Top Gun

Happy Independence Day! It’s time to celebrate with another patriotic movie. Let’s see…I think I got just the movie for today: the 1986 classic jet-flying movie, “Top Gun.”

Movie critic Rob Vaux’s wife commented after their screening of the movie in 3D, “I think this is a film for women,” and in the following conversation, it became more and more difficult to deny. For all the thundering shots of fighter planes in their patriotic glory, for all the façade of the so-called “men” proving themselves against their own self-doubts, for every single energizing 80s overload on the screen and soundtrack, the film seems to be geared more towards women’s sensibilities as much or more than men’s.

Obviously, that doesn’t change the magnificent flight scenes, done by director Tony Scott before the time of CGI and the works that we will never be able to be glorified of again. Whenever “Top Gun,” leaves the predictability of its earthbound story, it develops a brand new story as daredevil pilot Maverick (Tom Cruise) and his best friend Goose (Anthony Edwards) stun us with their dangerous acrobatics. Scott puts the stakes in completely obvious places – repeating key plot points a number of times with pedestrian, obvious dialogue – but following the drama isn’t the point. “Top Gun’s” strong point lies in pure MTV display, and if you want to experience that, the big screen is the only place where you can. Vaux said, “I’m guessing that, like me, a large number of people first experienced this movie on pan-and-scan VHS tapes.” It was a new movie when it was released in theaters, which did show with the audience with the first shots over the opening credits.

Vaux also commented this in his review: “In light of that, it’s unfortunate that the new transfer is such a spotty effort. Some shots look as crisp and sharp as you’d expect, but serious pixilation overwhelms too many others. On the IMAX screen, the grains look bigger than your average house cat. Scott’s devotion to colored air and extreme close-ups may play some part in that, but with interest in restored re-releases dropping precipitously, Paramount may simply have throttled back the budget and let us suffer through a less-than-perfect picture. At least the 3D is decent, though it can hardly improve on the already exceptional aerial shots.”

As soon as the flying scenes are done, the film falls flat on its face. Vaux mentioned this about the characters: “Its ridiculous cardboard characters can’t stand up to even a basic litmus test of plausibility and the script’s penchant for explaining everything multiple times to catch the rubes up to speed threatens each and every onscreen relationship.” Edwards saves a large amount of it with his effervescent charm, while Cruise and Val Kilmer (playing Maverick’s rival Iceman) put on a show of fiery chemistry that made audiences speculate the supposed gayness in this film. I felt sorry for Kelly McGillis because she couldn’t compete with that, though she does try hard to make the audiences convinced about her romance with Maverick that we’ll kindly call a subplot. It all arrives in the middle of countless smaller, equally laughable decisions (like people complained about giving Michael Ironside’s character the nickname “Jester”) that hopelessly swamp it in 80s bad taste.

This brings us back to my initial point…and “Top Gun’s” saving grace. When the boys in the audience can be amazed at the awesome fighter planes, the girls can howl at the actors. Whether it’s at them shirtless on the volleyball court, the shower scenes and even involves a lot of not-at-all-suggestive embraces as they go through their tough testosterone phase. Distinguish that with McGillis’s Charlie, who does not show audiences anything so much as her bare thigh especially during her lovemaking scene. Obviously she acts as a ready substitute for the girls in the audience: calm under pressure, tough as nails, and refusing to give anything to Maverick. She speaks the terms of her relationship, and earns herself a changed bad boy with a heart of gold by the end of the movie.

That makes “Top Gun,” hands down, a cheesy yet strangely interesting time capsule, with a little something for everyone by also making sure we understand that it’s all what the film was going for. You’ll rarely see a movie this one-dimensional, but neither has anyone else has done this particular combination of commercial flash and unacknowledged subtext. Producers Don Simpson and Jerry Bruckheimer combined a fortune with people who like this type of stuff in the seats entertainment like this, and for better or worse, changed moviemaking as a result. Put that together with Scott’s one-of-a-kind vision (which Vaux never appreciated until Scott passed) and suddenly we have a strangely fitting piece of cinematic history. “Top Gun” is no one’s idea of a great movie, but it is a significant movie, and it’s hard not to find something to like…even if you secretly hate yourself for doing so.

For a long time they have been talking about making a sequel to this movie, which I would be happy if they did. It would be great if they made a sequel because I do think this movie is worth checking out. Maybe this film will make you say, “Take my breath away,” while you are watching it. Anyway, enjoy the fireworks today everyone. Now I’m going to see if we are going out tonight because, “I feel the need – the need for speed.” Don’t worry, I won’t be driving fast over to the location, but we’ll see. Stay tuned for more of my film reviews.