Tom Cruise P-51 …

[airnutz]

I was "scarred for life" after watching the movie "Pearl Harbor with Ben Affleck in 2001. The CGI was horrible. the worst part is they shipped two real Zeros, a couple P-40's and lots of the TORA replicas to Hawaii and had real movie pilots like Steve Hinton on hand for filming. Then, they had one second frames, similar to an early MTV music video. Absolute waste of millions of dollars on the real aircraft. Most disappointing war movie of them all.
Recently the remake of "Midway" and of course "Top Gun Maverick" have been great. The key is to only expect entertainment. Was it worth the price of admission? As a bonus, if the sounds match the engine type and the guns are accurate , that's a bonus. I enjoyed the latest Top Gun but suspected many scenes got deleted to keep the movie around two hours. They surely had more romance and P-51 video in the unedited version. It had a minimum of romance similar to the "Mission Impossible" movies TC does. The movie is a commercial product for the masses and seems to have hit the bullseye. I plan to go back and see on IMAX.

Hopefully when they release the DVD there'll be an expanded Directors Cut to satisfy the itch for more...

[Dave Hadfield]

Me too -- there was hype about the sound track, but I came away not humming anything.

Not very hopeful about Tom Hanks' B-17 movie. Unfortunately.

All CGI or mockups.

[Xray]

Never did watch top gun, though I'm sure I must have seen some of the flying sequences.
Never cared for the concept of a romance soap opera wrapped in a thin layer of military ,, And yes, I recall pearl harbor being worse of all, literally fell asleep with my daughter on my lap, and she nodded out too.
Doubt if I'll watch this one either, too much actual footage out there to get hyped up about manufactured ,,, But I may watch snippets, and this day and age of free movies, might get around to trying to watch it at some point in time. Never was much of a TC fan but gotta say, Rain Man was pretty good.

[hurricane_yank]

I was "scarred for life" after watching the movie "Pearl Harbor with Ben Affleck in 2001. The CGI was horrible. the worst part is they shipped two real Zeros, a couple P-40's and lots of the TORA replicas to Hawaii and had real movie pilots like Steve Hinton on hand for filming. Then, they had one second frames, similar to an early MTV music video. Absolute waste of millions of dollars on the real aircraft. Most disappointing war movie of them all.
Recently the remake of "Midway" and of course "Top Gun Maverick" have been great. The key is to only expect entertainment. Was it worth the price of admission? As a bonus, if the sounds match the engine type and the guns are accurate , that's a bonus. I enjoyed the latest Top Gun but suspected many scenes got deleted to keep the movie around two hours. They surely had more romance and P-51 video in the unedited version. It had a minimum of romance similar to the "Mission Impossible" movies TC does. The movie is a commercial product for the masses and seems to have hit the bullseye. I plan to go back and see on IMAX.

Hopefully when they release the DVD there'll be an expanded Directors Cut to satisfy the itch for more...

In the expanded edition he puts the F-14 into a reverse flat spin and brings Goose back to life.

[airnutz]

In the expanded edition he puts the F-14 into a reverse flat spin and brings Goose back to life.

Holy Kobayashi Maru Captain Kirk!!!

[rwdfresno]

I happened to really enjoy TG:M. For an interesting perspective check out these NFWS/SFTI (TOPGUN) instructors giving their reviews on The Fighter Pilot Podcast. https://youtu.be/r5tJA9pluxY

[Zac Yates]

too much actual footage out there to get hyped up about manufactured

The vast majority of flying scenes are actual aircraft. There is the bare minimum of CGI. Using that as an excuse not to see the movie is only depriving yourself of some stunning aerial sequences that deserve to be seen on the biggest screen possible.

[Randy Haskin]

too much actual footage out there to get hyped up about manufactured

The vast majority of flying scenes are actual aircraft. There is the bare minimum of CGI.

Many of the scenes of "actual aircraft" doing any sort of maneuvering have been digitally manipulated.

It is really playing word games to say it isn't "CGI", because the shots in the movie don't depict things that actually occurred in the same place at the same time when filmed. They have been digitally combined afterward to produce what you see on screen.

[ZRX61]

The best quote I've seen about the movie is "Don't let your kid use this movie as a reason to end up painting the side of a Destroyer"

[Blackbirdfan]

too much actual footage out there to get hyped up about manufactured

The vast majority of flying scenes are actual aircraft. There is the bare minimum of CGI.

Many of the scenes of "actual aircraft" doing any sort of maneuvering have been digitally manipulated.

It is really playing word games to say it isn't "CGI", because the shots in the movie don't depict things that actually occurred in the same place at the same time when filmed. They have been digitally combined afterward to produce what you see on screen.

Much of the aerial sequences were shot by the Patriots jet team. The F18s, f14 and whatever the russian things were were superimposed over the L39s, but the sequences were actually flown by real aircraft. There was some stuff actually shot in F18s as well. The stuff in the P51, was done in the P51. Apparently where Tom Cruise splits the pair of F18s was the scariest thing the pilots involved had ever done.

The flying is real. The jets depicted were not there, but there were actually jets performing the scenes, and being filmed by another jet.

Will

[Randy Haskin]

Much of the aerial sequences were shot by the Patriots jet team. The F18s, f14 and whatever the russian things were were superimposed over the L39s, but the sequences were actually flown by real aircraft. There was some stuff actually shot in F18s as well. The stuff in the P51, was done in the P51. Apparently where Tom Cruise splits the pair of F18s was the scariest thing the pilots involved had ever done.

The flying is real. The jets depicted were not there, but there were actually jets performing the scenes, and being filmed by another jet.

Will

Yes, we know that they were originally actual aerial scenes of flying aircraft. However, they were digitally manipulated and what you see on screen is not representative of what actually occurred.

The F-14, SU-57, and Darkstar were not real aircraft, but the CGI overlays you were referring to. They were actually digital overlays of flying F-18s, not L-39s.



The rest of the flying scenes had multiple, regular instances of digital manipulation after shooting. It would take too long to list each shot-by-shot and point it out, because there are too many of them, but essentially any sequence where multiple aircraft are maneuvering with one another was digitally altered to bring the aircraft closer to one another than they were when they were actually flying and filmed.

These three, just for instance, did not occur this way, at this distance, in real life.

[Zac Yates]

The F18s [...] were superimposed over the L39s

Not true. The F/A-18s were real and the Su-57s and F-14 were done as Randy explained. Aerial co-ordinator Kevin LaRosa and naval liaison Captain (Reserve) Brian "Ferg" Ferguson explain it all in detail on The Fighter Pilot Podcast (links to their respective episodes here and here.

[Saville]

I saw the movie last night on the big screen.

I'd say it was pretty good. Not great but pretty good. Enjoyable.

It was a little predictable - for example, you knew exactly how Maverick would get out of the last predicament.

And they borrowed heavily from "The Hunters" and "633 Squadron" but that's ok since most people today don't even know those movies exist.

Glad they made it. Enjoyed it. But I think the first Top Gun movie was a little bit better - even though this movie had a Mustang in it.

[JohnB]

If nothing else, think of the millions of people around the world who now know what a P-51 is and that there are warbirds out there.

BTW: PoF has TC's Mustang on display through labor day, I would imagine it might draw some extra visitors.
They obviously realize the good the film can do for the warbird industry.

[Ken]

Nice point JohnB. Warbird groups have an opportunity to market (and benefit from) that connection. I hope someone seizes the opportunity while this is still in the public's forefront.

Ken