Some movies are remembered because of their big budgets and special effects, while others are remembered because they make people think. They Live is one of those films that stayed relevant because of its strange concept, memorable moments, and willingness to say something different. Released in 1988, it became a cult classic that continues to gain new fans.

The film was written and directed by John Carpenter, one of the most influential filmmakers in the horror and science fiction genres. Carpenter was known for creating movies with strong atmosphere, unforgettable characters, and ideas that went beyond simple entertainment. With They Live, he created a movie that mixed sci fi action with a deeper message about society and control.

Roddy Piper stars as John Nada, a homeless drifter looking for work and a better life. Piper was best known as a professional wrestler, but he proved he could carry a movie with his personality and natural charisma. His performance gives the character a tough but relatable quality.

Keith David plays Frank Armitage, a construction worker who becomes involved in Nada’s strange discovery. David brings a great balance of humor and seriousness to the role, and his chemistry with Piper is one of the biggest strengths of the film.

The plot begins when Nada discovers a secret group that is hiding the truth about the world. After finding a pair of special sunglasses, he is able to see that many people are actually aliens disguised as humans. He also discovers hidden messages everywhere telling people to obey, consume, and stay unaware.

What makes They Live work so well is that the idea is simple but powerful. The movie takes everyday things like advertising, television, and consumer culture and turns them into something much more sinister. Whether viewers agree with the message or not, the film definitely gets people thinking.

One of the most famous scenes in the movie is the fight between Nada and Frank. The scene goes on much longer than expected, but that is exactly why it became so memorable. It has become one of the most talked about and copied fight scenes in cult movie history.

John Carpenter’s direction gives the movie a unique style. The film has the look and feel of an eighties action movie while also carrying the atmosphere of a classic science fiction thriller. The music, pacing, and visuals all help create a world that feels strange but believable.

Roddy Piper’s performance is a big reason the movie remains entertaining. He brings humor and attitude to the role without making Nada feel like a typical action hero. His character is not a superhero, he is just someone who discovers the truth and decides he has to do something about it.

The special effects may look dated compared to modern films, but that does not hurt the movie. In many ways, the practical effects and old school style add to its charm. They Live feels like a product of its time while still having ideas that remain surprisingly relevant.

Another reason the movie has lasted is because it is not afraid to be different. It is strange, funny, action packed, and occasionally ridiculous, but it has a clear identity. Many films try to create a unique style, but few actually succeed the way this one did.

For me, They Live is a great film because it delivers entertainment while also giving audiences something to think about. The cast is memorable, John Carpenter’s direction is excellent, and the story is unlike anything else from that era.

More than thirty years later, They Live remains a true classic and one of John Carpenter’s most interesting films. It may have started as a simple sci fi action movie, but it became something much bigger. Its characters, ideas, and unforgettable moments are exactly why it continues to be loved today.

In life, things can change in the blink of an eye, and in anime, too! This is exactly what happened to the protagonist of this story: Yusuke Urameshi, a teenager who dies in a road accident, whilst still far too young to pass on to the afterlife.

This turning point is the thread that runs through the entire plot, in which we see the character’s evolution from his days as a rebellious youth to shouldering the responsibility of keeping all of humanity safe. It is a huge step towards maturity, for although the years pass at almost the same pace as in real life, the Urameshi of the beginning is a far cry from the one at the end of the anime.

Screenshot from Imdb pictures gallery

As well as the plot involving solving cases and maintaining the balance between the real world and the spirit world, this anime presents situations familiar to viewers: teenage romances, rivalries, friendship and adventures, which—all things considered—are scenarios that teenagers and young adults might encounter in their own lives, creating an emotional connection of sorts, even though many situations are exaggerated.

Alongside Urameshi, we encounter two figures from the spirit world, as well as two other demons who end up becoming his allies. Between the five of them, they maintain the balance and look after the interests of each side, whilst also including two members from the earthly world, who act as a sort of grounding influence for Urameshi.

The redemption of the demons Hiei and Kuwabara – who were called upon by the rulers of the spirit world to assist Urameshi, as a way of forgiving him for his audacity in stealing the treasures of their world – ends up adding that extra touch of action to the fight scenes.

Screenshot from Imdb pictures gallery

Of all the characters, my favourite is Master Genkai, an elderly woman who, as well as being Urameshi’s tutor in his training for spiritual missions, takes the other characters under her wing, guiding them as they discover and develop their full physical and mental potential.

And although the ending is a bit far-fetched, introducing some rather implausible elements (and yes, in a story that’s already incredible, there are elements that really don’t hold up), it was a series to watch and enjoy with my children, to whom I would occasionally point out that, with tenacity and a bit of discipline, any goal is achievable.

Screenshot from Imdb pictures gallery

En la vida, las cosas pueden cambiar en un abrir y cerrar de ojos, y en los anime ¡también! pues justo esto fue lo que le sucedió al protagonista de esta historia: Yusuke Urameshi, un adolescente que muere en un accidente de tránsito, siendo todavía muy joven para ir al más allá.

Este punto de retorno es el hilo que conduce toda la trama, en la cual se ve la evolución del personaje desde su realidad de joven rebelde hasta llevar sobre sus hombros la responsabilidad de mantener a salvo a toda la humanidad, es un gran paso de madurez pues aunque los años pasan casi al mismo ritmo de la vida real, el Urameshi del inicio, dista mucho de ser el mismo al final del anime.

Screenshot from Imdb pictures gallery

Además de la trama de resolver casos y mantener el equilibrio entre la vida real y el mundo espiritual, este anime presenta realidades comunes para los espectadores: amores juveniles, rivalidades, amistad y aventuras, que salvando las distancias, son situaciones con las que los adolescentes y jóvenes adultos se pueden conseguir en sus vidas, creando de algún modo una conexión emocional, aunque muchas situaciones son exageradas.

Junto al personaje de Urameshi, encontramos dos figuras que pertenecen al mundo espiritual, además de otros dos demonios que terminan siendo sus aliados. Entre los 5 mantienen el equilibrio y los intereses de cada bando, incluyendo además a dos miembros del mundo terrenal, que son una especie de cable a tierra para Urameshi.

La redención de los demonios Hiei y Kuwabara, quienes fueron llamados a colaborar con el proceso de Urameshi por parte de los encargados del mundo espiritual, para perdonar su atrevimiento de haber robado los tesoros de su mundo, terminan dándole el toque extra de acción a las escenas de pelea.

Screenshot from Imdb pictures gallery

De todos los personajes, el que más me gusta es la maestra Genkai, una anciana que más allá de ser la tutora de Urameshi en su entrenamiento para enfrentar las misiones espirituales, toma a los demás personajes como sus alumnos, guiándolos en el proceso de encontrar expandir todo su potencial físico y mental.

Y aunque el final es un poco rebuscado, añadiendo elementos un tanto increíbles (y si, en una historia que ya es increíble, hay elementos que realmente no convencen), fue una serie para ver y disfrutar junto con mis hijos, a quienes cada tanto les ponía de ejemplo, que con tenacidad y un poco de disciplina, cualquier meta es alcanzable.

Screenshot from Imdb pictures gallery

Foto/Photo by: Screenshot from Imdb pictures gallery Portada: 123

Banner de portada: Cortesía de @palabras1 Edición/Edited by @mamaemigrante using canva Translated and formatted with Deepl

Here's the trailer for the movie:

All the best.

By: Nattosheru.

Posted Using INLEO

Posted Using INLEO

Starship Mine (S06E18)

Airdate: 29 March 1993

Written by: Morgan Gendel Directed by: Cliff Bole

Running Time: 46 minutes

Throughout the long and distinguished history of the USS Enterprise, across its various incarnations, the vessel has been the subject of numerous hostile takeover attempts, forcing a lone protagonist or a handful of remaining crew to rely on their ingenuity to thwart the invaders. Many such episodes have, in retrospect, been compared to the scenario of the 1988 action classic Die Hard, but few are as direct and unabashed in their homage to John McTiernan’s film as Starship Mine, the eighteenth episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation’s penultimate season. The premise is indeed the simple, high-concept pitch of “Die Hard on the Enterprise”, a formulation acknowledged by both fans and critics.

The script, by Morgan Gendel—who also wrote the celebrated episode The Inner Light—finds the Enterprise-D docked at the Remmler Array for a routine but hazardous maintenance procedure known as a baryon sweep.This process, designed to remove radioactive particles that accumulate as a byproduct of warp travel, is fatal to all organic life, necessitating a full evacuation. Most of the senior staff find themselves hosted at a painfully awkward reception on the station by Commander Calvin “Hutch” Hutchinson (David Spielberg), a Starfleet officer whose relentless and insufferable attempts at small talk grate on everyone. Picard seizes upon the excuse of a forgotten saddle to return to his ship, a move that places him aboard as the sweep is about to commence. It is here he discovers that the Arkarian “technicians” remaining on board are in fact a gang of terrorists and mercenaries, led by the ruthless Kelsey (Marie Marhsall), who plan to steal valuable trilithium resin from the warp drive while the sweep provides cover. Simultaneously, their accomplices take the reception guests hostage, with Hutchinson killed and Geordi La Forge injured in the sudden, violent disruption.

What follows is a tense game of cat-and-mouse, with Picard, now the sole defender of his vessel, forced to improvise with booby traps and weaponry, including Worf’s Klingon crossbow. As the lethal baryon sweep progressively reduces the habitable sections of the ship, the stakes are physically narrowed, adding a palpable countdown to the proceedings. On the station, a secondary plot sees Dr. Crusher, Counsellor Troi, and others using La Forge’s VISOR to outmanoeuvre their captors, though this strand is notably underdeveloped compared to the main action. The final confrontation occurs in Ten Forward, where Kelsey manages to beam away with the resin, only for her ship to be destroyed when Picard’s earlier sabotage—the removal of a critical control rod—causes a catastrophic explosion.^It is a ruthlessly efficient conclusion that underscores the episode’s willingness to let its hero be decisively lethal.

The inevitable comparison to Die Hard is both the episode’s core appeal and its most significant liability. The parallels are extensive: a lone hero in a confined space, terrorists revealed to be common criminals, and the callous killing of an annoying side character (here played with darkly humorous exasperation by David Spielberg). Yet, where the film thrives on gritty realism and relentless pace, Starship Mine often feels like a gentler, more cerebral cousin, constrained by the show’s budgetary limits and its inherent aversion to outright brutality. The episode moves at a brisk clip, which helps gloss over its narrative contrivances, but the tonal shifts can be jarring. Moments of genuine threat, such as Hutchinson’s murder, are intertwined by comedic relief, notably Data’s painfully accurate mimicry of Hutchinson’s small talk, which, while hilarious, creates a discordant effect. Furthermore, the musical score by Jay Chattaway is frequently cited as a significant weakness; with its repetitive and intrusive horn blasts threatening to undermine the tension entirely.

For all its flaws, Starship Mine is generally regarded as a solid, entertaining entry that fits comfortably within the standards of TNG’s later seasons.^ Director Cliff Bole handles the action competently, and the cast offers several points of interest for dedicated fans.^ Patricia Tallman, later famous as Lyta Alexander in Babylon 5, appears as Kelsey’s henchwoman Kyros, while Tim Russ—in a role predating his iconic portrayal of Tuvok on Star Trek: Voyager—plays one of the terrorists. The episode also provides a rare opportunity to see Picard’s profound, almost romantic connection to the Enterprise visualised, as in the opening scenes where he wanders the empty bridge, caressing a console with palpable affection.

In the end, Starship Mine is unlikely to be remembered as one of the series’ profound philosophical statements. Yet, it succeeds on its own terms as a well-constructed and often thrilling bottle show, a piece of genre fun that allows Patrick Stewart’s Picard to play the action hero without completely sacrificing the character’s cerebral dignity. For viewers seeking a straightforward, Die Hard-inspired adventure within the Star Trek universe, it delivers efficiently, even if the homage sometimes feels more like a derivative blueprint than an inspired reinvention.

RATING: 6/10 (++)

Blog in Croatian https://draxblog.com Blog in English https://draxreview.wordpress.com/ InLeo blog https://inleo.io/@drax.leo Substack https://draxster.substack.com

LeoDex: https://leodex.io/?ref=drax InLeo: https://inleo.io/signup?referral=drax.leo Hiveonboard: https://hiveonboard.com?ref=drax 1Inch: https://1inch.exchange/#/r/0x83823d8CCB74F828148258BB4457642124b1328e

BTC donations: 1EWxiMiP6iiG9rger3NuUSd6HByaxQWafG ETH donations: 0xB305F144323b99e6f8b1d66f5D7DE78B498C32A7 BCH donations: qpvxw0jax79lhmvlgcldkzpqanf03r9cjv8y6gtmk9

What an insane first Episode for Season 3 of House of The Dragon, this series doesnt stop making you think there is a victory without actually realize how much they loose after each victory, makes me think at the end there will be nothing left. The whole vibe shifts immediately from where we left off and you can feel the weight of the war right from the start with Daemon finally getting the Grey Wolfs from Winterfell. Alicent returns from her secret trip to Dragonstone fully expecting her deal with Rhaenyra to proceed smoothly so she can save what is left of her family, specially her sons because I doubt she is doing it for the Greens memebers though. She wanders into the Red Keep looking completely drained, you can just see the exhaustion on her face but instead of going to her chambers she gets called by "the king" Aemond. Her entire plan hinged on handing over a bedridden king to stop the bloodshed but she hits a massive reality check the second a guard redirects her. She steps into the throne room and the visual framing immediately tells you the power dynamic has shifted completely out of her hands, you can feel her heart drop when she realizes her desperate gamble just went up in smoke seen Daemon sitting in the throne. It sets a raw tone for the rest of the first episode although we all know nothing is this easy, the series always try to play mind games, but this scenes perfectly illustrates how the older generation has completely lost control of the monsters they raised without even knowing from the moment Aemond lost his eye as a kid to take Vhagar and saying it was worth it, what can you expect from a kid that is that brave, violent and giving him basically a flying nuclear reactor??!!

• IMDB: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt11198330/
• Platform: {{PLATFORM}}

Aemond is sitting on the Iron Throne gripping his sword and looking like an absolute badass while Alicent walks in to face him. He is positioned exactly like Daemon was in the very first season but this time we dont got a King that wans the throne just to get drunk with his friends. You can see the panic wash over her face when he just casually informs her that Aegon is gone and she knows her whole bargain just went to shit, its a big "what I have done" moment for the episode and at that moment I was only wondering how fast Rhraenyra would attack Kings Landing. Aemond dragged the Grand Maester out of bed just to demand answers about his missing brother and he wants to stay in Kings Landing to defend it himself, refusing to fly out to join Criston Cole the way Alicent needed him to or was expecting he would. Aemon also finds out Larys actually smuggled the wounded king out of the city in a cart and they are on the run toward the coast, its very obvious to related sometimes this characters between GOT and HOTD, some of them have the same kind of behaviours. There is this scene when Larys tells soldiers he is transporting the king to get a higher reward instead of letting them kill Aegon. Aegon has become an addict to milk of the poppy while Larys admits he simply forgot to bring any during their rushed escape, almost like it was intentional of probably making him suffer to then be the hero of their own story saving him from getting killed and getting him milk of the puppy some how, which feels like the most Larys thing he has ever done. Alicent is trapped back in the capital realizing she has to somehow convince Aemond to leave the city so Rhaenyra can still take it and after all I think she got her plan to work out very cheap so far, she resorts to manipulating her own son by feeding his ego and telling him he is fearless just to get him out of the way.

What sucked is how they handle some of the travel logic making Alicent bounce around the map in a matter of days when it should take way longer, Aemon did said she have been missing for the past 3 days but I wonder if that is what really takes from Kings Landing to Dragon Stone, imagine if on Season 2 ending Vhagar took a good amount of time to get close to the island. We also have Daemon out in the Riverlands arguing with young Oscar Tully about burning dead bodies right after the Lannister army got wrecked and also he doesnt give a shit about local customs and just wants to use his dragon to incinerate the corpses so they do not spread the plague on top of probably having a good snack for free. The young Tully lord stand his ground asking for proper graves for his fallen men but Daemon does not care at all, something I might say annoys Daemon not having the last word on every argument and just have to comply because he need the men, he need the swords. Meanwhile Caraxes starts cooking people in the background of the shot which felt hilarious and chaotic for a serious war aftermath, hilarious because its like he already knew what his rider was talking about or could it be just common behaviour for them during war, so far Caraxes and Daemon have been in multiple battlers during this series. I got to say there were not too many monologue moments or many politics speech during this first episode but for sure we goint to get those slow draggy moments at some point, even during this small moments on S03E01, the cast still made it watchable even though the tone shifts weirdly into dark comedy territory, to wark, to almost some sort of weird romance from Aemond to his mother. The Winter Wolves emerge from the woods carrying the severed head of Jason Lannister, but they still dont get enough screen time and why would they cut down such important moment, tossing his head on the ground to prove their loyalty, I guess Daemon is not up to speed with his army, how did he didnt saw the banner and said welcome to the party. Aside from the dragons would love to watch some ground battles with the Northern soldiers who marched south strictly to die fighting for their dragon queen, they are old grey beard who have no plans to go bac, only if they lucky. This whole scene when they toss the head feels heavy but the bizarre comedy timing with the dragon fire just throws the vibe off for a minute.

I breavely read, dont want to spoil things for myself; how people have compare this to the original books you realize Daemon was not even at this specific battle since he was already heading back to Dragonstone, though I have not read the books myself and not something I want talk about during my posts since I'm just another average viewer. They are clearly changing the story to give him more screen time with the river men and justify his long isolation in the haunted castle, boring times during season two and it feels like the exact same stalling move they pulled last season, stretching things out to delay the truly massive confrontations but at least on this frist episode we got way more blood than during the entire previous season. They are building up Oscar Tully as a real leader too, who stands up to the rogue prince / king?, and it works, but you can see the machinery behind it. On the other side we see Tyland Lannister already aboard the Triarchy fleet with Lohar as their attack on the Sea Snake blockade begins, which is where this episodes really starts delivering and picking up a brutal pace, one scene after another. Lohar does not even care about the actual war and only wants to use this opportunity to gut Corlys Velaryon for every time he had chase them and cut them down over and over again. Lohar is an unhinged character who became really unpredictable and did more damage to the Greens army than what she really help them but it was expected as they are pirates, not only she told to Lannister face that she had no interest to fight for his king but the way she make her ship lighter, not trying to spoil things; this was a savage moment. This episode does not tease the sea battle as some future moment either, it throws you right into the actual Battle of the Gullet as the Triarchy slams into the Velaryon blockade with everything they have. The tension that builds as the Velaryon fleet realizes they are suddenly out numbered by an enemy they thought was defeated years ago, but it was so damn smart how the Sea Snake out manuver them, and then the dragons start moving and things escalate into something you were not fully prepared for and this was literally NOT what everyone was expecting, this was not Daenrys destroying and entire fleet with her three dragons and going back home without any loosses, this time it was a massive battle with bigger looses on both sides that you cant even tell who really won.

#houseofthedragon, #targaryen, #aemond, #rhaenyra, #alicent, #ironthrone, #dragons, #sheepstealer, #caraxes, #velaryon, #triarchy, #lannister, #winterwolves, #daemontargaryen, #oscartully, #larys, #aegon, #redkeep, #dragonstone, #riverlands, #pirates, #seasmoke, #bloodandcheese, #westeros, #hbomax

Posted Using INLEO

A central question in the film, Loving Vincent is, did Vincent van Gogh kill himself? However, the mystery of van Gogh's death is not the heart of the movie. The character who serves as the antagonist in this film investigates a larger issues. He strives to discover the essence of van Gogh, to plumb the depths of this artist's despair and to understand the peculiar man who left behind a legacy of extraordinary art.

Most of us know the broad outlines of Vincent van Gogh's life. He notoriously cut off his ear (or at least part of it), and was conspicuously mentally ill. We also are likely familiar with his most famous paintings.

Although his career as an artist lasted 10 years, it was in the last few years that van Gogh produced his most recognized masterpieces. He was astonishingly prolific. He left as his legacy 900 paintings and 1100 drawings. The drawings were largely done in the early years, before he transitioned to painting.

_{Self Portrait, van Gogh, 1887, Art Institute of Chicago, public domain}

If you are a fan of van Gogh's art, and have ever wondered about the man who created these magnificent paintings, then you should watch this movie. It is essentially a 94-minute, animated canvas that has been painted to evoke his vibrant art style.

In order to describe the unusual technique employed by the filmmakers I'll quote from their website, Loving Vincent:

We shot the film with actors, and literally painted over it frame by frame. This is a very laborious and time-consuming process

These painted frames were then animated using a process called rotoscoping. The result is spectacular.

Here is what the result looks like in the film's official trailer:

The filmmakers hired 125 artists from all over the world to paint the frames. These artists were trained in the characteristic style of van Gogh. The approximately 1,000 canvases comprise the movie, which is the first painted feature film.

We are offered the story of this artist's life through the eyes of an unsympathetic character, Armand Roulin. As is true for most of the characters in the film, Armand is drawn from life, literally. Here is a portrait of Armand, as painted by van Gogh in 1888.

_{Portrait of Armand Roulin, van Gogh 1888, Museum Folkwang, public domain}

While Armand Roulin was an actual, living person, drawn from real events in van Gogh's life, his actions in this film are fictional. He is sent on a mission by his father (in the film) to deliver a letter a deceased Vincent had addressed to his brother, Theo van Gogh. At the time the journey begins, Armand discovers that Theo has also died.

Armand is not happy about fulfilling his father's request, so he reluctantly begins to search for someone who can deliver this letter to Theo's widow. This search becomes the device through which the filmmakers explore the last days of Vincent's life.

Eventually, Armand warms to the story of van Gogh. He is told this artist has committed suicide, but he questions that judgement.

Armand Roulin is an excellent agent to carry the plot of the movie forward. His father has to persuade him to take on the chore of delivering the letter, so he is antagonistic to van Gogh's life story. As he asks questions of those he meets he is gradually persuaded that van Gogh had a worthy life.

Much of his inquiry centers around van Gogh's reported suicide. He, and others, do not accept this self extinction as a fact. There were no witnesses to the act, which was a gunshot to the abdomen, so there is no way to be certain how this shot was delivered. However, Vincent lingered for two days after the event and asserted that no one else was to blame.

Visually, also, Armand is an excellent agent to carry the plot forward. His bright yellow coat distinguishes him in a crowd, or in a fight. Armand fights a lot. And he drinks a lot.

While the film is painted mostly in brilliant colors, there are segments that are painted in black and white. These black and white scenes help us to distinguish current episodes from past episodes.

One fascinating part of the film is that we are casually introduced to Vincent's art contemporaries. As he sits in a Paris café, we see a small bearded man with glasses--Toulouse Lautrec. These two artists were friends. Lautrec painted a highly-regarded picture of Vincent while they were in a café.

_{Vincent van Gogh, by Toulouse Lautrec, 1887, Van Gogh Museum. public domain.}

We also have a scene (in black and white) where van Gogh and Paul Gauguin are fighting. These two artists had a tumultuous relationship which ended with the episode of van Gogh's self mutilation (ear incident).

This is an inspired film about a tragic life. From that tragedy great art was realized. There is no question that Vincent van Gogh was mentally ill. He was tortured by his illness. He was also tortured by life and by the people around him. In his father's eyes he was a failure. To the public he was a joke, a nuisance.

What was the source of his illness? The film does not tell us. He was certainly an alcoholic. He was certainly odd. His brother, Theo, suffered from syphilis. Was Vincent's mental illness a symptom of tertiary syphilis?

As azircon (who wrote the blog that prompted me to watch this movie) wrote, "Here is a penniless man in this tiny spartan apartment, but there are six original oil painting hanging in his wall, each worth at a minimum $10M..."

If life, and people, had been kinder to Vincent, would he have been able to handle his mental illness? If he hadn't been mentally ill, would he still have had the vision that produced his very remarkable work? One has to wonder.

A word about the actors. Through all that paint they are quite recognizable, and excellent. The budget for the film was a scant $5.5M, so it's not likely the actors brought home fat paychecks.

I hope my description of this movie and my display of Vincent van Gogh's beautiful art inspires readers to view the film. I watched it on YouTube. Here is a link to that site:

Just click on the YouTube link and it will play.

Thank you for reading my blog.

Peace and health to all.

Hive on!

It could be argued that Tony Scott’s 1986 military aviation action drama Top Gun defined the modern Hollywood blockbuster, not only becoming one of the most successful and iconic films of its time but also establishing the clear parameters of what a major Hollywood product is supposed to be: a high-concept, visually spectacular, music-driven, and emotionally simplistic spectacle designed for maximum audience appeal. Many decades later, its long-awaited sequel, Top Gun: Maverick became an important event in cinema history, this time for re-confirming those same parameters with an almost religious fervour. In an era where the cinematic landscape is fragmented by streaming, superhero fatigue, and a growing appetite for complexity, Top Gun: Maverick arrived as a defiant throwback, a $1.5 billion-grossing testament to the enduring power of the old formula. Yet, beneath its polished surface and critical acclaim lies a film that is arguably more fascinating as a cultural artefact than as a piece of storytelling—a meticulously engineered nostalgia bomb that serves as both a celebration of and an elegy for a certain kind of American cinema, and perhaps for a certain kind of American confidence.

The plot, set roughly three and a half decades after the events of the first film, finds the protagonist Captain Pete “Maverick” Mitchell (Tom Cruise), a highly talented and successful US Navy aviator, near the end of his career. His legendary tendency towards insubordination and lack of political skills have prevented him from advancing in the ranks, unlike his old rival and friend Tom “Iceman” Kazansky (Val Kilmer), who reached the rank of Admiral and command of the US Pacific Fleet. Iceman, now fighting terminal cancer, uses all his remaining clout to prevent Maverick from being kicked out of the Navy or permanently grounded, especially after his latest stunt as a test pilot results in breaking the speed record but destroying a valuable experimental aircraft in the process. This setup immediately establishes the film’s central tension: Maverick is a relic, a man whose exceptional skill is inseparable from a rebellious spirit that the institution can no longer comfortably accommodate in an age of drone warfare and risk-averse bureaucracy.

Maverick is kept in service, but the best Iceman can do is to arrange for him to serve as an instructor at the elite fighter pilot school “Top Gun.” His superior, Admiral Beau “Cyclone” Simpson (Jon Hamm), is deeply sceptical, considering him too old and obsolete. Maverick’s task is to teach a hand-picked team of pilots for a near-impossible mission: to destroy an illegal uranium enrichment facility in an unnamed “rogue country.” The site is so well-defended by surface-to-air missiles and fifth-generation fighters that the mission requires flying through a deep, twisting canyon at dangerously low altitudes and executing a precision strike with a tiny window for escape. The personal complication for Maverick is that one of the candidates is Lieutenant Bradley “Rooster” Bradshaw (Miles Teller), the son of Maverick’s late friend and navigator, Lieutenant Nick “Goose” Bradshaw. Rooster’s resentment towards Maverick is twofold: he blames him for his father’s death, and he believes Maverick pulled strings to delay his naval academy application, thwarting his career. Unbeknownst to Rooster, Maverick was only honouring the wishes of Goose’s widow, who feared losing her son as she lost her husband. These simmering personal conflicts are forced to the back seat when the mission is moved ahead of schedule, compelling Maverick to once again take the pilot’s seat and lead the team in an extremely dangerous and complicated strike.

The very idea of a sequel to Top Gun, one of the most popular and influential films of all time, seemed logical on paper, yet its main premise—the glorification of US naval aviation—did not seem particularly relevant in the decades after the Cold War’s end. The subsequent carnage in Iraq and Afghanistan had made many audiences lose their taste for uncomplicated military jingoism. Tony Scott, director of the original, had begun working on a sequel, but the project entered a long development hell following his tragic suicide in 2012. Furthermore, after production wrapped, the COVID-19 pandemic forced repeated delays in its theatrical release. Top Gun: Maverick finally arrived in cinemas in May 2022, almost two years later than originally planned.

This long delay, however, proved to be a blessing in disguise. When the film finally opened, pandemic lockdowns were receding into memory. Audiences in the United States and around the world enthusiastically embraced it, not merely as a reminder of a nostalgic past but as a potent symbol that the world, so shattered by the traumas of the 21st century—economic crises, terrorism, endless wars, and a global pandemic—was returning to a longed-for “normalcy.” Tom Cruise, who looks incredibly youthful despite being nearly sixty at the time of filming, became the embodiment of that very normalcy. He represented a return to star-driven, practical spectacle, a comforting constant in a changing world. His much-publicised dedication to performing actual flight sequences in real fighter jets became a marketing narrative of authenticity and old-school Hollywood grit, standing in stark contrast to the digital artifice dominating the box office.

The script, credited to Ehren Kruger, Eric Warren Singer, and Christopher McQuarrie, does not attempt to reinvent the wheel. It diligently follows the structural blueprint of the original, keeping plot and character arcs simple and faithful. The primary difference is the passage of time, acknowledged through poignant casting decisions. The most moving of these is Val Kilmer’s return. Kilmer, in what may be his final screen role, makes a small but profoundly effective appearance. His character, like the actor himself, has lost the ability to speak due to throat cancer, communicating instead through a text-to-speech device and written notes. The scene where Maverick visits Iceman is one of the film’s few moments of genuine, unvarnished emotion, a meta-textual acknowledgment of mortality and friendship that briefly elevates the material.

In terms of the new cast, Miles Teller credibly plays the resentful, piano-playing Rooster, channelling a suitable mix of vulnerability and stubborn pride. However, he is inevitably overshadowed by the sheer gravitational force of Tom Cruise’s movie star presence, and even by Glen Powell, who steals scenes as the arrogant, swaggering Lt. Jake “Hangman” Seresin—a clear spiritual successor to Iceman. Powell understands the assignment perfectly, delivering the kind of cocky, quotable bravado that the film’s tone demands.

Director Joseph Kosinski, who previously worked with Cruise on Oblivion, does an exceptional job from a technical standpoint. He creates an exciting, visually stunning mix of action and “cool” imagery, complemented by a soundtrack that cleverly incorporates Harold Faltermeyer’s original theme and a refreshed version of “Danger Zone.” In many ways, he outdoes Tony Scott’s work in the original film, particularly in the aerial sequences. Where Scott’s film featured great and exciting action scenes using real jets but was let down by a cliché-ridden middle act, Kosinski maintains a relentless pace. The flying sequences are not just background; they are the narrative’s core, shot with an immersive intensity that makes the audience feel every G-force turn. An interesting Kosinski addition is the opening sequence, which pays direct homage to Philip Kaufman’s The Right Stuff, with shots of early morning flight line activity set to a solemn score, immediately linking Maverick to the legacy of American aviation pioneers.

The film includes an obligatory love subplot, with Maverick rekindling a relationship with Penny Benjamin (Jennifer Connelly), a divorced mother and bar owner who was briefly mentioned but never seen in the original. Connelly, like Cruise, wears her age with grace and confidence, and their chemistry is pleasant if undemanding. Some more cynical viewers, however, might interpret this subplot as a deliberate retort to the long-standing queer reading of the original Top Gun. That reading, famously articulated by Quentin Tarantino’s character in Sleep with Me, interpreted the original as a submerged gay romance between Maverick and Iceman. By giving Maverick a conventional, mature heterosexual romance, Maverick can be seen as gently closing the door on that interpretation, reasserting a traditional heroic masculinity.

Those who like to read between the lines will, on the other hand, easily discover a more sinister geopolitical context. Although the “rogue country” remains deliberately unnamed, specific details—most notably the use of repurposed F-14 Tomcats by the enemy—clearly indicate it as a stand-in for Iran (the only nation still operating the F-14). This allows the film to present a thrilling, morally unambiguous combat scenario without explicitly naming a contemporary adversary. Consequently, like its predecessor, Top Gun: Maverick can easily be viewed as sophisticated US military propaganda. The original Top Gun was an expression of a newly confident superpower on the way to undisputed global hegemony. Maverick updates this for a different era: it is an expression of a superpower seeking to reclaim a sense of military invincibility and moral clarity after the failures and ambiguities of the War on Terror. The mission is clean, surgical, and successful; the enemy is faceless and its motives purely nefarious; American technological prowess and pilot courage triumph without collateral damage or political complication.

Top Gun: Maverick had the good fortune of being released a few years before the horrific real-world conflict between Israel and Hamas in 2023 and subsequent wars against Iran, and the subsequent widespread devastation in Gaza. It was, therefore, unburdened in the audience’s mind by the unflattering comparison between Hollywood fiction about heroic derring-do and the grim reality of modern warfare, where innocent civilians, including children, are butchered and entire civilisations are threatened with genocidal extinction. The film exists in a pristine fantasy space, one that has become increasingly difficult to maintain in the face of 21st-century realities. Its staggering financial success suggests a deep audience craving for that fantasy.

In the end, Top Gun: Maverick is a masterclass in blockbuster filmmaking and a cultural phenomenon of significant weight. It is a better-made film than Tony Scott’s original, with superior action sequences, a tighter narrative, and a more emotionally resonant core thanks to the Kilmer subplot. Yet, its critical reception often overlooks its profound conservatism—both cinematic and ideological. It reaffirms the 1986 template with such precision that it feels less like an evolution and more like a preservation in amber. It offers nostalgia as its primary currency, selling a vision of American heroism that is technically impeccable but politically anachronistic. Top Gun set the path towards less glorious Hollywood future of style over substance. Top Gun: Maverick does not deviate from that path; it simply paves it with more advanced technology and even greater box-office returns. It is the ultimate legacy sequel: brilliantly executed, emotionally effective, and intellectually hollow—a perfect monument to the blockbuster ethos its forebear helped to define.

RATING: 6/10 (+++)

==

Blog in Croatian https://draxblog.com Blog in English https://draxreview.wordpress.com/ InLeo blog https://inleo.io/@drax.leo Substack https://draxster.substack.com/

InLeo: https://inleo.io/signup?referral=drax.leo Leodex: https://leodex.io/?ref=drax Hiveonboard: https://hiveonboard.com?ref=drax Rising Star game: https://www.risingstargame.com?referrer=drax 1Inch: https://1inch.exchange/#/r/0x83823d8CCB74F828148258BB4457642124b1328e

BTC donations: 1EWxiMiP6iiG9rger3NuUSd6HByaxQWafG ETH donations: 0xB305F144323b99e6f8b1d66f5D7DE78B498C32A7 BCH donations: qpvxw0jax79lhmvlgcldkzpqanf03r9cjv8y6gtmk9

A few months ago I saw a deeply moving film called Portrait of a Lady on Fire. I found the title intriguing and decided to give it a chance. According to my research, the film is set in 18th-century France.

source

The story introduces us to Marianne, a talented painter commissioned by a countess to paint the wedding portrait of her daughter, Héloïse, who has just left a convent following the tragic suicide of her older sister. This painting is a purely commercial and patriarchal commission: it will be sent to a nobleman in Milan to secure the marriage. The initial dilemma is that Héloïse flatly refuses to marry and, therefore, to be painted, forcing Marianne to pose as her lady-in-waiting to secretly observe her during the day and paint her from memory at night.

source

As the plot unfolds, the bond between the two women grows beautifully. I really liked the way they were drawn to each other with their eyes; I found it very romantic. Marianne had no choice but to confess the truth and told Héloïse that the reason she was there was to paint her portrait. She showed her the painting she had secretly done, and Héloïse criticized it for being cold and technical, which led the painter to destroy it. Surprisingly, Héloïse decided to pose voluntarily for the second attempt, taking advantage of the fact that her mother was away on a trip for a few days.

source

It is in this absence that the film becomes wonderful. Class barriers disappear completely, and, along with the housemaid, they share moments of absolute freedom, art, and profound empathy. A passionate but painful romance blossoms between Marianne and Héloïse, for both know their days are numbered and that at some point they will have to part ways. The climactic moment occurs around a nighttime bonfire, where their eyes meet, filled with fire and uncontainable passion.

The ending is heartbreaking but inevitable: the mother returns, the portrait is finished, and Héloïse must leave to fulfill her destiny. Although they are separated forever due to societal constraints, the love they shared transforms them forever through art and memory. A beautiful drama that invites us to reflect on freedom, love without barriers, and the indelible mark we leave on the lives of others. I highly recommend it; it's a film worth watching.

I used Google Translate (my language is Spanish).

Rating: 100/100