Ok while its not WW II Mustangs, Spitfires , Battle of Britain stuff….from the folks in Hollywood who love to alter and rewrite history..which I detected in the past tends to make some here rather angry….me as well ……. I see and run for cover if you thought the first film was a bit much …. TOP GUN II many be headed your way…. guess the Battle of Britian film he was going to make is off the list ……………….. wish the resources and money from the top studios could be use to make a real WW II aviation related film ..keeping with history and not changing who did what …. oh well so it goes !
BlueNoser352!
http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment/2010/10/top_gun_2.html
Top Gun 2 Is Heading to the Runway
10/13/10 at 8:40 PM Comment 9Comment 9Comments
Photo: Paramount Pictures
Reinflate your beach volleyballs, don your aviators, and apply some Coppertone to your shaven chests, lads, for the sequel to Top Gun is nigh! Vulture has learned that Paramount Pictures has made offers to both producer Jerry Bruckheimer and director Tony Scott to follow up their action classic, and has a missile lock on Oscar-winning screenwriter Christopher McQuarrie (The Usual Suspects) to update the script, one in which Tom Cruise’s Maverick would play a smaller role.
Maverick would be confused and slightly depressed by the state of Top Gun these days, anyway. Last June, at a junket for Disney’s The Sorcerer’s Apprentice, Bruckheimer let slip that he had been “recently approached again to start talking about [a sequel]” but noted that “the aviation community has completely changed since we made the movie a long time ago.” Since 1986, the TOPGUN syllabus has been changed so the focus is far less on the spectacular and dramatic air-to-air dogfights that defined Top Gun and far more about teaching U.S. pilots to drop very large bombs on very small ground targets.
But we’re told by a source close to the project that McQuarrie — who is friendly with Cruise — has found a way to incorporate Maverick, and what’s more, we hear that Cruise has agreed to take a smaller role in the film, provided it’s not too “obvious” a part, i.e. Lieutenant Pete ‘Maverick’ Mitchell as grizzled Top Gun flight instructor.
McQuarrie is in big demand these days, having impressed Twentieth Century Fox with a hot script for the Wolverine sequel. And to be sure, Paramount would no doubt like to see Top Gun become a franchise, too: The original film grossed $353 million worldwide, or roughly $699 million in today’s dollars.
But why the move to make a sequel now, all of a sudden? We’re told that a big part of the reason is the influence of David Ellison, the 27-year-old son of Oracle Corp. founder — and world’s sixth-richest man — Larry Ellison. Despite being only 3 years old when Top Gun first strafed theaters, Ellison clearly became a big fan of the film on VHS, and went on to become both an aerobatic pilot and instrument-rated commercial pilot before attending USC’s film school and then launching his own production company, Skydance. His first production was the 2006 World War I drama Flyboys, in which he also starred. It bombed, but Ellison didn’t lose his taste for the movie business: Just this August, Ellison the Younger left his Skydance offices (located at Santa Monica Municipal Airport, where Ellison still keeps several small aircraft), swung by JPMorganChase, and raised $350 million to co-finance much of Paramount’s slate of films — the first of which will be … wait for it … Mission: Impossible 4, starring Tom Cruise.
Meanwhile, the Top Gun move also highlights an interesting development in the Bruckheimer orbit. The super-producer has long been tethered to Disney, though that notoriously frugal studio has been forcing him to reduce his gross participation on movies. (Though to be fair, outside of the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise, Bruckheimer’s track record at Disney has not been stellar as of late, either.) This potential collaboration with his old home, Paramount, could be an interesting trial balloon to see if The Bruck can get a better deal outside Disney. Or it could simply be an effort to gain leverage and sweeten his deal at Disney. This is Hollywood, after all.
We’ll keep you updated as we hear more. In the meantime, kick the tires and light the fires!
By: Arabella-Cox - 17th October 2010 at 19:52
Fired up!
Yep, got me fired up all right.
Just thinking of those air-to-air’s of F-4’s in their hi-viz schemes and the ground shots of the crews all geared up in their APH-4 helmets, MBU-5 oxy masks and MA-2 torso harnesses (along with the rest of their gear) next to their chunky, stencilled and colourful Phantoms gets me goin’!
All we need now is a seedy plot.
What’s Mr. Bruckheimer’s phone number again?
Anon.
By: BlueNoser352 - 17th October 2010 at 15:26
I knew that post would fire you all up!
Yep……….. got folks fired up and the blood pressure up!
By: Stolly - 17th October 2010 at 08:58
This will be a very bad film.
By: spitfireman - 16th October 2010 at 23:22
Son, your ego is writing cheques your body can’t cash.:D
By: Phantom Phil - 16th October 2010 at 20:55
Enter the ‘Toom’
This my friend, is an awesome idea!
Also, the bald guy is Cmdr. Tom ‘Stinger’ Jordan!
They should make a Top Gun prequel – with Tom Cruise playing the part of his father in the Vietnam war.
They could re-paint surviving QF-4 target drones to make up a Phantom Phleet (they would only need a couple for flying sequences anyway) and use the Collins Foundation F-4C’s to bring in a bit of USAF F-4 content for some extra colour.
There’s lots of surviving good quality colour F-4 carrier and other footage for splicing in some action. They could reproduce some of the fantastic high-vis F-4 schemes prevalent in the 60’s and 70’s and even include some surviving contemporary aircraft types for a bit of spice and realism, many of which survive in flying trim.
I think I read somewhere that nearly all the Tomcats are scrapped now so these are a no-no as well as being hugely expensive to operate if they did.
Bring back the Phantom in a last blaze of glory. They can borrow my F-4J for some in-cockpit shots:D
How about it Mr. Bruckheimer?
Anon.
By: piston power! - 16th October 2010 at 18:15
Just like Viper said . . . “And if you screw up just this much, you’ll be flying a cargo plane full of rubber dog s*** out of Hong Kong!”
It wasn’t viper it was the old kid with the bald head who is in Back to the future!
But still a good line…………………..
Let them make the film then watch it and then you lot can moan like old men you are………………………….;)
By: sfp54 - 16th October 2010 at 17:52
Just like Viper said . . . “And if you screw up just this much, you’ll be flying a cargo plane full of rubber dog s*** out of Hong Kong!”
It’s got Dog**** written all over it……
By: Arabella-Cox - 16th October 2010 at 16:03
Top Gun II?
They should make a Top Gun prequel – with Tom Cruise playing the part of his father in the Vietnam war.
They could re-paint surviving QF-4 target drones to make up a Phantom Phleet (they would only need a couple for flying sequences anyway) and use the Collins Foundation F-4C’s to bring in a bit of USAF F-4 content for some extra colour.
There’s lots of surviving good quality colour F-4 carrier and other footage for splicing in some action. They could reproduce some of the fantastic high-vis F-4 schemes prevalent in the 60’s and 70’s and even include some surviving contemporary aircraft types for a bit of spice and realism, many of which survive in flying trim.
I think I read somewhere that nearly all the Tomcats are scrapped now so these are a no-no as well as being hugely expensive to operate if they did.
Bring back the Phantom in a last blaze of glory. They can borrow my F-4J for some in-cockpit shots:D
How about it Mr. Bruckheimer?
Anon.
By: F-111buff26 - 16th October 2010 at 13:43
Which is ironic, when you consider that Kelly McGillis actually does…!
sorry, that was the point i was making, but sarcasm never seems to translate to posts well! 😉
maybe Maverick can go up and shoot down the alien DC-8s full of aliens that his religion believes exists?:D
By: markstringer - 15th October 2010 at 21:35
It’s got Dog**** written all over it……
By: Bager1968 - 15th October 2010 at 21:25
http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment/2010/10/top_gun_2.html
Maverick would be confused and slightly depressed by the state of Top Gun these days, anyway.
…..
Since 1986, the TOPGUN syllabus has been changed so the focus is far less on the spectacular and dramatic air-to-air dogfights that defined Top Gun and far more about teaching U.S. pilots to drop very large bombs on very small ground targets.
In 1986 there was the US Navy Fighter Weapons School (Top Gun) and the Carrier Airborne Early Warning Weapons School (TopDome) at NAS Miramar, California, and the Naval Strike and Warfare Center (Strike U.) at NAS Fallon, Nevada.
In 1993, the post-Cold-War BRAC (Base Realignment And Closure) process ordered MCAS El Toro (the USMC’s west coast F/A-18 base) closed, and its squadrons relocated to NAS Miramar (now redesignated MCAS Miramar). The F-14 squadrons moved to NAS Oceana, Virginia, & the E-2C squadrons moved to NAS Point Magu, California.
In 1996, the moves were complete… with TopGun moving to NAS Fallon, and merging with Strike U. to form the Naval Strike and Air Warfare Center (no sexy nick-name, just NSAWC, pronounced “EN-SOCK”), which co-ordinates and conducts all USN air combat training, combining A-A, A-G, AEW&C, SAR, and other helicopter missions… as well as pre-deployment group training of the entire air wing for the carrier as a single body.
The USMC has its own, smaller, fighter & ground attack school… Marine Aviation Weapons & Tactics Squadron – One (MAWTS-1) at Marine Corps Air Station Yuma, but Marine aircrew also attend NSAWC.
By: spitfireman - 15th October 2010 at 18:28
Oh I don’t know………..ppruned yet?:diablo:
By: ozplane - 15th October 2010 at 18:17
Only this forum could condemn this proposal before a frame has been shot.
By: Elliott Marsh - 15th October 2010 at 16:58
I’d agree with Chox on this. Also, won’t it all be CGI? Only Michael Bay has enough clout with the military to secure extensive USAF involvement, as shown by his Transformers movies…
I can’t see this ending well!
By: Chox - 15th October 2010 at 16:33
The thought of a Top Gun sequel sounds fine in principle but I guess it depends on what aircraft are involved and how good the filming is. We all know the original was complete garbage but some of the flying sequences made it worth sitting-through time and time again. Without Tomcats and Skyhawks it’s not going to be much of a thrill (I mean, how many Hornets would you want to see?) so unless the flying and the filming is really cutting-edge stuff… think we might as well ignore it!
By: ZRX61 - 15th October 2010 at 16:31
Could it be any gayer?….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekXxi9IKZSA
LOL!!
By: scotavia - 15th October 2010 at 15:57
Sort of combine Top Gun with Judgement day and V, then Tom Cruise could battle all those reptile Thetan aliens which lurk within.
I actually like the Iron Eagle series,lots of crazy flying and certainly not a sombre offering.
By: Mark12 - 15th October 2010 at 15:05
Sorry, but after Hot Shots and Hot Shots – Part Deux, I don’t think I could take a new Top Gun seriously.
‘Regected’ ?
By: pagen01 - 15th October 2010 at 14:46
Ah, I could only take the awful sequences, terrible acting, and cheesy script comedically.
By: Sky High - 15th October 2010 at 14:39
Only in as much as you take any action film seriously, as opposed to comedically, yes, you can draw that inference.
Sign In
October 15, 2010 at 9:51 am