*** TOP GUN: MAVERICK *** (Spoiler Thread)

191,929 Views | 1717 Replies | Last: 3 mo ago by Marauder Blue 6
YouBet
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to GreasenUSA • 8:28p, 8/28/22
AG
GreasenUSA said:
YouBet said:
GreasenUSA said:
YouBet said:
BTW, sound editing thoughts here...we bought digitally through Apple. Paid $20 but I couldn't wait since I missed it in theaters. I'm curious if the blu-ray version will sound differently than the Apple Digital version?
The most you'll be able to get from streaming right now will be Dolby Digital Plus, which is compressed to somewhere around 768 Kbps. When it comes out on disc, you will get the full uncompressed audio track in DTS HD Master or TrueHD, which will be upwards of 4000 Kbps.


See I was wondering about that because I didn't notice all that great of sound with the digital version. Says it's in Atmos but that's the only codec I see.
Yeah, it should be the compressed version of Atmos in the Dolby Digital Plus codec. It still can provide height channels, but just at a lower bitrate.


I'm derailing but I wonder how many people have forgotten what truly good sound is since streaming cant equal a Blu-ray. I know I forget except on the rare occasion I watch one of my Blu-ray's.
Reply Quote
5
Scriffer
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to YouBet • 9:17p, 8/28/22
AG
Same boat here. I've started buying 4K Blu Ray's for that very reason.

Cannot wait for this to come out on disc
Reply Quote
DallasTeleAg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to YouBet • 10:13p, 8/28/22
YouBet said:

I'm derailing but I wonder how many people have forgotten what truly good sound is since streaming cant equal a Blu-ray. I know I forget except on the rare occasion I watch one of my Blu-ray's.
I think so. It's the same thing we have seen with music.
Reply Quote
maroon man
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:34p, 8/28/22
S
Actually the iTunes version is Dolby Atmos ..

Still the 4K discs I have vs iTunes : discs wins for sure but Apple Dolby Atmos has really come along way.
Reply Quote
1
fig96
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:40p, 8/28/22
AG
Can I just say I'm pleasantly surprised to see the notification for a ton of new posts and then they're actually about the movie for a change

Carry on EB posters.
Reply Quote
5
GreasenUSA
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to maroon man • 10:47p, 8/28/22
AG
maroon man said:
Actually the iTunes version is Dolby Atmos ..

Still the 4K discs I have vs iTunes : discs wins for sure but Apple Dolby Atmos has really come along way.
As mentioned, yes it's nice to have Atmos (height channels) encoded into streaming, but you're still only getting 5-20% of the bitrate quality out of that Dolby Digital Plus codec that you will eventually get from the full uncompressed True HD Atmos (and DTS HD Master Audio) tracks once the physical media is released.

The quality that streaming can provide in a Dolby Digital Plus codec is still nearly twice the bitrate of the Dolby Digital soundtracks that were on standard DVDs.
Reply Quote
2
2 edits
HvilleAggie
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to InternetFan02 • 11:03p, 8/28/22
AG
I thought the Cars - Drive was in consideration for the original film, then they switched to Berlin at the last minute?
Reply Quote
TCTTS
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to HvilleAggie • 11:40p, 8/28/22
AG
That's right. But because of that - because "Drive" was such a close second for the original movie - they initially decided to use it as Maverick & Penny's theme for this movie. There was even an edit of the movie with "Drive" used throughout. In fact, that's the whole reason Penny drives the Porsche, which, as I understand it, was featured another time or two in the earlier edit as well.

Ultimately, though, once Lady Gaga came on board, and they heard "Hold My Hand," they decided to use it instead (and also incorporate it into Zimmer's theme).
Reply Quote
5
2 edits
Chipotlemonger
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to TCTTS • 11:43p, 8/28/22
AG
I am very happy with where it ended up.
Reply Quote
1
TCTTS
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Chipotlemonger • 11:49p, 8/28/22
AG
I am too. I don't mind it at all, and I *love* the "Hold My Hand" music video. Personally, though, I wish we could have had the best of both worlds, and that they would have kept "Drive" in the final edit throughout, and then just used "Hold My Hand" in the final scene/over the end credits. But when you have Lady Gaga, a sure-fire hit single, radio play all summer, a shot at the Oscar for Best Original Song, etc, I get why they ultimately chose to use it throughout instead. Still, "Drive" is just so damn good, and would have been the perfect connective tissue to the '80s.
Reply Quote
5
1 edit
TCTTS
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to TCTTS • 11:55p, 8/28/22
AG
Reply Quote
2
TCTTS
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to GreasenUSA • 11:56p, 8/28/22
AG
This has all been really good to know. Thanks for sharing/explaining.
Reply Quote
1
Chipotlemonger
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to TCTTS • 12:01a, 8/29/22
AG
TCTTS said:
I am too. I don't mind it at all, and I *love* the "Hold My Hand" music video. Personally, though, I wish we could have had the best of both worlds, and that they would have kept "Drive" in the final edit throughout, and then just used "Hold My Hand" in the final scene/over the end credits. But when you have Lady Gaga, a sure-fire hit single, radio play all summer, a shot at the Oscar for Best Original Song, etc, I get why they ultimately chose to use it throughout instead. Still, "Drive" is just so damn good, and would have been the perfect connective tissue to the '80s.
I hear your points, but I personally disagree. I'd have to see it to believe it, but I think Drive would be just a little too tongue in cheek for this movie to use in some tie to the 80s.

And I think my own personal opinion of 'Drive' plays a part as well. It's a little repetitive and redundant to me. Gaga's song has some "story" flow to it.
Reply Quote
2
YouBet
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to GreasenUSA • 8:46a, 8/29/22
AG
I'll definitely be getting this on blu-ray then. Can't even remember that last one I purchased. It may have been LOTR.

One more comment on this and I'll shut up but for anyone who does not own Master and Commander on blu-ray, do yourself a favor and buy that if you have a great sound system. It is still the best sound from any movie I've ever heard. From loudness to the preciseness and placement of all the little sounds that the boat makes. It's amazing.

To bring this back to Top Gun, Tom Cruise is a god and has to go down as the biggest star ever.
Reply Quote
2
Chipotlemonger
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to YouBet • 9:17a, 8/29/22
AG
Yes I think Cruise has solidified himself as the biggest actor ever.

Also, love Master & Commander. I remember exactly what you are talking about in regards to sound.
Reply Quote
2
Scriffer
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:13a, 8/29/22
AG
Funny y'all mentioned that about Master and Commander.

I bought the DVD around 2005, and it was unwatchable on my crummy college TV. Maybe I should give it another try.

On Prime Day this year, I got LOTR, Indiana Jones, and the Dark Knight trilogy on 4K Blu Ray. Absolute game changer, especially for the recent releases. I've got 7.1 but not Atmos, and it's still pretty incredible.

Maverick might have me making an upgrade.
Reply Quote
1
joerobert_pete06
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:07a, 8/30/22
AG
Just watched it and it was good, enjoyed it.

Question though:
When did Iran start having a better Air Force than the US? Not sure why there was always an emphasis on how superior the enemy's planes were in the movie.
Reply Quote
maroon barchetta
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to joerobert_pete06 • 5:42a, 8/30/22
They bought them from Russia or China line they have done with many other military assets over their history?
Reply Quote
Cinco Ranch Aggie
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to joerobert_pete06 • 6:39a, 8/30/22
AG
joerobert_pete06 said:
Just watched it and it was good, enjoyed it.

Question though:
When did Iran start having a better Air Force than the US? Not sure why there was always an emphasis on how superior the enemy's planes were in the movie.
It's not that this enemy had superior aircraft to the US Navy (not Air Force in this case), it's that (a) the F/A-18 is an older airframe with older avionics and technology than those 5th-generation fighters they were going against, and (b) I believe Maverick himself stated that the F-35 (which I think qualifies as a 5th-generation aircraft) was not useful for the mission they were flying in this movie.

I'm an airplane nut but I'm not a pilot and am not familiar with the nitty gritty details of what US aircraft are geared for which type of missions, but I'd think the F-22 Raptor might have been a suitable airplane for the mission, but it's an Air Force bird, not Navy. The F-35 has 3 variants, one for the Air Force, one for the Navy, and one for the Marines if I'm not mistaken.
#FJB
Reply Quote
5
aTmAg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
7:39a, 8/30/22
AG
The only reason is that our 5th gen fighters are all single seater. They couldn't film the movie in any of those. So they had to make an excuse on why they needed to fly F-18s. The excuse was bogus, but you have to suspend disbelief.

Regarding those enemy 5th gen fighters, they are really 4 1/2th gen. The front is low observable, but the back is not. Those round ass engines would light up a radar. The supposed thought is "we would get you before we had to turn around". Of course, ours are low observable all the way around and would kick the crap out of them.
Reply Quote
4
1 edit
The Porkchop Express
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to joerobert_pete06 • 8:13a, 8/30/22
joerobert_pete06 said:
Just watched it and it was good, enjoyed it.

Question though:
When did Iran start having a better Air Force than the US? Not sure why there was always an emphasis on how superior the enemy's planes were in the movie.



I thought they kept hammering it home so you understand what disadvantage they are at in the F14 at the end. For the average movie goer, a fighter plane is a fighter plane, which made Roosters reaction to the 5th Gen doing the mid-air u-turn that much better.
MY post breakdown:
33% Star Wars
33% Astros
33% Making myself laugh
Reply Quote
5
BCG Disciple
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aTmAg • 8:20a, 8/30/22
AG
aTmAg said:
The only reason is that our 5th gen fighters are all single seater. They couldn't film the movie in any of those. So they had to make an excuse on why they needed to fly F-18s. The excuse was bogus, but you have to suspend disbelief.

Regarding those enemy 5th gen fighters, they are really 4 1/2th gen. The front is low observable, but the back is not. Those round ass engines would light up a radar. The supposed thought is "we would get you before we had to turn around". Of course, ours are low observable all the way around and would kick the crap out of them.

I assumed it was Chinese gear on loan or even Chinese pilots. I never once considered it to be Iran, simply because of it being advanced aircraft. I didn't even given it an second thought. Odd how we fill in blanks differently.
Reply Quote
aTmAg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BCG Disciple • 8:23a, 8/30/22
AG
BCG Disciple said:
aTmAg said:
The only reason is that our 5th gen fighters are all single seater. They couldn't film the movie in any of those. So they had to make an excuse on why they needed to fly F-18s. The excuse was bogus, but you have to suspend disbelief.

Regarding those enemy 5th gen fighters, they are really 4 1/2th gen. The front is low observable, but the back is not. Those round ass engines would light up a radar. The supposed thought is "we would get you before we had to turn around". Of course, ours are low observable all the way around and would kick the crap out of them.

I assumed it was Chinese gear on loan or even Chinese pilots. I never once considered it to be Iran, simply because of it being advanced aircraft. I didn't even given it an second thought. Odd how we fill in blanks differently.
I assumed the same as you. Sorta like Soviet planes over Vietnam.

I think the movie made up a plane, but it was based off of this (which is Chinese):
Reply Quote
2
1 edit
wangus12
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BCG Disciple • 8:27a, 8/30/22
AG
BCG Disciple said:
aTmAg said:
The only reason is that our 5th gen fighters are all single seater. They couldn't film the movie in any of those. So they had to make an excuse on why they needed to fly F-18s. The excuse was bogus, but you have to suspend disbelief.

Regarding those enemy 5th gen fighters, they are really 4 1/2th gen. The front is low observable, but the back is not. Those round ass engines would light up a radar. The supposed thought is "we would get you before we had to turn around". Of course, ours are low observable all the way around and would kick the crap out of them.

I assumed it was Chinese gear on loan or even Chinese pilots. I never once considered it to be Iran, simply because of it being advanced aircraft. I didn't even given it an second thought. Odd how we fill in blanks differently.
I think everyone went with Iran because we're talking about a country that is trying to develop a nuclear program and also still has some F-14s in use.
Reply Quote
6
maroon barchetta
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to wangus12 • 8:44a, 8/30/22
wangus12 said:
BCG Disciple said:
aTmAg said:
The only reason is that our 5th gen fighters are all single seater. They couldn't film the movie in any of those. So they had to make an excuse on why they needed to fly F-18s. The excuse was bogus, but you have to suspend disbelief.

Regarding those enemy 5th gen fighters, they are really 4 1/2th gen. The front is low observable, but the back is not. Those round ass engines would light up a radar. The supposed thought is "we would get you before we had to turn around". Of course, ours are low observable all the way around and would kick the crap out of them.

I assumed it was Chinese gear on loan or even Chinese pilots. I never once considered it to be Iran, simply because of it being advanced aircraft. I didn't even given it an second thought. Odd how we fill in blanks differently.
I think everyone went with Iran because we're talking about a country that is trying to develop a nuclear program and also still has some F-14s in use.


This.
Reply Quote
1
aTmAg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:47a, 8/30/22
AG
One thing is weird to me is that I always thought that the unnamed country in the first TG was lame. But this time it worked. Can't put my finger on why.
Reply Quote
Scriffer
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aTmAg • 8:54a, 8/30/22
AG
aTmAg said:
One thing is weird to me is that I always thought that the unnamed country in the first TG was lame. But this time it worked. Can't put my finger on why.

How old are you?

I felt the same as a kid with the original - born in 82 - but having lived in the post-9/11 world with Iran being a real threat, when I filled the gap on my own, it stuck.
Reply Quote
1
aTmAg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Scriffer • 9:07a, 8/30/22
AG
Scriffer said:
aTmAg said:
One thing is weird to me is that I always thought that the unnamed country in the first TG was lame. But this time it worked. Can't put my finger on why.

How old are you?

I felt the same as a kid with the original - born in 82 - but having lived in the post-9/11 world with Iran being a real threat, when I filled the gap on my own, it stuck.
I'm about 10 years older than you.
Reply Quote
SJEAg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aTmAg • 9:28a, 8/30/22
AG
aTmAg said:
One thing is weird to me is that I always thought that the unnamed country in the first TG was lame. But this time it worked. Can't put my finger on why.

Think a lot of it is because other movies in that era were all calling them out by name (Red Dawn, Firefox, Rocky IV, etc). They were the only enemy country anyone cared about, were perceived as a military equal, and we were united about hating (and fearing) them.

Also, I personally think us not using our best 5th gen fighters would be more annoying in TG2 if it was a real country. Even with the movie's explanation, I'd be stuck on why the eff is Iran outclassing us. But with the unknown factor I can get over it.

Reply Quote
5
aTmAg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:31a, 8/30/22
AG
I wonder if making it unnamed was a movie producer decision or a requirement placed on them by the military?
Reply Quote
1 edit
bthotugigem05
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aTmAg • 10:39a, 8/30/22
AG
The enemy fifth-gen fighters were based on the Sukhoi Su-57, a real plane just now in testing by the Russians (who will no doubt sell them to the Iranians).

It's not that we didn't have better jets than the Su-57, it's that we "couldn't" use them on that mission.
Reply Quote
2
1 edit
aTmAg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to bthotugigem05 • 11:11a, 8/30/22
AG
bthotugigem05 said:
The enemy fifth-gen fighters were based on the Sukhoi Su-57, a real plane just now in testing by the Russians (who will no doubt sell them to the Iranians).

It's not that we didn't have better jets than the Su-57, it's that we "couldn't" use them on that mission.
Which is bogus. But the movie would have been boring if it was realistic.
Reply Quote
1 edit
TCTTS
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to aTmAg • 11:14a, 8/30/22
AG
It's because they wanted the movie to feel timeless. Naming a country would instantly date the movie, locking it in to a particular era/conflict. The director said it was a very specific choice, and definitely not one forced by the military.
Reply Quote
4
TCTTS
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:19a, 8/30/22
AG
Reply Quote
6
The Porkchop Express
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to TCTTS • 11:19a, 8/30/22
TCTTS said:
It's because they wanted the movie to feel timeless. Naming a country would instantly date the movie, locking it in to a particular era/conflict. The director said it was a very specific choice, and definitely not one forced by the military.
I'd rather have them have said China or Russia or Iran. But then the movie wouldn't have done well in those countries if they were the "bad guys", right? Damn I miss the era of Red Dawn.
MY post breakdown:
33% Star Wars
33% Astros
33% Making myself laugh
Reply Quote
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.