Review: Top Gun: Maverick

Tom Cruise returns to the role of Pete ‘Maverick’ Mitchell, a Navy test pilot and captain who is transferred to the Navy’s fighter pilot training program (AKA ‘Top Gun’) to prepare a group of young best and brightest for a dangerous mission. He’s recommended for the gig by old sparring partner and now Admiral Tom ‘Iceman’ Kazinsky (Val Kilmer). A snag comes in the form of one of the young pilots, Lt. Bradshaw (Miles Teller) who just so happens to be the son of Maverick’s old pilot buddy ‘Goose’, who of course died in the first film. Bradshaw is bitterly opposed to being instructed by Maverick. Meanwhile, Maverick reignites an old flame in local bar owner Penny (Jennifer Connelly), whom he didn’t end on the best of terms with a long time ago. Jon Hamm and Ed Harris play disapproving senior officers, whilst Glen Powell and Monica Barbaro are a couple of cocky pilots.

 

I suppose I understood the immediate superficial appeal of the first “Top Gun”, but I’ve never understood its enduring appeal nor has it ever appealed to me personally. Great soundtrack, Tom Cruise had the ‘It factor’ if not strong acting chops at this point, I get why it could’ve been a flavour of the month at least for sure. Superficial entertainment, easily disposed soon after consumption. However, with an inert romance, wooden leading lady, and a central conflict that is almost entirely internal, I never really got why people love it let alone still love it. I found it mediocre to be very, very kind, and it was basically a military hype video at best. We barely had any understanding of the external conflict/threat, and for a movie about Navy fighter pilots, that’s always been bizarre and problematic to me.

 

So this was the mindset I went into with this very belated 2022 sequel from director Joseph Kosinski (“Oblivion”, “Only the Brave”), and the screenwriting trio of Ehren Kruger (“Scream 3”, “Ghost in the Shell”), Eric Warren Singer (“American Hustle”, “Only the Brave”), and Christopher McQuarrie (“The Usual Suspects”, “Valkyrie”, “Edge of Tomorrow”). What did I think of this one? It’s a better version of the first film, I’ll give it that. However, some of the same problems I had with that film are still here to enough of an extent that I couldn’t recommend this one. At least they get the leading lady right this time, but I’m not sure why critics went crazy over this one. Audiences, sure. Big blockbuster, legacy film. I get that. However, jumping the low bar set by the first film ain’t that impressive to me. I think you have to be a fan of the first one to really get into this one.

 

Starting with ‘Danger Zone’ on the soundtrack was a perfect decision, and although he’s playing a stock cliché you can’t say Ed Harris is miscast as the angry general wanting to shut Maverick down. It’s a perfect role for him, if not a meaty one. Meanwhile, couch-jumper Tom Cruise may be even more perfectly suited to the role of Maverick than he was in 1986, or perhaps it’s just that he’s clearly a better actor now. He really brings his A-game here, and given the nature of the film – or its predecessor at least – he really didn’t need to. I’m thankful that he’s not coasting nonetheless. The fact that Maverick is still just a captain after all these years is perfect for the rather troubled character. I bet the familiar echoes of the original music score – and outright replays of it – will resonate with fans. Even I love the music, credited this time to the trio of Hans Zimmer (“Inception”), Harold Faltermeyer (“Beverly Hills Cop”, “Fletch”, “Top Gun”), and one Lady GooGooGaGa who seemingly only contributes the end credits song. It ain’t no Berlin, unfortunately. I’d wager you’ll never hear it again beyond the year of the film’s release unless you re-watch the film. The cinematography by Claudio Miranda (“Oblivion”, “The Life of Pi”) is damn good here too, in air and on the ground. It looks terrific, possibly the best-looking film of the year and the overall directing by Kosinski is superior as well.

 

One thing I also liked was that 20 minutes in we get an actual mission with an actual threat. I was getting on board here, though that obviously didn’t last. Even though she’s playing a massive cliché, Jennifer Connelly has always been a favourite of mine and she gives her role more than it deserves. She also works quite well opposite Cruise, not always an easy thing for a leading lady. They’re both 80s/90s icons to some extent, but this kind of thing isn’t normally in Connelly’s wheelhouse these days so it’s fun to see her in something a bit less serious I guess. Elsewhere, Glen Powell is perfectly punchable as the film’s equivalent of Val Kilmer’s arrogant friendly villain ‘Iceman’ (with a touch of Maverick). Powell steals his every moment with a smug, self-satisfied smile. I also enjoyed watching a well-cast Jon Hamm chew Cruise’s Maverick out even though his role is basically the same as Harris’ in the film. Miles Teller is well-utilised as the son of Anthony Edwards and Meg Ryan’s characters from the first film. Having him made up to look like Edwards’ ‘Goose’ was a masterstroke. It's a shame they couldn’t get Meg Ryan in there somewhere, but she doesn’t act all that often these days (the way they cover for her absence is in my view rather unnecessary and brutal). I was far less impressed with Monica Barbaro, who tries too damn hard to be the ‘tough chick’, I found her a constant irritation and not at all believable. The dialogue she and the other pilots are given during the flying sequences in particular is dreadfully clichéd which probably didn’t help. Given his severe health limitations, Val Kilmer’s limited participation in this is as best as can be and it was nice that he wasn’t forgotten.

 

To be honest, for a film that runs at a pretty epic length this really isn’t terribly three dimensional and it only looks better in comparison to the first film because the first film was so empty. It’s nice that we get an actual mission this time but once again the external threat is barely present. It’s there, enough so that it’s noticeable in comparison to the first film, but not enough for it to be substantial or even satisfactory. The ‘enemy’ is still painted too vaguely to give much of a crap. I don’t even think the ‘good guys’ are given enough depth except Cruise’s Maverick.

 

There are elements here that lift this remake/sequel hybrid above the original, chiefly the excellent, assured performance by Cruise and some of the sights and sounds. However, unless you’re a fan of the original there’s still not a whole lot else here aside from a lot of running time. It’s OK but even then it’s really only in comparison to the borderline subpar original in my view.

 

Rating: C+