Ward Carroll uses the Navy contract with the production company to reverse engineer Top Gun Maverick:
Ward Carroll notices/hypothesizes that:
- they are in an F-14 stolen from not-Iran;
- Rooster was shot down by the not-Iranians and Maverick went into rescue him;
- Rooster is in the back seat and Maverick is flying;
- that is a not-Iran Su-57;
- Maverick will repeat his nose-up maneuver from the first film
REALLY interesting video on Ukraine.
Saw the movie. Was very good.
Special effects were extremely good.
Hokey dialog. Overwhelming re-use of dialog from the first film had a mixed result.
Thanks for the honest review. I kind of suspected as much, based upon the hokey trailer from one of the âstarsâ on an evening show. Seems Hollywrinkle just doesnât have any real talent, at least in the writing sphere, anymore. All of it is now âtechnicalâ.
Enter the plaintiffsâ bar:
Complaint (one of plaintiffâs attorneys is former 9th Circuit Chief Judge Kozinski):
Laughable chart of similarities:
Docket:
Contains discussion of scenes deleted from Top Gun: Maverick:
Will we see an extended cut?
Of course! Hollywood never gives up on a money-maker - until it totally dies.
Hmm. Some aspects of it kind of look like a B-2. Or that hokey plane with the broad flying off a carrier.
Top Gun Maverick was so obsessed with using real F-18 footage that they apparently just kept re-using footage of a loadout including two bombs.
That makes no sense for Hangmanâs Alert-5.
Neil deGrasse Tyson took to Twitter bring the authoritative voice of The Science to the opening of Top Gun: Maverick.
A few hours later, ToughSF rolled onto his six and called out âFox Oneâ.
Swatted like a worm, indeed. Eject! Eject! Eject!
The authoritative live of science may want to stick to formats such as the boobtube that donât allow feedback.
Edit: or Twitter needs to ban people that respond.
Enter the Defense Bar:
Your honor, what we have here is a case of the heirs wishing they had capitalized MORE the first time around. Their quest to enrich themselves should be denied and this case dismissed with prejudice.
(Always ask for âwith prejudiceâ or they will amend their complaint and your client will be right back in the same seat a year later.)