Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

So, I have a theory about the Tomcat... Are they making Maverick out to be a fictional Snort Snodgrass stand-in, and giving us a universe where the government signed off on his application to maintain an F-14 for personal use at air shows?  I can totally get behind that. :) 

Trailer looks like fun, and due to location, I'm actually curious if there will be any site-sponsored pre-showings of the film out here.  Should be a fun year.

Posted
52 minutes ago, davidwhangchoi said:

the F-14 at the end...:wub:

^^^^ This!! 

I normally don't do the opening day routine anymore with movies but I might just make the exception for this one. 

That was either some exceptional "Green Screen" work happening there or Tom was actually in an Super Hornet launching from a carrier.  

"I feel the need.... the need for speed!" 

Posted (edited)
34 minutes ago, 505thAirborne said:

^^^^ This!! 

I normally don't do the opening day routine anymore with movies but I might just make the exception for this one. 

That was either some exceptional "Green Screen" work happening there or Tom was actually in an Super Hornet launching from a carrier.  

"I feel the need.... the need for speed!" 

This is Tom Cruise we're talking about. He probably went and bought his own F-18 just so he can do his own stunts.

The real question is how they going to work in a scene of how him running 

Edited by BeyondTheGrave
Posted (edited)
On 12/15/2018 at 9:36 PM, Dobber said:

My guess, it’s supposed to be a made up foreign nation that is still using the Tomcat. Through the course of the movie Maverick and ‘Lil Goose need to escape from said country and steal it to make their get-a-way. Mav gets to  dominate in the sky one last time with the old bird.

Chris

I thinking my theory is spot on. Maverick and his flight are on an attack mission in the fictional country (what we see in the trailer) Mav and Lil’ Goose go down for some reason...shot down or mechanical issues...I say shot down by some identifiable Ace or Drone.... and then my theory above takes place with him taking down the Ace or Drone in the old Tomcat.

Chris

 

Edited by Dobber
Posted
22 minutes ago, electric indigo said:

Beach volleyball!

Lol, football this time ;)

Chris

Posted
3 hours ago, BeyondTheGrave said:

This is Tom Cruise we're talking about. He probably went and bought his own F-18 just so he can do his own stunts.

The real question is how they going to work in a scene of how him running 

Gonna say no on that Super Hornet purchase, however there's a super quick glimpse of a P-51D Mustang in that trailer. Betcha that's Cruise's personal plane. B))

Posted

I'm sold! :good:^_^ 

7 hours ago, Sanity is Optional said:

So, how many people think we're going to get a (Macross Plus style) plot about who needs human combat pilots when we have drones?

Same as 'Stealth'. Who needs a human pilot when we have A.I.'s? ;)

 

Posted
14 minutes ago, Big s said:

It looks like they kept the cgi to a minimum. I’m more interested than I thought I would have been 

The "every Hornet in the formation gets a vapor cone" shot looked pretty fake to me. 

Posted
11 minutes ago, David Hingtgen said:

The "every Hornet in the formation gets a vapor cone" shot looked pretty fake to me. 

Yeah, but the carrier take off looked pretty legit. As long as the CGI shots aren't noticeably bad I'll be happy.

 

Posted

Did anyone notice the as Maverick took down his sunglasses in his locker room, there is a picture of an F-117 out of focus?

Does that mean he might have flown one?  I have no idea what circumstances... but interesting.

Oh yeah, and F-14 at the very end, if only we get to see it with a couple of phoenix shots along with it.  That'll be nice.  And I do hope that they put up some Flankers as opposition, it would really rock.  Not the "terminator" flankers, but real life Su-35 types.  F-18E/F vs Su-35... hmmmm, would be kind of cool

As for the CGI, there is a right way to do CGI, and a wrong way.  So far, I don't see much wrong with this on the trailer.  I think they can make this work.  Looking forward to it.  I think that could've made the original  better, after all, there are only so many shots of the same sidewinder leaving the same rail that one can take.

 

Posted
4 hours ago, Shadow said:

Sold!

I'm kind of surprised Maverick wasn't wearing a JHMCS helmet and was wearing the traditional visor.

If they did that, you wouldn't be able to do facial expressions on camera. :p  I do wish we could get over the whole "my helmet needs lights for my face" bit, though.

48 minutes ago, David Hingtgen said:

The "every Hornet in the formation gets a vapor cone" shot looked pretty fake to me. 

It does, probably because of copy-pasta.  You can make one aircraft look good, but too many together, and you start to see how the effects are too similar to be coincidental.  At the very least, it's a composite shot of four separate runs by a solo hornet, but the vapor cones looked suspicious altogether.

On that note though, I'm slightly sad to see them sticking to the "too close to be real" maneuvering.  I guess the original got away with it, but even then jet wash was a real problem.  I don't think there's any way four individual hornets would be flying in that close of a formation at low level in a canyon.  They'd be eating each others' exhaust, not to mention turbulence and ground effect.

Posted

I noticed those were some big-ass GBU's under the wings when Maverick rolled inverted----not sure a Hornet (or any plane) can do that with that kind of load.  

Posted

I have never been so turned on by a movie trailer the way this Top Gun Maverick trailer just did.

Those reverse-angle cockpit shots of Tom Cruise in an F/A-18.... yes... Yes.... YES!!!!

Is he actually piloting for real in those trailer scenes?  If so, OOOH BABY!

Did I forget to mention that I love fighter jets?

Posted
1 hour ago, Shizuka the Cat said:

I have never been so turned on by a movie trailer the way this Top Gun Maverick trailer just did.

Those reverse-angle cockpit shots of Tom Cruise in an F/A-18.... yes... Yes.... YES!!!!

Is he actually piloting for real in those trailer scenes?  If so, OOOH BABY!

Did I forget to mention that I love fighter jets?

Nah, he was in the back seat of an F/A-18F and I figure the movie will just make it look like it’s a single seater with alternate forward facing shots with a pilot wearing his Maverick helmet.

Chris

Posted (edited)

My god, that HAS to be the lighting in the studio. Or the color grading. Or SOMETHING. No person can possibly be that artificially tan.

EDIT:

On topic, way better trailer than I thought it could or would be. Here's hoping the actual thing meets the expectations set up by this trailer.

Edited by kajnrig
Posted
8 hours ago, David Hingtgen said:

I noticed those were some big-ass GBU's under the wings when Maverick rolled inverted----not sure a Hornet (or any plane) can do that with that kind of load.  

Haven't there been demonstrations done with the Super Hornet carrying a bomb load? Those looked like GBU-24s.

I can't help but hope that maybe they worked out a deal with the Malaysian or Singaporean military's and we get to see actual Mig-29s or Su-30s as adversarial aircraft against the Super Hornets.

Posted

This former  Bug driver didn’t have much of a problem with the trailer. In fact the only thing he questioned/really commented on was the beginning and even then only stated that he never did that and it was probably a Blue’s pilot performing that.

 

Posted

Interesting thing, they actually did have a Blue Angel out here performing some assorted maneuvers and flyovers, as well as some oddball situations with other aircraft that we don't usually see out here.  Scuttlebutt was that they were actually using the aircraft as physical footage to overlay CGI on top of, or composite shots of other aircraft over.

Posted (edited)
35 minutes ago, AN/ALQ128 said:

https://twitter.com/markmackinnon/status/1152241649893945346

Not unexpected, but still disappointing.

Make sure to read the whole context and comments attached.  The patch changed entirely, and makes sense, if you look at the dates/locations.

Like so much of the internet, the original post is un-researched, inaccurate, and incomplete, but completely overwhelms the corrections following it.

Edited by Chronocidal

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...