I have a naive airplane question. Why ever take off with the wings swept back? When would you want to need a longer runway?
When Bruce is in the water below you’re gonna need a longer runway.
Maybe a naive response but I assumed they do always take off with the wings out. I thought Soren was saying Rooster was surprised Mav extended the wings while on the taxiway specifically because he assumed he would taxi to the actual runway first, then extend the wings. Extending the wings on the taxiway would be the first indication Mav was going to take off from the taxiway, surprising Rooster.
But I don’t remember the scene that well, and that sorta relies on Rooster not having noticed that the runway wasn’t an option until Mav’s wingin’ it. Which I think is Tom’s point? What did Rooster think was going to happen?
My understanding – based strictly on playing videogames – is that you would never do this. In fact, I’m guessing you’d have a hard time getting enough lift to get airborne with the wings swept back. I wouldn’t be surprised if an F-14 literally couldn’t take off without extending its wings. The wings sweep back to reduce drag and therefore conserve fuel at high speeds.
And don’t even get me started on Top Gun’s absurd missile shenanigans or we’ll be here all night!
-Tom
Tom’s point as articulated on the podcast was technical nerdery about the F14 not being able to take off without extending its wings and why is Rooster freaking out about this. My point is the context is what’s making him freak out - and he’s right to! They’re inches form going splat against a wall, their landing gears get shed off. Why, it’s stunt so crazy only a Maverick mavericking maverickingly could pull it off!
(Also it’s a fun complication for a sequence that otherwise would’ve been perfunctory, it’s set up well by the Tomahawk strike, and leads to a much more satisfying conclusion than a smooth landing on the hangar would’ve been. Like most of Top Gun: Maverick, it is capital letters Good Writing.)
Again, this is really confusing to me. It doesn’t occur to Rooster that Pete Mitchell is going to attempt to take off in the F-14 until the wings sweep forward? Why did he think he’d been instructed to fill the F-14’s gas tank? Why did he think he was climbing into the cockpit? Did he not realize five minutes earlier, along with all of us Cinemascore voters in the audience, that Tom Cruise was going to fly them home in the F-14?
It’s a minor point, but I can’t be the only one who missed the apparent intent of that scene!
-Tom
A guy I work with pointed out that the movie’s allegory is really about movies, and movie stars, and how they’re gradually being replaced by CG and algorithms. But Tom Cruise is all, “Not today!”
Now I don’t cry listening to podcasts, but if I did…
it would be when people who have, weirdly, been a part of my life for over ten years, don’t cry at movies that resonate with their feeling of loss and struggle, because that would, in turn, resonate with me.
I still sometimes cannot believe how much a part of my perspective on movies is due to the pod, having learned things about movies and articulating criticism, cherishing the differing opinions, and turning me on to dozens and dozens of movies I might not even have heard of otherwise (speaking of, I listened to this ep not having watched Maverick, and now wanting to. thanks). Many old episodes are a comfort to me, an aural blanket of sorts, and still put a smile on my face even when things are bad.
So if I were to tear up over a podcast, which I certainly don’t, it’d be when I realize that people who I never met, talking about movies and sharing their lives on a podcast, means this much to me.
Hah! Same. I never really dared to ask because I didn’t want to be that internet weirdo :D
I cannot possibly tell you how much it means to read this. So I won’t even try. And since we’re not the types to wear our emotions on our sleeves, suffice it to say, @puddingbrummsel, a manly handshake ensues!
-Tom
I’m so happy to share that silly little moment from my life with you guys! :) And I’m even happier that we can do it with two actors who we all miss very much.
-Tom
P.S. New podcast for the movies Thelma and The Innocents to be posted Tuesday night/Wednesday morning!
Finally caught up with this and found the flying scenes outstanding but the rest rather perfunctory. I wished I had caught it on the big screen, as I would imagine that the flying scenes are much more impactful and everything else in the film only needs to be inoffensive to give the audience a breather from the spectactular action.
Anyways, the greatest joy was not watching the movie, but actually having a rare new podcast episode to listen to. Many others have done a better job at expressing how much they value the podcast and how big of a role it played in their lives. So I just want to say thank you for all the enjoyment it has brought me up to now and the opportunity to hear your voices again on a new episode.
And speaking of voices, I just want to point out to @tomchick that according to Joseph Kosinski, Val Kilmer’s original voice was in fact used in the film instead of a digital recreation:
Q: There were reports that a London-based tech company has used artificial intelligence to restore Val Kilmer’s voice. Was that used in the film?
Kosinski: I’ve read about it and saw Val is working with that company. But I’ve never used that technology and we didn’t use that A.I. technology in “Top Gun.” (Kilmer’s) voice was digitally altered and blended a little bit just for clarity.
Missed this in the theater and then decided to wait until I got a fancy new TV to watch it at home. But then I waited forever to buy one and just got around to watching it last night, on Memorial Day. RIP Goose.
I think Rooster expected Maverick to try and taxi out to the actual runway (they were only on a taxiway, not a runway) and use that instead. He wasn’t surprised that Pete was trying to take off, he was surprised that they were going to take off right from that position. Which is not an unreasonable thing for him to think, there were like 30 feet of not-actual-runway in front of them before a giant piece of collapsed something blocking their way. And also Rooster is super cautious conservative man. But not like the racist kind. Maybe.
This makes sense. Not sure why I wasn’t able to figure it out during the movie, but I blame the various other dumbnesses for making me expect further dumbness.
Now that this is streaming, I’ve been mildly tempted to rewatch, but mostly I think I’m happy to leave it alone as a theatrical experience and one of our final podcasts. I haven’t even ducked into the other thread where people are talking about it, but I’m guessing it was a big hit here on the forum.
Also, this podcast was released on my birthday. Thanks, guys! All I got you was this post :(
I think that could play into why it bounces for some people. It’s a movie that really benefits from the biggest possible screen and sound system.
The first time I saw it on a huge system, the second time I saw it at home, and it did not feel like the same movie. Jet engines, go figure.
In the theater I went to, they had a display showing the differences between the regular version and the IMAX version, showing how you would see much more in the actual frame in the IMAX version. More movies should do this. Advertise the IMAX specialness. Especially Christopher Nolan movies, since he tends to film with IMAX cameras.