many problems to work out, as the radio frequency could not interfere with the regular operations of the aircraft, nor could it possibly jam air-to-ground communications. Finally, however, a proper system was devised to allow the camera to be activated remotely.

 

For tracking shots where using the Mirage 2000 camera was not practical, a Lear jet was flown in from Southern California in the United States, and used for about a week at great expense. Due to all these concerns and complications, director Gérard Pirès and his aerial-photography team had to carefully plan each shot with storyboards, something the director normally does not do. However, he said in a question and answer session after the film's screening on at the City of Lights - City of Angels Los Angeles Film Festival on April 7th, 2006 that the time limitations on the film actually did not hinder production, as they required thought and economy towards the shots being attempted, and also as the Mirage 2000 plane itself had to refuel every 45 minutes. The director took great pride in the fact that he was able to use this camera to capture the incredible look and feeling of flight, without resorting to using the computer to manipulate his images.

(source imdb.com)

 

[C2Aaircrew 3]

I saw Top gun when it first came out. I was stationed at Pensacola, Fla. (birthplace of U.S. Naval Aviation). A bunch of us went to the movie theater off base. You could tell where all of the Naval Aviation personnel were in the theater. We were the ones laughing our asses off. The only believable scene in the whole movie was the opening shots of the cat launches. Of course I'm having a hard time remembering any Cat Officers doing any dancing in between launches, from my time spent on flight decks. Besides it would have earned them a call on the 5MC from the Ops Boss up in Flight Ops. And believe me, that is ten ladderwells you do not want to climb. Afterwards someone had asked us what was so funny? We told them this movie was the biggest load of crap there is as far as Naval Aviation is concerned. Any pilot that acted like that would be grounded so fast that his a$$ would draw a vacuum as he left the C.O.'s office. Kelly McGillis of course made the whole thing worth watching. Good box office draw. Great recruiting tool. Fast and loose licensing with the facts, you bet! I think you guys are right, Hollywood ran out of ideas years ago.

 

C2

Edited July 24, 2008 by C2Aaircrew