2.0 out of 5 stars
Prop Gun, April 28 2000
We've seen it all a million times: Maverick and his buddies, fueled by Reagan-era geopolitics, knocking the Soviet fighters out of the sky; Maverick wearing his shades while riding his bike without a helmet (racing a jet fighter no less). Slick, explosive and full of MTV moments, "Top Gun" is the epitome of 80's movie-making. It's also one of the clearest exercises in plastic filmmaking I've ever seen.
In the midst of its 1986 release, the only thing missing from the hoopla surrounding "Top Gun" was any reference to the film's message. The reason is simple: there isn't one. In its place are instantly memorable images that clearly fit the recipe for success repeatedly concocted by producers Jerry Bruckheimer and the late Don Simpson.
In fact, "Top Gun" is little else behind a potpourri of slick shots of fast jets and good-looking people. Quentin Tarantino's now classic dissection of it as an introspective study of a man's struggle to come to terms with his own homosexuality gives too much credit to this overproduced and overhyped vacuum of a movie. Tony Scott, who has repeatedly shown that he can make above average Hollywood fare (e.g., "True Romance," "Crimson Tide"), fails to give the story any depth whatsoever. This becomes painfully evident when "Top Gun" unloads its inept attempts at getting us to identify with Maverick's "struggle" via the supposedly moving guitar theme and references to his relationship with his father. Heck, I didn't buy it when I was 13, much less now at 26. Then again, it figures that, being a man, I was immune to the movie's "Tiger Beat" factor, which I can only imagine would help account for its success.
Which brings me to the actors. I would give "Top Gun" only one star, but I would like to credit the casting director with assembling a first-rate ensemble, including Tom Cruise, Kelly McGillis, Anthony Edwards, Meg Ryan, Val Kilmer and Tom Skerritt. Sadly, they are ill-served by roles that could easily be played by William Shatner in all his hammy majesty. It's like putting together a team of top painters to do a color by numbers book.
The incredible preponderence of style over substance thus permeates the whole movie and, as a reference point, is eerily prescient of Joel Schumacher's 1990's oeuvre. Thankfully, the talent involved in this overlong commercial would eventually go on to do projects far more worthy of their abilities.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
2.0 out of 5 stars
Mind-Numbingly dumb, April 16 2000
Someone down the line said this is a movie for people"into aircraft and dogfights." If anything, it's foreveryone else. All of the dogfights in this movie are completely contrived and utterly preposterous. The action sequences are predictable and boring the first time, irritating the second, and disgusting the third.
The drama? What drama? All this movie contains are a few annoying one-liners, some ... 80s-qua-80s music, a pseudo-Romance, and a Tom Cruise who is playing impeccably himself. That is to say, he's doing absolutely nothing for the part.
Which might not neccessarily be bad. I'm not sure if there's anything that can be done with the plot. It's pathetic and boring from start to finish, a few arrogant two-bits strapped into paper-mache F-14s doing impossible tricks and fighting lame enemies.
Yawn!
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No