Sequel to 1986 movie Top Gun is being made

[Ns1]

Ohhh cooooommmmmonnn! Can't they just leave a movie alone? It's okay to have a stand alone movie Hollywood. And it's about drones? LOL. Way to be totally subservient to the latest cultural meme. Their only goal it seems it to cash out on nostalgia, it's pathetic. Is there nothing original anymore?

What's next? Back to the Future 4?

FYI: Hollywood is in the business of making money.

 

[Franz316]

FYI: Hollywood is in the business of making money.

Doesn't make their method for going about it any less pathetic.

 

[rh71]

but this time instead of the Russians it will have to be Taliban or ISIS migs. Come on, we know they exist.

There's also got to be a line about rubber dog shit.

 

[Ns1]

Doesn't make their method for going about it any less pathetic.

I'm positive the industry executives are reeling in butthurt from this opinion.

 

[KeithP]

repost
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2437385&highlight=top+gun

There have been a bunch of link bait articles written about this and they all seem to stem from this Variety article http://variety.com/2015/film/news/top-gun-2-maverick-drone-warfare-1201529697/

All that article really says is that the project is "in development" which means almost nothing in Hollywood.

-KeithP

 

[qliveur]

No.

 

[Genx87]

If this is like the Point Break remake they will be flying everything except naval fighters.

 

[Sonikku]

They spend 9/10 of the movie trying to get out of the hanger until their F-35's get ready for prime time and the last 1/10 of the movie being told that technology has rendered dog fighting irrelevant any way. The End.

 

[CZroe]

repost
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2437385&highlight=top+gun

There have been a bunch of link bait articles written about this and they all seem to stem from this Variety article http://variety.com/2015/film/news/top-gun-2-maverick-drone-warfare-1201529697/

All that article really says is that the project is "in development" which means almost nothing in Hollywood.

-KeithP

Bah. Everyone knew that Tony Scott himself was working on it when he committed suicide. When the original creator is making a sequel then I don't mind as much and don't consider it as much of a nostalgic cash-in as other modern sequels to classic movies. My biggest concern was them involving Bruckheimer again after what he has become. My next biggest concern was it going all CG when most of what made Top Gun great was knowing that those were REAL planes doing REAL maneuvers with REAL cameras flying around up there with them. It's just too easy to do all that with CGI and it sucks all the novelty ("magic") out of it.

 

[Brainonska511]

 

[nakedfrog]

What's next? Back to the Future 4?

You're going to sit there and tell me you don't what to know where Doc and his brood went on the time train?
YOU LYING SACK OF RAT ANUSES!
I WILL CUT YOU!!!


"Anuses" is the plural of "anus", right guys?

 

[ImpulsE69]

You're going to sit there and tell me you don't what to know where Doc and his brood went on the time train?
YOU LYING SACK OF RAT ANUSES!
I WILL CUT YOU!!!


"Anuses" is the plural of "anus", right guys?

No, it is anusass. :sneaky:

 

[AgentUnknown]

Man the opening to that movie was awesome. This thread made me open netflix and watch it.

I agree with goose kid seeking revenge as a rival drone pilot controller.

 

[SKORPI0]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pwjg97w9_c :awe:

 

[Svnla]

Tom Cruise said the movie will be shot in 2018. What will the plot be?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/internet-already-got-plot-apos-085947720.html

 

[Sonikku]

Tom Cruise comes out as gay and needs to fly a fighter jet for reasons.

 

[JulesMaximus]

I'm guessing Cruise will play the role Tom Skerritt played in the original. It will come down to who they cast in the role of the young pilot he will need to mentor. If they fuck that up it will suck.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Tom Cruise said the movie will be shot in 2018. What will the plot be?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/internet-already-got-plot-apos-085947720.html

LOL! The comments on that link a pretty funny.

 

[nathanddrews]

C'mon guys, the plot writes itself:

Tom Cruise is the captain/mentor role, but still has his sweet motorcycle/shades, never settled down. The first WOMAN Top Gun candidate - whaaaaa??? (record needle screech noise). She's all business, all the misogynists call her a "b-word" and her call sign is ICEQUEEN. This movie defies convention and is IN YOUR FACE about defying expectation (and convention) while you watch our titular heroine fly straight up the butthole of the patriarchy and smash through the glass ceiling those ol' flyboys call a face. BUT Tom Cruise may be 67 years old, but the tension between them is too much, taboo even! Does he give up his command to be with her? Will she survive the next mission and punch nazis in the face? YOU BETTA BELIEVE IT SISTA! Too bad for Maverick, she's totally out of his league and identifies as a trans gender non-conforming male. You've never seen volleyball like this!
SUMMER 2019!
/trailer

Followed by backlash against how horrible the idea of a sequel is, but the studio uses the negative spin to market it as "sticking it to the neckbeard white males" in order to fill seats, a la Ghostbusters 2016.

 

[Linux23]

i'm thinking aliens are going to be involved some how.

 

[ultimatebob]

but this time instead of the Russians it will have to be Taliban or ISIS migs. Come on, we know they exist.

There's also got to be a line about rubber dog shit.

I thought that it was "cool" to hate on the Russians again. America First, and all that.

It would be kinda cool if the Admiral's daughter showed up in this one as a pilot. That was one of the characters I found myself wondering about from the old movie.

 

[ultimatebob]

While we're doing 80's movie sequels, can we do Back To The Future as well? Maybe we could send someone back to 1985 and give them some technology to make 2015 as cool as it was supposed to be in the second movie

I still want my real flying hoverboard, dammit!

 

[darkswordsman17]

I'm fine with this, but only if they can make a propaganda movie that heavily subterfuges like the original (where they made the hypermasculine military bullshit into blatantly softcore gay porn).

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin.../gIQAU6qJgJ_story.html?utm_term=.9a1a02786559

Why did director Tony Scott go along with it? In his words, "I didn't have a vision of what I was doing other than just doing soft porn ... I got the guys to get all their gear off and their pants and sprayed them in baby oil."

 

[darkswordsman17]

FYI: Hollywood is in the business of making money.

I guess that's why we get the constant bitching and moaning when their idiotic ideas flop?

Plus, uh, considering the "creative accounting" where they allegedly make little to nothing even when they rake in hundreds of millions, they sure act like they're in the business of not making money.

I'm positive the industry executives are reeling in butthurt from this opinion.

I don't know, how massively a lot of their remakes have been flopping, they seem pretty damn butthurt about something. Granted because they're assholes they try to just blame it on piracy, I'm sure people being tired of shitty remakes has nothing to do with it.

 

[feralkid]

Ohhh cooooommmmmonnn! Can't they just leave a movie alone? It's okay to have a stand alone movie Hollywood. And it's about drones? LOL. Way to be totally subservient to the latest cultural meme. Their only goal it seems it to cash out on nostalgia, it's pathetic. Is there nothing original anymore?

What's next? Back to the Future 4?

I couldn't agree more.






I wonder if it will be in 3-D?



.