top of page

Top Gun: Maverick Review, Do You Need To See The Original?

Top Gun: Maverick, because it is a sequel, they did not just copy and paste from the original. They took the right amount of nostalgia and enough new to feel like a proper sequel. Tom Cruise as Maverick was still the renegade loose canon but has grown, coming full circle seeing that the world doesn’t just revolve around him. The casting overall was very well done. The team worked well with each other and felt organic as Navy pilots. The pasting of the movie never dragged. I believe Val Kilmer’s “Iceman” character got justice. Miles Teller as the son of Goose was perfectly cast. The tensions between Maverick and Rooster were well done and you’ll learn that there is more than just the death of Rooster's father that he holds against Maverick.

If you saw the original, then you need to see the sequel because it's not a disappointment to the franchise. Top Gun 2 hits the mark and maybe better than the original. It is more exciting than the first one. The focus on the love interest did not distract from the movie as it kind of did in the original, fitting where it should in the sequel. Meg Ryan was not cast in the sequel and the reasons they gave I did not particularly like. It was one of the minor issues that I had with the move. It made sense for the storyline. A lot of people are commenting about people that should have been brought back. Meg Ryan is the only one I will agree with.

If you have not seen the original, you’ll want to give the sequel a shot for the action sequences alone. You do not have to see the original and find enjoyment without it. I do recommend seeing the first one if you want to enjoy catching the nostalgic moments because they are worth catching. It is a must-see.


bottom of page