Top 5 of 2022 Domestically (so far)

1) Dr. Strange 2
2) The Batman
3) Top Gun
4) Sonic the Hedgehog 2
5) Uncharted

Only 6 films have grossed 100 M, only 3 have made 200 M

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Tommy C,

Finally went to see Top Gun Maverick yesterday. When I said 10 truckloads of nostalgia I wasn't kidding!

Theater was about 40% full for a 3pm Wed showing.

This couldn't have been difficult to write as it is basically the first movie all over again. Even parts of the original script are tossed in. The whole mission concept seemed like a Star Wars rip off.

It ignores its own timeline (Goose's kid should be like 40 by now) and is even more annoying than the first for an ex Navy type like myself.
(I don't think anyone consulted or even cared about Navy regs, protocol or reality)

Still ya gotta give Cruise credit he pulled off a fun and enjoyable summer ride at the movies. The upgrades in film technology since 1986 plays very well in all of the flight scenes. I can't say I understand the 97% RT score but if you can catch this one at the theater it is worth it.


Of course Jurassic World only has a 30% RT score and is killing it at the BO.

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:
Finally went to see Top Gun Maverick yesterday. When I said 10 truckloads of nostalgia I wasn't kidding!

.......

Of course Jurassic World only has a 30% RT score and is killing it at the BO.

I think a lot of people think that Top Gun is all live action, so have given it extra credit for that. The reality being it has quite a lot of CGI but makes extensive use of in cockpit filming and some actual live action flying. I am still weighing up whther to go see it in the cinema where it will be at its best.

Jurassic World has been panned by a lot of film critics here in the UK with one and two star reviews. The jist of the complaints being that while the set piece action sequences are well done, they are generic and often just stuck in rather than being a logical part of the storyline. I think one reviewer even went as far as to suggest they scripted/worked out all the action sequences first...then wrote a script that included all of them

I'm weighing up whether or not to see both of these films in the cinema as I have a couple of vouchers to use at my local Cineworld. Though I will probably hang on to one for 'Thor: Love and Thunder' which looks a lot like it will be totally predictable...but a whole lot of fun

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:
(I don't think anyone consulted or even cared about Navy regs, protocol or reality)

How do you afford a P-51 on an O-6 salary?

How many officers can spend 36 years moving from LT to CAPT without washing out?

quote:

Originally posted by Kevin F:
Jurassic World has been panned by a lot of film critics here in the UK with one and two star reviews.

The problem with Jurassic World isn't the dinosaurs or the set piece action sequences. It's everything else that comes in between in this overlong film. The last three films are basically the same plot, although I have to believe that Dominion can't be as bad as Fallen Kingdom. But then again, they brought back more chatter with the three stars of the prior trilogy and all of the five starring characters are just nauseating in their goodness and sincerity, so maybe its worse.

Just watching Pratt, Howard, Dern, Goldblum and Neill praise each other's remarkable talents to high heaven at the red carpet premieres made me wish their characters would all get eaten. Alas, I fear I will be disappointed there.

This is just one of those movies that will make a fortune simply because everyone has seen all the others and must see the "ending", even though only the first installment of each trilogy was halfway worth watching.

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Mullins:

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:
(I don't think anyone consulted or even cared about Navy regs, protocol or reality)

How do you afford a P-51 on an O-6 salary?

How many officers can spend 36 years moving from LT to CAPT without washing out?

How do you get a variety of Top Gun graduates to train and every last one of them are Lieutenant?

How is an Admiral near death still commander of the Pacific Fleet?

quote:

Originally posted by Kevin F:
I think one reviewer even went as far as to suggest they scripted/worked out all the action sequences first...then wrote a script that included all of them

Haha! I have felt that way since the second film. It has just been a series of bigger and better monsters. It's nearly impossible to break spoiler alert protocol with these movies because nothing original is going on. I would say check out TG and JW at the theater cause a small home screen will increase one's critical thinking abilities. These weren't made for that.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
Just watching Pratt, Howard, Dern, Goldblum and Neill praise each other's remarkable talents to high heaven at the red carpet premieres made me wish their characters would all get eaten. Alas, I fear I will be disappointed there.

Well....they do have remarkable talents. Just not in this movie.

I have a friend who always points out the things in movies that would never happen in the Navy. He didn't like "Iron Eagle," "Crimson Tide," nor "Battleship." I don't think he likes "Iron Eagle II" any better. He hasn't said anything bad about "The Hunt for Red October" so he at least tolerates that one.

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:
It ignores its own timeline (Goose's kid should be like 40 by now) and is even more annoying than the first for an ex Navy type like myself.
(I don't think anyone consulted or even cared about Navy regs, protocol or reality)

quote:

Originally posted by catskilleagle:
He hasn't said anything bad about "The Hunt for Red October" so he at least tolerates that one.

He's okay with a Soviet (or, strictly speaking, Lithuanian) Naval Captain speaking with a Scots accent?

Can't vouch for accuracy, but the two best submarine movies I have seen are "The Enemy Below" and "Das Boat". I did like "The Hunt for Red October" for its entertainment value. It's probably the only Alec Baldwin movie I can stand, but realistic it wasn't.

quote:

Originally posted by catskilleagle:
I have a friend who always points out the things in movies that would never happen in the Navy. He didn't like "Iron Eagle," "Crimson Tide," nor "Battleship." I don't think he likes "Iron Eagle II" any better. He hasn't said anything bad about "The Hunt for Red October" so he at least tolerates that one.

Movie scripts that are so far fetched like Battleship and Iron Eagle typically don't bother me as they aren't making any pretense at being realistic. Most military film inaccuracies are forgivable while others insist on riding the BS train.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
Can't vouch for accuracy, but the two best submarine movies I have seen are "The Enemy Below" and "Das Boat". I did like "The Hunt for Red October" for its entertainment value. It's probably the only Alec Baldwin movie I can stand, but realistic it wasn't.

It's been so long since I have seen Enemy Below that I have forgotten it but Das Boot was intense. I had to do some work on the modern fast attack subs while stationed in Connecticut. I can't even imagine how crazy those things were with 1930's technology.

quote:

Originally posted by mykdude:
It's been so long since I have seen Enemy Below that I have forgotten it but Das Boot was intense. I had to do some work on the modern fast attack subs while stationed in Connecticut. I can't even imagine how crazy those things were with 1930's technology.

The best part about "The Enemy Below" and "Das Boat" is that neither one was propaganda but dealt with the human cost of war on both sides. "The Enemy Below" holds up quite well for its age and Robert Mitchum and Curt Jurgens are terrific as the respective Captains of a Navy Destroyer locked up with a German U-boat.

Yes, "The Enemy Below" and "Das Boot" were both great movies. I remember my stepdad telling me about "The Enemy Below" in the 80's so we watched for it back when you couldn't just type in what you wanted to watch.

There was an episode of the original "Star Trek," "Balance of Terror," that was like a submarine movie and seems to have been inspired by "The Enemy Below." It's my favorite episode.

I read "The Hunt for Red October" after hearing about it a couple of years after it was published - great stuff. The movie changed some things but didn't mess with the story so I liked the movie too - pretty much watch it every time it's on when there's nothing else to watch.

Yeah, he was okay with that because he likes Sean Connery. I wonder if Russian native speakers thought he spoke with a Scottish accent when he speaks Russian at the beginning of the movie.

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Mullins:

quote:

Originally posted by catskilleagle:
He hasn't said anything bad about "The Hunt for Red October" so he at least tolerates that one.

He's okay with a Soviet (or, strictly speaking, Lithuanian) Naval Captain speaking with a Scots accent?

Seems like Disney is taking a hit.

First, "Lightyear" debuts to a lukewarm 50 M, and now this news

https://www.msn.com/en-us/movi...r-AAYFxYF?li=BBnbfcL

There are too many MCU TV shows and they have now turned to second and third tier characters that only true Marvel readers know. Is it reasonable to expect that general TV viewers will become obsessed by characters they never heard about? Are the same the same expert MCU viewers expected to eat up all of them? Success can't be defined as only breaking the record and failure as not breaking the record. That's why they are records.

Disney has too many of these shows to keep up with, even for those of a mind to do it, but it has to keep feeding its streaming channel with new content of anything Marvel.

quote:

Originally posted by Tommy C:
Seems like Disney is taking a hit.

First, "Lightyear" debuts to a lukewarm 50 M,

The woke/progressive people at Disney who want to insert social messages into everything don't seem to realize that the parents of middle America that buy the tickets don't share their values.

quote:

Originally posted by Tommy C:
Seems like Disney is taking a hit.

First, "Lightyear" debuts to a lukewarm 50 M, and now this news

https://www.msn.com/en-us/movi...r-AAYFxYF?li=BBnbfcL

Which is a shame, because Ms. Marvel is an excellent show. I feel releasing it while Obi-Wan is still being released, on the same day, no less, killed it.

quote:

Originally posted by Raven:
There are too many MCU TV shows and they have now turned to second and third tier characters that only true Marvel readers know. Is it reasonable to expect that general TV viewers will become obsessed by characters they never heard about?

Why did people give Guardians of the Galaxy a chance, then? Talk about a roster of Marvel D-listers.

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Mullins:
The woke/progressive people at Disney who want to insert social messages into everything don't seem to realize that the parents of middle America that buy the tickets don't share their values.

Have you watched the series? Her character is of Indian descent, it only make sense that their lifestyle is represented accurately. I'm actually finding it an interesting look into a culture I know nothing about (if it is indeed accurate).

quote:

Originally posted by Ted Dastick Jr.:

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Mullins:
The woke/progressive people at Disney who want to insert social messages into everything don't seem to realize that the parents of middle America that buy the tickets don't share their values.

Have you watched the series? Her character is of Indian descent, it only make sense that their lifestyle is represented accurately. I'm actually finding it an interesting look into a culture I know nothing about (if it is indeed accurate).

My comment was about Lightyear, not Ms. Marvel.