[imagesource: Paramount Pictures]

We’ve reached the full-throttle part of the Top Gun: Maverick hype machine.

Two weeks from today (it’s Friday the 13th, by the way, for those who pay attention to such things), the long-awaited sequel to the 1986 cult classic will hit theatres.

Tom Cruise has put everybody through his boot camp, denim jeans and volleyball nets are en route to the beach, and the reviews have arrived.

Let’s start with The Telegraph – five stars, pal:

Thrilling, moving and gloriously Cruisey, Joseph Kosinski’s sequel to the 1986 hit is unquestionably the best studio action film in years…

Watching Cruise’s return as Maverick is so outrageously pleasurable largely because the actor himself treats it as pleasure….

There is also a neat, lower-key role for Jennifer Connolly as an old flame, and a touching return for Val Kilmer, whose Iceman is now a highly decorated Admiral with health problems that mirror the actor’s own.

Kilmer’s health struggles were front and centre in Val, a doccie covering his life story released last year.

The Guardian was slightly less enthused, giving the film three stars and saying it misses “the homoerotic tensions of the 80s original”:

There’s plenty of rock’n’roll fighter-pilot action in this movie, but weirdly none of the homoerotic tension that back in the day had guys queueing up at the Navy recruitment booths set up in cinema foyers…

But where, oh where, is the towel-round-the-waist, semi-nude locker-room intensity between the guys? The guys who compete with each other but need each other? Well, nowhere…

I guess everybody has their own cinematic tastes.

Mashable hasn’t awarded a score but says the film is “far more interested in safe choices than danger zones”:

There are chases, dog fights, and hotshot moves that’ll have even those of us who know nothing about planes in awe of their daring. The sound design is so intense that the engine’s roar literally shook me in my seat. The immersive cinematography takes us into the cockpit, then the shrewd edit pitches us into the sky…

But should a movie about a life-or-death mission play it so safe? Nostalgia is one thing, but rerunning the same plotlines, resuscitating the same archetypes, and coasting on the relics of pop culture past makes for a movie that feels sanitized instead of sensational, safe instead of sexy.

Safe often means a massive box office haul and, let’s be honest, that’s why we’re seeing a sequel in the first place.

For the eight people out there who haven’t seen the latest trailer, you’re welcome:

We’ll finish with a positive and a glowing review from IndieWire:

Joseph Kosinksi’s long-delayed sequel is a confidently rapturous, emotionally involving, take-your-breath-away great time at the movies…

If “Top Gun” was a fun film because it invented Tom Cruise, “Maverick” is a great film because it immortalizes him. It’s not a Tom Cruise movie so much as it’s “Tom Cruise: The Movie,” and by the time it’s over, even his fiercest critics might have to admit that they’ll miss him when he’s gone…

Where is Tom Cruise going? The guy will keep on churning out movies until he’s six feet under.

So there you have it – mostly glowing reviews saying you know what you’re getting and you’ll probably like it.

[sources:telegraph&guardian&mashable&indiewire]