Maverick is coming back I've never been a fan of the movie "Top Gun". The picture somehow passed by and was remembered for a good story at one time with several significant moments and a completely passing plot. However, the announced sequel to the film and the ardent interest in Tom Cruise's new work caught my attention. The picture became even more interesting when it began to bypass large-scale blockbusters at the box office one by one. That's when I decided to watch this movie to personally verify the quality of the proposed sequel. And I really liked the picture. The film boasts an impressive budget of $ 140 million and an excellent box office, which is close to $ 1.5 billion. Such figures are not amenable to every mastodon, of which there are a lot only among movie comics. What impressed the viewer so much with the second "Maverick"? I won't say for everyone, but for me it became a high-quality large-scale action movie, where drama and full-scale shooting are successfully intertwined. When viewing the latter, they are somehow noticed by themselves. Verified shots, dynamics in flight scenes, unusual camera angles — all this really attracts and does not look somehow hackneyed in our modern era of blockbusters, where such scenes have become the norm for a long time. It is in this film that the action scenes are especially memorable. I consider the close connection of this project with the first film to be important. An excellent and even somewhat cunning move on the part of the creators. The screenwriters and director skillfully play on the emotions of the audience, who are repeatedly sent to the events of the first part, which happened more than 35 years ago. They do it both cheekily and cleverly. As a viewer, I understand this, when here and there they tell and show what is connected with the first picture, but at the same time the success and sincerity of the previous film respond with a kind of longing for the past, when the main character was young, and my generation, along with the film, was just born. Now we are older, and Maverick Cruz has managed to raise his friend's child, protecting it as best he could. Decades have passed, but the hero is still with us. I don't know. It's a strange feeling, but it's like you've lived your whole life, and for Maverick and Cruz, these 35 years have passed, he's back with us, his story continues, and you grow up with him. The more interesting for me was the appearance of Val Kilmer in this project. The actor has been fighting laryngeal cancer since 2015. In the film, this moment is played out in an interesting way. Some of the scripted moments look controversial. For example, I was not convinced enough by the storyline just with the son of a Goose, a Rooster (in the original, the call sign Rooster). The conflict between Maverick and Bradley, that's the guy's name, looks somewhat far-fetched and even implausible, given that Maverick did what he did, and the young guy himself could not influence it. The line with Jennifer Connelly's character was also weak. The actress played perfectly, demonstrating Maverick's long-time love interest, but it seemed to me the whole film that the girl was brought here simply because the actress Kelly McGillis refused the original role of Charlie from the first film (I don't know the true reason for her non-participation, just an assumption). It would be wiser to develop this line, especially considering that the creators made so many important references to the first picture. In general, Connelly Penny's character fit well into the picture, her story with Cruz was revealed, but there was clearly a certain alienness to this narrative. The film itself looks dynamic and interesting, despite the high duration of the film. Director Joseph Kosinski did a great job, managing to present aerial combat scenes to the audience with unusual visual solutions, convey the same recognizable camaraderie that permeated the first film and competently depersonalizing the main antagonists of the picture. There is dry information about the "enemy base" that needs to be eliminated. What kind of enemy it is, why it was recorded there, is not discussed. And for good reason. The audience should be focused on the story of the pilots, their flight and the approaching attack. Competently, without any political agenda, this will suit everyone. The film is not replete with technical data so that it is clear which aircraft and what is better. However, through dialogues, it is easy to understand who has the advantage, why it is impossible to fight with some aircraft against others, and which of the aircrafts are more maneuverable than the rest. There is no confusion and by the beginning of the final act you clearly understand what the advantages of the team are, and what awaits them in case of an error. The picture is remembered for several twists, but I was more impressed by the visual component and the music. The creators were able to bring that spirit of the mid-1980s into modernity and at the same time do it, successfully combining it with the current rhythm of the narrative of the paintings. The scenes of flights and aerial shootouts are very impressive, and Cruz once again proves that he doesn't mind anything when he is masterfully flying real planes even at the age of 60. "Maverick" came out as a worthy sequel with a new and interesting story, excellent visual and audio sequences. The painting is designed to remind of the past, show modernity, reveal the old problems that still oppress the characters, and also give a couple of fascinating hours to the audience. 9 out of 10