Lalo ☮️’s review published on Letterboxd:
(Spiritually a 3 or 2.5-star review, but I can't bring myself to rate a movie that I couldn't watch the way it was intended).
It always bothers me to watch a sequel to a film I've never seen, and unplanned circumstances led me to watching this film with my family, although I wasn't very bothered by it because I had no real interest beforehand in watching neither this film nor the original. If anything, I was curious by its surprisingly positive reception, which described it as not just a great action blockbuster and much better than the original, but as one of the best films of the year.
Needless to say, I thought it was not only far from the best, but also not that good of a movie in itself. The thing is, I give the film the strong benefit of the doubt because I didn't see the original. Thus, I don't have the full understanding and personal/emotional connection to these characters and their backgrounds, something that the filmmakers clearly had in mind when making this film. I understood what they went through, but couldn't bring myself to care, because the film decided to appeal to the memories of those who had seen the previous film and develop its characters from the understanding that that audience had of the previous film, instead of exploring the depth of these characters in their current situation. I see that as a flaw, although I have to admit that the movie didn't need to not do that because, well, it's a sequel, and plenty of sequels do that without me realizing it. And it's my fault for not watching the first film. So, again, I can't truly criticize it in that way, but I also can't excuse some of these decisions, so it takes the benefit of the doubt. But if this is considered to be considerably superior to the previous film, then I personally can't expect much from that one.
As for the film itself, I don't think it's anything special. It's a fun ride, with a pro-military ideology that I strongly disagree with, but made for a thrilling experience nonetheless. The action is well made, and the climax was, for the most part, very exhilarating. But even then, while its technical achievements are notable, I wouldn't put this film highly above other action films just because of it. I think because movies set completely on air combat are not as common, and we're easily more impressed by them, that we feel more awe watching something as greatly crafted as this. However, I wouldn't rank this as the best action of the year, as I thought The Batman and The Northman, while having more "common" action, achieved a high level of mastery, beauty, sensitivity, excitement, creativity and craftsmanship through their action sequences; in a level of quality that was constantly present even in their non-action sequences, which is something I cannot say for Top Gun: Maverick.
While I do keep in mind my lack of full understanding of the characters present in the first film, I can't say the same for those introduced here, which I also felt lacked of any real depth and characterization that could make me feel attached to, fitting into stereotypes that don't transcend much. Even Miles Teller's character, who is an important one, never evolved from being just "the son of the dead friend" for me. There are some interesting ideas thrown out, such as personal sacrifice, the understanding for others' decisions, and the refusal of retirement; but the film never tries to actually explore any of these aspects and instead chooses to show them in such a simplistic way that feels flat. There are instances where it seems like it's going to explore an interesting introspection of a character, but whatever is said ends up being nothing. Every time I think a character is going to give a helpful advice to someone, they all pretty much end up saying "You got this". But an actual line said in the film, "Don't think, just do", felt very problematic to me, despite the film treating it as the ultimate, inspirational message, when I can't not think of its negative implications of irrational and violent impulses that "don't think, just do" acts tend to lead do. "Follow your heart and your instincts, not your rational thoughts and understanding of the right thing do to". I'm sorry, but I can't agree with that.
Director Joseph Kosinski previously made another legacy sequel of a classic 80's film, TRON: Legacy (2010), which defined him as a stylish director of great visual flair; something that elevated that film from mediocrity to inventive excitement. Both of his films lack of compelling screenplays, but are crafted in a way that is impossible not to enjoy yourself when watching them. I do give more value to TRON though, as every moment of that film awes me with its unique world, while Maverick only does so when the characters are on a vehicle. TRON's direction was enough for me to like it and appreciate its qualities and achievements. Maverick's wasn't enough; starting with 10 minutes of excellent cinematography, followed by the occasional nice shot every now and then throughout the film, a very good editing job and an almost perfectly exhilarating climax that would have made me forgive its flaws if the story was as compelling as it needed to be and its characters as sincere as they needed to be.
I am still interested in understanding, however, what is it that is making people describe Top Gun: Maverick as a one-in-a-million achievement. I don't think I even saw that much praise with Dune (2021), which was THE film for me to elevate "Hollywood blockbusters" to a whole new level I didn't even know existed. And even recently, again, The Batman was another proof that modern big budget blockbusters could achieve enormous artistic achievements and be excellent entertainment. Top Gun: Maverick is the perfect definition of a summer blockbuster, a term that isn't used too often anymore because of Hollywood's saturation of similar action films. But do we really miss these kinds of films that much?
