Top 5 things Top Gun: Maverick did better than Top Gun (and top 5 that the original did better)

I feel the need - the need for speed!

After multiple Covid-19 delays caused Top Gun: Maverick (2022) to top my "most anticipated movies of this year" list three years in a row, the long-anticipated sequel is finally out in cinemas. I'm a massive fan of the original Top Gun (1986), an action classic that would definitely make my top 10 films that I've seen the most times (I'd estimate the correct figure to be somewhere between seven and nine). I went to see the sequel last week with my parents, and just like the film it follows, this one was a massive testament to the power of cinema (in that an environmentalist-pacifist like myself can watch a film romanticizing fighter jets and military culture, and fully pump my fist and feel the "HELL YEAH" effect because the movie just is so damn good). My Mom said it best: Top Gun is great when taken as a fairy tale of sorts, and just not thinking about the real world too much.

The sequel was worth the wait, as there are some elements where it manages to improve on the original, while there are many other factors where the original can't be beaten. Here are the top 5 things that Top Gun: Maverick does better than its predecessor, and top 5 things where Top Gun comes out on top!

Disclaimer: I won't do any major spoilers for the new film, but there are spoilers of the original, as I suppose anyone who bothers to read a blog post comparing the two Top Gun films has at least seen the original.

#5 in things the sequel did better: More tense and exciting

There's no denying that the 1986 original has its suspenseful moments, but they aren't nearly as downright exhilarating as the most tense scenes of the well-directed and often nerve-wracking sequel. This is especially clear in Maverick's final act, which takes you so far to the edge of your seat that you'll nearly fall off. Joseph Kosinski does such a solid job creating tension in the action sequences, that the suspense factor manages to up the ante when comparing the sequel to its predecessor.

#5 in things the original did better: More quotable

The dialogue in the new film is good enough, but the dialogue in the first Top Gun is downright legendary. It says something that the sequel's greatest dialogue moments are the ones where iconic quotes from the original are referenced or recreated, as those are lines that true fans will immediately remember and feel a strong rush of nostalgia for. Top Gun has so many unforgettable quotes, that when I saw my friend Topias a few weeks ago and we were starting to get very hyped about Maverick's release, we pretty much only spoke to each other in Top Gun quotes.

"I feel the need, the need for speed"? Amazing. "Tower, this is Ghost Rider requesting a fly-by"? Ice-cold. "You can be my wingman anytime / Bullshit, you can be mine"? Pure gold. "Talk to me, Goose"? Chills. "Your ego is writing checks your body can't cash"? As deliciously 80's as its gets.

#4 in things the sequel did better: It had a harder job to do

Okay, it's debatable whether the cultural expectations for a film should have anything to do with one's opinion of the end result. But it can't be denied that it's hellishly impressive when a sequel to a beloved film, made decades afterwards and massively hyped up, while having to answer the expectations of many different sorts of viewers, manages to score a better IMDB rating than the original that was sort of just made to be an entertaining action flick with no huge prior expectations.

It seemed that a Top Gun sequel was bound to fail in today's atmosphere: wouldn't it piss off the original core action flick fans if it was more suitable for modern sensibilities and less macho-militaristic than the original, just as it would piss off critics wanting a good movie if it was just as cheesy-masculine and military-romanticizing as the original? But, somehow, the end result manages to walk that line by feeling just modern and serious enough to surpass critic expectations, while also being cool and tongue-in-cheek enough to satisfy the core fans who just wanted more Top Gun. The people who made the original sure as shit didn't have to worry about factoring all of that into their product.

#4 in things the original did better: The originality factor

Don't get me wrong, it's by no means a bad thing that Top Gun: Maverick bathes in nostalgia with its callbacks and references. But the greatness of all those moments, from the misty Top Gun Anthem / Danger Zone intro to the scene where Rooster (Miles Teller) rocks Great Balls of Fire with a piano, owes its thanks to the fact that it's coasting off the greatness of the original.

1986's Top Gun doesn't have any prior cinematic product to coast off of, and deserves multitudes of respect for creating scenes so memorable and awesome that it's still fun as hell to watch slightly different versions of the same scenes in a nostalgic sequel decades later. I'm not one of those "The first one is always the best" elitists, but you definitely do get a lot of extra points for originality.

#3 in things the sequel did better: More serious and layered

While for me this is only at third place, I do believe that it is the biggest individual reason for the fact that many critics are praising Maverick so much and downright saying that it's a better movie than the original. While I do like the original slightly more as a whole, I do very much get why Maverick would be considered the better cinematic product especially by conventional critic standards: it's less silly and cheesy than the first film, and much more reflective and serious. There's nuance in the film's themes, and the film has more to say about the world than the original did. Also, the style of directing is much less "entertaining&fun action flick" and more "seriously taken action drama veering on potential Oscar bait".

Although, to be fair: let's not forget that the original Top Gun won the Oscar for Best Original Song (Berlin's Take My Breath Away), while getting nominated for three more (sound, editing and sound effects)!

#3 in things the original did better: More heartbreak

At first, I titled this item "more emotional", but I wasn't sure if that was accurate: Maverick is emotional in a whole different way, and both films have moved me to tears. But the emotion in Maverick comes either from temporary problems that are later solved in an all-ok manner, or simply from heartwarming moments of nostalgia. The emotion in the original film is much more many-sided, as there are moments that will touch you due to being so uplifting and motivational, but there is also genuine heartbreak and some truly gripping material amidst the fun.

Yes, I'm mostly talking about Goose's (Anthony Edwards) death. While the new film has its sad moments, there is nothing that comes into the slightest vicinity of what is felt when the parachute goes down and Maverick (Tom Cruise) holds his departed friend in his arms to the backdrop of Harold Faltermeyer's heart-piercing score. Also, the scene where Viper (Tom Skerritt) finally tells Maverick the truth about his father's death does have a profound sadness to it, even if it deals with heroism and ends up being the moment of closure and motivation that the protagonist needs.

#2 in things the sequel did better: More fleshed-out characters

This one was a no-brainer. It's not like the original needed to have multi-dimensional characters, as it works wonders with the "lovable rule-breaking wild card", "arrogant rival with a secret heart of gold", "by-the-book best friend", "wise mentor", "hot 80's gal" etc. tropes. But when comparing the films as a film buff such as myself is bound to do, one can't help but praise Maverick for really fleshing out its complex characters.

At first glance, you'll look at new hot-shot characters Rooster and Hangman (Glen Powell) and think: "ah, it's the new iteration of Maverick vs. Iceman (Val Kilmer), nice". But then it hits you: it's not that straight-forward, because if these are the new Maverick and Iceman, which one is which? On one hand, Rooster is Maverick Jr. and Hangman is Iceman Jr., as Rooster is the heroic good guy you root for while Hangman is the arrogant asshole standing in his way. But on the other hand, Rooster is Iceman reborn and Hangman is Maverick reborn, as Rooster is careful and goes 'by the book' just like Iceman did in the original, while Hangman embodies Maverick's rule-breaking spirit.

This neat reversal of roles is just one example of how the major characters in Maverick are surprisingly well-written, with more to them than meets the eye.

#2 in things the original did better: Better soundtrack

I mean, the soundtrack in the new film is pretty kick-ass, as it repeats some of the big hits from the original while also bringing in originals like Hans Zimmer and Lady Gaga's score contributions as well as certain rock classics that could've been in the original film atmosphere-wise even though they weren't (The Who's Won't Get Fooled Again in particular).

But it doesn't come anywhere near the all-time great soundtrack of the first Top Gun.

The film makes use of Kenny Loggins' Danger Zone, Berlin's Take My Breath Away, The Righteous Brothers' You've Lost That Lovin' Feeling, Cheap Trick's Mighty Wings, Kenny Loggins' Playing With The Boys and Jerry Lee Lewis' Great Balls of Fire with a level of greatness that most films don't reach with even just one song. And in addition to that insanely iconic combination, you've got Harold Faltermeyer's Top Gun Anthem - both the intro version that causes the grandest of goosebumps every time, and the full guitar version that is one of the most triumphant pieces of music ever composed.

#1 in things the sequel did better: Clever writing and payoffs

I can't go too deep into this one without doing spoilers, but believe me - there are some epic and well-built payoffs in Top Gun: Maverick. There are many moments that the groundwork is subtly built for throughout the film, only for the moment itself to feel very climactic and earned once it occurs. Some of them you might not see coming, and even the ones you do see coming feel less "yawn, predictable" and more "YES, I KNEW THIS WOULD HAPPEN, AWESOME!". As insanely much as I love the original Top Gun, I'll admit that the script isn't among its strongest suits - with Maverick, the writing is much more clever and detailed than you'd expect.

#1 in things the original did better: More fun and entertaining

It's not like Top Gun: Maverick is anyhow boring - it is in fact one of the more thrilling movies from the last couple of years. But the original Top Gun is one of the most entertaining films in cinema history, and if I were to make a list of the most fun movies of all time, it might just top the chart. In action blockbuster cinema, the entertainment factor counts for a lot, and while the sequel does have its share of moments that put a big smile on one's face, the original Top Gun has loads and loads more (a viewer like myself spends about 83 per cent of the runtime with a satisfied grin, with the other 17 per cent being spent tearing up over the heartbreaking moments mentioned in #3). In terms of entertainment value, you can't beat Top Gun.

Thank you for reading! Tune in next week for my list of the top 10 movie quotes of all time!