Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Wet_Clamato t1_jcw6tjl wrote

And yet...

‘Top Gun: Maverick’ just passed ‘Avengers: Infinity War’ at the all-time domestic box office—these are the 10 highest grossing movies ever

  1. Star Wars: Episode VII - The Force Awakens (2015, $936.6M)

  2. Avengers: Endgame (2019, $858.3M)

  3. Spider-Man: No Way Home (2021, $804.7M)

  4. Avatar (2009, $760.5M)

  5. Black Panther (2018, $700.4M)

  6. Top Gun: Maverick (2022, $685.1M)

4

ghostrats t1_jcw7yn3 wrote

I get it! You're not trying to trash the movie by pointing this out. When things like that come to my mind it definitely ruins the experience because now I can't suspend disbelief. I was watching a movie and someone was dying and the characters on screen were chatting and I was pissed. We all have these moments in movies that take us out. But I am glad the movie had them do that (apparently pointless) mission because it was unbelievably good cinema.

5

ballyhire t1_jcwcyt3 wrote

It's a movie man. A great one that let's you suspend real life and enjoy a crazy and entertaining story. Just chill and enjoy the ride.

0

marleyandmeisfunny t1_jcwdfmv wrote

Replying to tezoatlipoca (#2,275,228)

I care. I don’t like any of these movies. No one cares what I think though lol.

Edit: by any objective measure in regards to story telling, these are all childish dribble. However, the majority of adults never grew up so here we are

−1

ballyhire t1_jcwdpll wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#2,275,694)

Fair enough. You are perfectly entitled to your comments and emotions on it.

All I'm saying is this film was designed to be a movie where you just open the bag of popcorn and enjoy the ride.

But don't get me started on tenet!!

1

ballyhire t1_jcwgrab wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#2,275,857)

Yes. My point is that there are different types of movies.

Maverick was made to be a popcorn flick where you have fun and don't need to think about it

Tenet was made in purpose to make u think and try to analyse the screenplay and figure out what's going on.

It's like comparing Indiana Jones against the original blade runner.

2

pornproducerxxx t1_jcwh6p0 wrote

Replying to Wet_Clamato (#2,275,209)

Box office numbers are misleading. Global population has exploded and inflation has too. If you adjust for inflation and percentage of population that attended screenings "blockbusters" would not look as successful.

3

RyzenRaider t1_jcwhees wrote

Much of the actual aviation is deeply flawed. The trench run is just one aspect.

Maverick pulls up to avoid a missile in the dogfight. Airspeed and energy is king in a dogfight, so why give it all up going vertical? He fires flares (good) then splits the throttles to turn around. Possible in an F-14, but also prone to putting it into a flatspin, which is what killed Goose in the first movie.

He gets behind the Su-57, but how? Why the actual fuck did the Su57 not follow Maverick, and instead flew in a straight line so that Maverick could get behind him? Not even a rookie mistake, that's grossly negligent. Maverick fires a missile, Su57 cartwheels out of the way. The plane can actually pull that maneuver, but again, energy is king in a dogfight, and he just threw it all away. It also doesn't do anything to confuse a missile, as it will still track the heat source (the plane's surfaces are still much hotter than the air, so it still has a clear signature). And Maverick makes the not-even-a-rookie mistake, flying directly straight as the Su-57 tucks in behind him. Even if Maverick was surprised - and he shouldn't have been... Russian planes have been able to pull these moves for some time now - he should at least instinctively know to change direction just to avoid the enemy getting right behind him. In fact, if there was ever a good time to fly straight up, that would have been it... The Su-57 would have been so slow, it would have struggled to gain altitude to pursue, and so Mav has time to reposition and re-engage.

Su-57 can't get a lock on the F-14 in the canyon because of the terrain, but Maverick can immediately lock on the Su-57, which has some stealth capability? Okey dokey. And so on, and so on...

There is SO much to pick apart in the movie about the way flying and combat are depicted. Throughout the training, all the way to the final dogfight.

But despite all that, it's still a kick ass, adrenaline-fueled ride. And that's all the filmmakers are asking you to accept.

4

ballyhire t1_jcwhve9 wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#2,275,926)

No worries. I'm an engineer myself and had to suspend my knowledge of basic physics to watch maverick to be honest.

But it was so much fun and that's what Hollywood is basically about.

Hit the cinema or ntetflix and zone out.

And bring beers!!!

2

RyzenRaider t1_jcwpp4h wrote

Replying to [deleted] (#2,275,994)

I don't consider myself particularly knowledgeable. I did some googling, but some of this stuff is simple strategy. The worst possible position to be in is to have an enemy directly on your 6. You have no offense and the enemy has every advantage and a perfect position to shoot you down... Despite that, both pilots make that happen. It does give a sense of tactics in the moment though, with each pilot fighting for advantage in dynamic and interesting ways. It's just not realistic in the slightest.

Regarding the bomb run itself, time is supposedly their greatest enemy... They have to push 500-600 knots through this narrow range. Why? Fly slower, a little safer, and just launch the missiles from the carrier a little later. All that matters is that the airfield gets hit just before they bomb the facility. But flying faster is cooler, so that's what they go for.

So again, still a fun movie. But best not to think too hard about the realism :)

1

Bergerboy14 t1_jcww0pk wrote

Can we not just assume that these air defenses have larger range? Idr if they give a specific unit. Seems like youre criticizing the film based on assumptions, which is not fair to the film.

1