Pete "Maverick" Mitchell (Tom Cruise) is where he belongs after more than thirty years of duty as one of the Navy's best aviators, pushing the boundaries as a brave test pilot and avoiding the rise in rank that would ground him. Maverick meets Lt. Bradley Bradshaw (Miles Teller), call sign: "Rooster," the son of Maverick's late buddy and Radar Intercept Officer Lt. Nick Bradshaw, aka "Goose," while preparing a detachment of TOPGUN grads for a specialized mission the likes of which no surviving pilot has ever seen. Maverick is driven into a battle with his own innermost fears as he faces an uncertain future and confronts the ghosts of his past, culminating in a mission that demands the ultimate sacrifice from those who will participate.

The Good:

To begin with, there is no Top Gun: Maverick without Tom Cruise. His charm and energy propelled the entire film forward. The camera adores him, and he always holds your attention anytime he appears on film. I was struck by how effortlessly he could be in the middle of a joyful scene (e.g., at the Bar) and transition immediately into the emotional parts when he dealt with Maverick's prior pain. Cruise's performance practically held emotions hostage since spectators were likely to connect and follow him wherever he went with the part.The supporting actors also performed admirably. On-screen chemistry between Cruise and Miles Teller ("Rooster") was fantastic. The chemistry between Cruise and Teller was enthralling. Although I had their characters had somewhat better scripting for their feud, Teller held his own on screen with Tom Cruise, the behemoth. While the rest of the ensemble fared well, Val Kilmer was a standout. Given his circumstances, his performance was both appropriate and emotional.

The Bad:

One of Top Gun: Maverick's minor flaws was that it didn't know when to rein in some of the nostalgia. The bar scene with Rooster was fantastic in my opinion. It established a link between the previous film and the sequel. However, the film not only continued to push what transpired in the past, but it also became a rehash of the previous picture. There were minor differences, but for the most part, Top Gun: Maverick seemed like an updated version of Top Gun (1986). As a result, a few of critical scenes felt unduly predictable. The dynamics of Rooster and Hangman's relationship, for example, were identical to those of Ice Man and Maverick. Is that a disaster? Another small issue was that I felt the writing between Rooster and Maverick should have been more substantial and realistic. After all, this was meant to be the story's main conflict. I liked the reasons for Maverick's previous acts against Rooster, but I can't say I felt the weight of "pulling papers." Perhaps it's because I'm not in the military. I completely grasped the premise, but the sensation of the action didn't translate well enough for me to justify Rooster's wrath.

The Verdict:

Top Gun: Maverick is the epitome of what a blockbuster film should be. You've got a movie star in Tom Cruise, as well as action, drama, humor, and thrills to keep your eyes entertained. This was nothing short of a blast to watch, and it's a wonderful example of why people should still go to the movies. Any other viewing of this film would be a letdown. While prior viewings of Top Gun: Maverick aren't required, I feel that watching the film would be a fantastic way to really appreciate Top Gun: Maverick. See Top Gun: Maverick as soon as possible on the widest screen imaginable.