It was never released in China because of the Taiwan badge on Mav's jacket, which makes the cumulative box office take much more impressive.
*** TOP GUN: MAVERICK *** (Spoiler Thread)
199,852 Views |
1717 Replies |
Last: 8 mo ago by Marauder Blue 6
Btw, I *finally* got the HDR working properly on my TV last night, and man has that made all the difference. In the past, whenever I tried to switch to Dolby Vision or 4K HDR at 60hz, it's always been way too dark, even after messing with every setting know to man, watching countless YouTube calibration videos, etc. But Sony recently released an update that finally allowed for the brightness/gamma in HDR mode to be properly bumped up and it just looks incredible now. TG:M was of course the movie I first tested the new settings on - in glorious Dolby Vision - and I basically ended up watching the entire thing yet again. I also tried Dolby Vision on The Batman - obviously a very dark movie (color-palette-wise) - and it was like seeing it again for the first time. Just absolutely stunning.
Now, after being inspired by this thread, my next step is to finally embrace Dolby Atmos. I've had a standard Sony sound bar (with subwoofer) for years that did the trick, but Sony finally released a new one with Dolby Atmos, the HT-A7000 7.1.2ch 500W Dolby Atmos Sound Bar Surround Sound Home Theater, complete with rear channel wireless speakers, and I think I'm about to pull the trigger on that one (with the 300W SW5 Sub and RS5 rears). I thought about going with a full-on 7.1 system, with a proper receiver, seven separate speakers, and all that jazz, but I'm just not a fan wires running all over the place, or something that has to be installed and run under the floor/in the walls via technicians. I'll save that setup for when I can afford my first home theater, down the line.
Now, after being inspired by this thread, my next step is to finally embrace Dolby Atmos. I've had a standard Sony sound bar (with subwoofer) for years that did the trick, but Sony finally released a new one with Dolby Atmos, the HT-A7000 7.1.2ch 500W Dolby Atmos Sound Bar Surround Sound Home Theater, complete with rear channel wireless speakers, and I think I'm about to pull the trigger on that one (with the 300W SW5 Sub and RS5 rears). I thought about going with a full-on 7.1 system, with a proper receiver, seven separate speakers, and all that jazz, but I'm just not a fan wires running all over the place, or something that has to be installed and run under the floor/in the walls via technicians. I'll save that setup for when I can afford my first home theater, down the line.
The Su-57 and one by China are the only 5th gen fighters that aren't Western and there are only around 5 Su-57s in existence. Russia just took delivery of their first one less than 2 years ago. IRL, Iran would not have any of these planes until long after Russia had filled out their own forces.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.
Thus, why the enemy is somewhat nameless and this movie is meant to be "timeless" in that regard.
Was this a Sony TV issue or a Dolby Vision issue so I'm clear? When I first got my LG OLED, I was told that HDR would make things darker like you experienced. I'm not sure I've experienced that but when it comes to video settings many times I don't know what I don't know...TCTTS said:
Btw, I *finally* got the HDR working properly on my TV last night, and man has that made all the difference. In the past, whenever I tried to switch to Dolby Vision or 4K HDR at 60hz, it's always been way too dark, even after messing with every setting know to man, watching countless YouTube calibration videos, etc. But Sony recently released an update that finally allowed for the brightness/gamma in HDR mode to be properly bumped up and it just looks incredible now. TG:M was of course the movie I first tested the new settings on - in glorious Dolby Vision - and I basically ended up watching the entire thing yet again. I also tried Dolby Vision on The Batman - obviously a very dark movie (color-palette-wise) - and it was like seeing it again for the first time. Just absolutely stunning.
Now, after being inspired by this thread, my next step is to finally embrace Dolby Atmos. I've had a standard Sony sound bar (with subwoofer) for years that did the trick, but Sony finally released a new one with Dolby Atmos, the HT-A7000 7.1.2ch 500W Dolby Atmos Sound Bar Surround Sound Home Theater, complete with rear channel wireless speakers, and I think I'm about to pull the trigger on that one (with the 300W SW5 Sub and RS5 rears). I thought about going with a full-on 7.1 system, with a proper receiver, seven separate speakers, and all that jazz, but I'm just not a fan wires running all over the place, or something that has to be installed and run under the floor/in the walls via technicians. I'll save that setup for when I can afford my first home theater, down the line.
The enemy base had the latest and greatest plot armor installed, which, as it turns out, our most advanced aircraft couldn't defeat.
YouBet said:Was this a Sony TV issue or a Dolby Vision issue so I'm clear? When I first got my LG OLED, I was told that HDR would make things darker like you experienced. I'm not sure I've experienced that but when it comes to video settings many times I don't know what I don't know...TCTTS said:
Btw, I *finally* got the HDR working properly on my TV last night, and man has that made all the difference. In the past, whenever I tried to switch to Dolby Vision or 4K HDR at 60hz, it's always been way too dark, even after messing with every setting know to man, watching countless YouTube calibration videos, etc. But Sony recently released an update that finally allowed for the brightness/gamma in HDR mode to be properly bumped up and it just looks incredible now. TG:M was of course the movie I first tested the new settings on - in glorious Dolby Vision - and I basically ended up watching the entire thing yet again. I also tried Dolby Vision on The Batman - obviously a very dark movie (color-palette-wise) - and it was like seeing it again for the first time. Just absolutely stunning.
Now, after being inspired by this thread, my next step is to finally embrace Dolby Atmos. I've had a standard Sony sound bar (with subwoofer) for years that did the trick, but Sony finally released a new one with Dolby Atmos, the HT-A7000 7.1.2ch 500W Dolby Atmos Sound Bar Surround Sound Home Theater, complete with rear channel wireless speakers, and I think I'm about to pull the trigger on that one (with the 300W SW5 Sub and RS5 rears). I thought about going with a full-on 7.1 system, with a proper receiver, seven separate speakers, and all that jazz, but I'm just not a fan wires running all over the place, or something that has to be installed and run under the floor/in the walls via technicians. I'll save that setup for when I can afford my first home theater, down the line.
Definitely seemed to be a Sony TV issue. Previously, when I switched to HDR via my Apple TV, the image was not only darker, but insanely dark, even in "Dolby Vision Bright" mode. With this latest update, though, the "High" setting for the "Auto Local Dimming," along with the newly maxed out Gamma, allowed for a lot more brightness than usual, which seemed to have done the trick.
If it helps at all, I have a Sony XBR-85X900H, and these are all my current settings. Some have been calibrated using YouTube tutorials, others are just my own personal preference. Either way, I finally feel like I've arrived at the "perfect" picture…
I don't necessarily subscribe to this theory, but it's a fun one, and would at least explain why, just after the opening crash, everything about the diner and the people in it looks/feels like something straight out of the 1950s…
This is how I read the film now. This is canon for me. https://t.co/uWe4aYulUP
— ScreenCrush (@screencrushnews) August 30, 2022
YouBet said:The Su-57 and one by China are the only 5th gen fighters that aren't Western and there are only around 5 Su-57s in existence. Russia just took delivery of their first one less than 2 years ago. IRL, Iran would not have any of these planes until long after Russia had filled out their own forces.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.
Thus, why the enemy is somewhat nameless and this movie is meant to be "timeless" in that regard.
Can't wait till the Ukes shoot down an Su-57
TCTTS said:
I don't necessarily subscribe to this theory, but it's a fun one, and would at least explain why, just after the opening crash, everything about the diner and the people in it looks/feels like something straight out of the 1950s…This is how I read the film now. This is canon for me. https://t.co/uWe4aYulUP
— ScreenCrush (@screencrushnews) August 30, 2022
Makes sense for why it was so "sweet" and fan-service-y. Though i recognize this is a post hoc explanation.
Some people...
Why can't we just enjoy the awesomeness of the movie? Why must it be dissected from every angle?
Why can't we just enjoy the awesomeness of the movie? Why must it be dissected from every angle?
Internet.DallasTeleAg said:
Some people...
Why can't we just enjoy the awesomeness of the movie? Why must it be dissected from every angle?
Life is better with a beagle
DallasTeleAg said:
Some people...
Why can't we just enjoy the awesomeness of the movie? Why must it be dissected from every angle?
Cinemaphiles aka "Filmies" (I just made that up and hereby own that word and copyright it and trademark it and all that stuff)
TexasAggie_02 said:
That was Allsome.
"NYET!!"
DallasTeleAg said:
Some people...
Why can't we just enjoy the awesomeness of the movie? Why must it be dissected from every angle?
It's just people enjoying talking about and analyzing movies. Chill. There's absolutely nothing negative about it. It's a fun theory!
This thread is chalk full of posters "dissecting" the movie "from every angle" and almost all of it has been fun/interesting, from the nuts and bolts jet talk to the geo-political stuff to the artistry/performances.
What confuses me more is coming to an entertainment message board of all places to b*tch about people dissecting a movie.
Dude... you are the biggest drama queen on this board. I literally posted a single tongue in cheek comment, and you start your holy war. You have issues.TCTTS said:DallasTeleAg said:
Some people...
Why can't we just enjoy the awesomeness of the movie? Why must it be dissected from every angle?
It's just people enjoying talking about and analyzing movies. Chill. There's absolutely nothing negative about it. It's a fun theory!
This thread is chalk full of posters "dissecting" the movie "from every angle" and almost all of it has been fun/interesting, from the nuts and bolts jet talk to the geo-political stuff to the artistry/performances.
What confuses me more is coming to an entertainment message board of all places to b*tch about people dissecting a movie.
A "holy war"??? It was a simple response to your post. On a message board. Where people respond to each other.
TCTTS said:
A "holy war"??? It was a simple response to your post. On a message board. Where people talk to each other.
To be fair (To Be Faaaaaiiiiiir!!) you dissected his post about dissecting movies.
Beverly Hills Cop 4 will be called Beverly Hills Cop: Axel Foley.
Yes, I'm serious.
Yes, I'm serious.
I did. I posted an innocuous theory. Which annoyed him for some reason. I responded to his annoyance. And now I've started a "holy war" and "have issues." Yet *I'm* the one overreacting.
No... that's what i did, in a tongue in cheek way. You then start your "chill" crap and that childish thing you do to all posters who disagree with you where you act surprised that people criticize anything you post because it's the Entertainment forum. I was responding to your twitter link. You were directly criticizing me. That is what you do on this board, constantly, and it is why you have been given multiple bans by the staff.TCTTS said:
A "holy war"??? It was a simple response to your post. On a message board. Where people respond to each other.
You flood this board with twitter links and some of them are stupid. I think what you posted was a stupid theory, and i therefore posted that opinion on the Entertainment board where people come to post opinions on entertainment.
Hello? Spoilers?Brian Earl Spilner said:
Beverly Hills Cop 4 will be called Beverly Hills Cop: Axel Foley.
Yes, I'm serious.
Life is better with a beagle
Are you listening to yourself?
I posted a link. You mocked it. I said something back. It was nothing more than that. You always make it out to be like I'm on some crusade to be loved on an internet message board, when I could not care less about that sh*t. But if someone expresses annoyance in response to something I post, more often I'm going to say something back. Why are you allowed to be annoyed at me "flooding this board with Twitter links" yet I'm not allowed to be annoyed when you find one of them stupid? Why can your opinion be stated and not mine?
That, and I've been banned twice this year, both times having to do with name-calling, one of which was because I called a notorious clown poster here "deranged." That was the extent of my crime. Not because I go around combating anyone and everyone who disagrees with me. If you think that's who am I and what I do, then you don't pay attention to the things I say and the way I treat most people here.
Either way, you really do increasingly come across as obsessed with me and it's super weird.
I posted a link. You mocked it. I said something back. It was nothing more than that. You always make it out to be like I'm on some crusade to be loved on an internet message board, when I could not care less about that sh*t. But if someone expresses annoyance in response to something I post, more often I'm going to say something back. Why are you allowed to be annoyed at me "flooding this board with Twitter links" yet I'm not allowed to be annoyed when you find one of them stupid? Why can your opinion be stated and not mine?
That, and I've been banned twice this year, both times having to do with name-calling, one of which was because I called a notorious clown poster here "deranged." That was the extent of my crime. Not because I go around combating anyone and everyone who disagrees with me. If you think that's who am I and what I do, then you don't pay attention to the things I say and the way I treat most people here.
Either way, you really do increasingly come across as obsessed with me and it's super weird.
Brian Earl Spilner said:
Beverly Hills Cop 4 will be called Beverly Hills Cop: Axel Foley.
Yes, I'm serious.
But why? To make sure Gen X knows Eddie is in it?
Jerry Bruckheimer just had massive success with a legacy sequel named "Top Gun: Maverick." He's following that up with another legacy sequel to another one of his '80s hits, so why *wouldn't* he name it "Beverly Hills Cop: Axel Foley"? If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
(That said, I agree that it doesn't roll off the tongue. Though, I remember thinking "Top Gun: Maverick" sounded weird at first too.)
(That said, I agree that it doesn't roll off the tongue. Though, I remember thinking "Top Gun: Maverick" sounded weird at first too.)
TCTTS said:
Jerry Bruckheimer just had massive success with a legacy sequel named "Top Gun: Maverick." He's following that up with another legacy sequel to another one of his '80s hits, so why *wouldn't* he name it "Beverly Hills Cop: Axel Foley"? If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
(That said, I agree that it doesn't roll off the tongue. Though, I remember thinking "Top Gun: Maverick" sounded weird at first too.)
Guess so. Didn't realize JB was doing this movie also.
Would like to see some new standup though - call it Eddie Murphy: Eddie Murphy.
Beverly Hills Cop 4: [that keyboard ditty]
How about Serge: An Axel Foley Story?
Life is better with a beagle
Beverly Hills Judge: Reinhold
schmendeler said:
Beverly Hills Judge: Reinhold
Life is better with a beagle
YouBet said:TCTTS said:
Jerry Bruckheimer just had massive success with a legacy sequel named "Top Gun: Maverick." He's following that up with another legacy sequel to another one of his '80s hits, so why *wouldn't* he name it "Beverly Hills Cop: Axel Foley"? If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
(That said, I agree that it doesn't roll off the tongue. Though, I remember thinking "Top Gun: Maverick" sounded weird at first too.)
Guess so. Didn't realize JB was doing this movie also.
Would like to see some new standup though - call it Eddie Murphy: Eddie Murphy.
One of the GOATS...
- Armageddon
- Bad Boys
- Bad Boys II
- Bad Boys for Life
- Black Hawk Down
- Con Air
- Crimson Tide
- Beverly Hills Cop
- Beverly Hills Cop II
- Dangerous Minds
- Days of Thunder
- Deja Vu
- Enemy of the State
- Gone in Sixty Seconds
- National Treasure
- National Treasure: Book of Secrets
- Pearl Harbor
- Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl
- Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest
- Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End
- Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides
- Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales
- Remember the Titans
- The Rock
- Thief
- Top Gun
- Top Gun: Maverick
Also, I may or may not have once showed Jerry how to use Tinder. Not because he wanted on the app (he's happily married), but because he was curious how it worked. And this may or may not have happened at a CSI wrap party where I was mistaken for a tech mogul because I showed up in a hoodie and ball cap.
Tl;Dr- TC hooked up with Jerry Bruckheimer on Tindr
Life is better with a beagle
Featured Stories
See All
Post Game Review: No. 15 Texas A&M 38, New Mexico State 3
by Kay Naegeli
19:50
1d ago
5.7k
Donors can now earn priority points by giving to Texas Aggies United
by Texas Aggies United
8:23
8h ago
1.0k
TexAgs' The Night Before: No. 15 Texas A&M vs. New Mexico State
by Luke Evangelist
27:22
21h ago
4.7k