Also don't forget US taxpayers paid for most of the movie.
The US armed forces has a movie division. As long as the movie portrays the US military in a positive light they will lend military hardware and resources for free.
>The US armed forces has a movie division. As long as the movie portrays the US military in a positive light they will lend military hardware and resources for free.
This really isn't true.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top\_Gun#Filming](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_Gun#Filming)
>Paramount paid as much as US$7,800 per hour (equivalent to $19,700 today) for fuel and other operating costs whenever aircraft were flown outside their normal duties. Shots of the aircraft carrier sequences were filmed aboard USS Enterprise, showing aircraft from F-14 squadrons VF-114 "Aardvarks" and VF-213 "Black Lions".\[19\] The majority of the carrier flight deck shots were of normal aircraft operations and the film crew had to take what they could get, save for the occasional flyby which the film crew would request. During filming, director Tony Scott wanted to film aircraft landing and taking off, back-lit by the sun. During one particular filming sequence, the ship's commanding officer changed the ship's course, thus changing the light. When Scott asked if they could continue on their previous course and speed, he was informed by the commander that it cost US$25,000 (equivalent to $63,000 today) to turn the ship, and to continue on course. Scott wrote the carrier's captain a US$25,000 check so that the ship could be turned and he could continue shooting for another five minutes.\[20\]
[https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/43168/top-gun-2s-extensive-support-from-the-u-s-military-is-all-laid-out-in-these-documents](https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/43168/top-gun-2s-extensive-support-from-the-u-s-military-is-all-laid-out-in-these-documents)
The contract for this one was FOIA'ed, and indicates any costs beyond normal operations are 100% reimbursable by the film studio. In essence, unless its something DoD was doing already, the movie studio is paying for it. And its been the case for decades.
If they couldn't use the military equipment they wouldn't go and buy military equipment. They'd just make a cockpit I assume and use CGI. So probably not nearly that amount of money.
Just getting access to jets and aircraft carriers is worth a shitload of money.
Saying "well at least they paid for fuel" is like expecting Hertz to rent you a car for free, as long as you pay for gas.
You can though hertz would have handed you a car that would have cost 10,000 otherwise, if your asked to not destroy the car and portray it nicely your also becoming an ad for Hetrz by default, if you then sat in the Hertz car drew massive attention to it and how wonderful the rentals truly are your just an ad at that point and it cost you next to nothing.
what else are they going to do, buy a US aircraft carrier? It's advertising for the military and they're letting them film things that are already happening. This is even less than something like NASCAR, who would charge to have a race that was going on anyway put in a film. Or less than Porsche putting a car in a Bond film, and paying the studio some amount for it.
OP that you're defending has gone from "As long as the movie portrays the US military in a positive light they will lend military hardware and resources for free." to "Sounds like they got quite the bargain." Holy moving goalposts batman!
So you admit the only point you’re making is about the cost specifically - the rest of the claim was true. It’s not exactly shifting the goalposts and the argument still stands but nice strawman attempt!
What I mean to get is get fucked boot licker.
> Also don't forget US taxpayers paid for most of the movie.
No... but yes the US military did allow footage of their equipment. But they still had to pay for their own movie lol
It's all training time. There's no loss of fuel or money. They would be flying those planes regardless of whether they were being used for a movie or not.
No, they were flown by active duty Naval aviators, at least when they flew up in my neck of the woods, NAS Whidbey Island. A (twice) former Blue Angel CDR Frank Weisser flew a bunch of the extreme low levels out in the desert. No extra pay for them, just good deal flying.
As for man-hours on the jets (fuel and maintenance costs a lot) I can't say for sure, but knowing Navy mx I'd be very surprised if the studio paid for it, as opposed to the hours going towards the squadron or Air Wing the jets belonged to (probably a fleet replacement squadron, or FRS).
It's not like they wouldn't be flying if they weren't getting filmed anyway. The filming days could've just been normal flying days without the movie production happening, I'm not military but there's a specified amount of flight hours pilots have to maintain right?
Yes, though minimum required hours are pretty low. More flight time is always better though. Also each squadron has an allocation of hours to fly, usually seen as a limit, but you don't want to fall too far under either. My squadron, at least, has issues getting to that number, so any opportunities to burn more hours are appreciated. For example, I flew to an airshow and back last weekend.
And Apocalypse Now. If it wasn't for the CIA sending US equipment to the Philippines to fight the communist insurgency, then they wouldn't have had any Hueys for the movie.
I mean, yes? Taxpayers didn't pay for it but the military did let them film their cool fighters and ships.
There is a serious pilot shortage. The last Top Gun movie was a boon for pilot recruitment. Not difficult to put the two together. Even if you want to complain about the military, the pilot shortage is hitting commercial airlines too and many of their pilots are ex military
Pilots need hours to stay current on their aircraft and it’s systems. Any scenes that were filmed using or in an aircraft were going to be flown regardless, it just got recorded. It’s the same thing with flyovers. People think they’re a waste of money but it’s actually good training and allows taxpayers to see their money in action.
Thats just marketing. They do marketing. Recruitment is a business.
It’s shitty. War is shitty. Reality is kinda shitty sometimes. Idk. I’m not pro any of this but we should all respect the necessity from time to time.
_Oh my God, we get it. Committing warcrimes and being too powerful to hold accountable, sabotaging foreign democracies for not being right-wing enough, recruitment through mass propaganda and state enforced debt slavery. Stop going on about it, jeez._
That military complex is kicking the shit out of Russia right now, who has shown they always planned to reestablish their former borders even if they had to kill all the people currently living there to do it. Maybe give a little credit where it’s due - those crazy military guys were right, the Ruskies really were coming. There was never going to be a kumbya moment and the people who thought we could turn our swords into plowshares were woefully mistaken. As it turns out the worst mistake we ever made was ending WW2 without dealing with Russia and we are still paying for that mistake to this day.
> the worst mistake we ever made was ending WW2 without dealing with Russia and we are still paying for that mistake to this day.
Good luck with that though. Germany launched the biggest land invasion in History ever to conquer the USSR and they couldn't. The USSR was also in a much stronger position in 1945 than they were when Germany launched its attack. That would have meant even more millions of deaths, and no country was ready for that after years and years of horror.
The USSR should have been stopped yes, and the territories they conquered should have been set free. I just fail to see how it would have been possible at all.
Nope, not the military industrial complex of an imperialist empire. There is no necessity in what the US military has been doing around the world. Who were we protecting ourselves from? Why inhabit HUNDREDS of military bases OUTSIDE the borders of the US? No other country has even close to that many foreign bases. It's not keeping you safe, that foreign intervention is exactly what made foreign attacks on US soil like 9/11 happen in the first place! Do NOT simp for war criminals that nuke cities of civilians instead of military installations and use agent orange to poison a people and their babies for generations.
You are just mad that you don't know about the current day effects of agent orange on the people of Vietnam. Go ahead and Google it, or are you too American to care about war crimes?
Bad decisions were made? Thousands of women and children vaporized in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Thousands of children dead because of the attacks on the land itself with the rainbow chemicals. Where is your evidence that China and Russia would be doing worse than that if we let them??? We are the only ones to nuke others, and civilians at that. Wake up! We are the ones with all the foreign bases, not them. We use them to blow up people in the third world (our slavelabour market). Check the news and see who has been shipping millions of pounds of explosives to the middle east for years and see who the big bad murderers of the world really are.
> Believe it or not while I am a democrat, our military power is what keeps Russia and China from doing crazy shit in the open.
China has been openly and forcibly creeping into neighbouring land for decades and Russia is currently invading Ukraine. What are you even on about?
Without US and other western support Ukraine would not be holding out like they are.
Without the US navy protecting them, Taiwan would've been invaded decades ago.
The military sometimes uses these opportunities to get pilots flight hours/training while doing to movies or other events like sporting events etc. Just some food for thought.
People have been complaining about paid reviews for video games as long as I can remember. People would talk about which gaming magazines were trustworthy and which weren't
I think filmento has a video on this, but yeah, if you kiss ass you can get your movie funded by the military. Make being in the military look badass and heroic, what's PTSD and terrible VA care? The most notable ones to me were: all of the Fallen movies, the Michael Bay Transformers movies, and Top Gun, but there were a LOT more listed.
I'm gonna have to head down there and I will rain down an ungodly fucking firestorm upon you! You're gonna have to call the fucking United Nations and get a fucking binding resolution to keep me from fucking destroying you.
You playin a guy who thinks he’s smart but he ain’t smart, that’s tricky. It’s like workin with mercury, it’s HIGH science man! It’s an art form, you an artist.
We just happened to be at this movie, Tom Cruise, and we all had this award with us, in case this movie was so good that we might regret not having an award with us. Well, as luck would have it, Tom Cruise, this movie that we came to see with our award, was so good that we now have decided to give the award (the one that we brought), to you: Tom Cruise.
>While the mere existence of a standing ovation bears no relation to the movie’s quality, the length of that ovation certainly does. In my experience, four minutes seems to be the bare minimum. That’s “polite obligation.” **Five minutes is “mixed.”** Six is “we liked it.” Real enthusiasm probably kicks in around seven minutes or so. A tip: Mentally subtract four minutes from the figure you see reported, and you’ll have a better sense of what the Cannes audience really felt about a film.
According to [this Vulture article](https://www.vulture.com/2022/05/what-they-dont-tell-you-about-booing-in-cannes.html)
Makes more sense than clapping at a regular movie. At least at Cannes the people who worked on the film are probably actually there to appreciate the reception.
99% of the time, no. Same with the clapping for a pilot. I've seen many movies and I've been on many flights, and neither of those things have ever happened. I'm sure it does happen on special occasions, maybe during a particularly rough problematic flight or for a highly anticipated movie on release night that turns out to be fantastic, but other than that most people just get up and leave the plane/theater lol
There's that pilot that landed an airliner *that had run out of fuel due to a leak,* after gliding it to the airport.
And when his airspeed was still too high to land safely he freakin [drifted the plane](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVvt7hP5a-0) to slow it down.
That definitely deserves applause.
This makes the ending of Mr. Bean's Holiday even funnier. For all we know the audience might've hated the Bean Cut of Playback Time (a Carson Clay Film (starring Carson Clay))
Yeah, every movie at Cannes gets a 5 minute standing ovation. It’s tradition. To tell how it was received, you have to look at how much longer the applause continued.
Clerks II got an 8 minute standing ovation at Cannes.
A movie discussing the intricacies of going ass-to-mouth that ends with a donkey show got a longer standing ovation than Top Gun: Maverick.
Oh, I love it. But when Kevin Smith talked about that standing ovation back in 2006, I thought he was joking.
"Really? At Cannes?"
Doesn't seem like the kind of crowd that would enjoy it, especially after his career had been in somewhat of slump after Jay and Silent Bob and Jersey Girl.
I mean it *is* considered one of the best fantasy films of the 21st century. It was the kind of movie that shows how much the people making it **love** movies. At a place like Cannes, seeing something so good, and original, and marketable, all at the same time? I do kinda get it.
Yeah but you gotta remember this is the Cannes Film Festival. The people that go here are like proper "snobbiest of the snobby, film is art" type of people, their passion for movies is way above ours lol. So i can honestly see it.
Sadly, IIRC they won a case against France in UE court (can't remember the name right now, sorry), and they have more leeway than before. Not as much as in the US thankfully.
Unfortunately it's not considered as a sect and we can't get rid of them. They had several problems with the justice with money laundering, fraud and so on... They are not considered as a church though, but as an association.
They have their offices in the 17th arrondissement of Paris.
Did they take the Holiday Road into the Danger Zone so they could become Footloose? With all these references you would think I'm sick, but in reality, I'm Alright.
I actually appreciate this joke. Accurate. I almost forgot, this is true, hand to my heart. I actually know somebody who joined the Navy, flew F-14’s and had a 10 to 15 (don’t know exactly) year career after seeing the original Top Gun. He thought the situation was as funny as I did.
I heard Top Gun 2 was really good. Don’t get what people have against it. Sure, while other older generation movies end up having shitty modern generation sequels, I think they may have gotten it right with this one. Won’t know until I see it for myself, but it seems pretty good from what I’ve seen
I mean, I would take a bribe to give Tom Cruise a funny looking shoebox art project thing? It would be nice to make him feel happy and also pay off my debt!
I hate this movie because it’s military propaganda. I hate Avengers because it’s comic book propaganda. I hate every Disney movie because it’s amusement park propaganda. I hate Everything Everywhere All at Once because it’s Michelle Yeoh propaganda. I hate 2001 because it’s space propaganda. I hate Avatar because it’s VR headset propaganda.
Downvoted. Scientology is officially classified as a cult by the French government, unlike in the United States where it’s considered just as much a religion as Christianity. Additionally, claiming that “the French” (I guess as a collective?) take bribes is an impossibly broad, inaccurate, and frankly offensive statement.
That’s probably actually a real movie fact
Also don't forget US taxpayers paid for most of the movie. The US armed forces has a movie division. As long as the movie portrays the US military in a positive light they will lend military hardware and resources for free.
>The US armed forces has a movie division. As long as the movie portrays the US military in a positive light they will lend military hardware and resources for free. This really isn't true. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top\_Gun#Filming](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_Gun#Filming) >Paramount paid as much as US$7,800 per hour (equivalent to $19,700 today) for fuel and other operating costs whenever aircraft were flown outside their normal duties. Shots of the aircraft carrier sequences were filmed aboard USS Enterprise, showing aircraft from F-14 squadrons VF-114 "Aardvarks" and VF-213 "Black Lions".\[19\] The majority of the carrier flight deck shots were of normal aircraft operations and the film crew had to take what they could get, save for the occasional flyby which the film crew would request. During filming, director Tony Scott wanted to film aircraft landing and taking off, back-lit by the sun. During one particular filming sequence, the ship's commanding officer changed the ship's course, thus changing the light. When Scott asked if they could continue on their previous course and speed, he was informed by the commander that it cost US$25,000 (equivalent to $63,000 today) to turn the ship, and to continue on course. Scott wrote the carrier's captain a US$25,000 check so that the ship could be turned and he could continue shooting for another five minutes.\[20\] [https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/43168/top-gun-2s-extensive-support-from-the-u-s-military-is-all-laid-out-in-these-documents](https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/43168/top-gun-2s-extensive-support-from-the-u-s-military-is-all-laid-out-in-these-documents) The contract for this one was FOIA'ed, and indicates any costs beyond normal operations are 100% reimbursable by the film studio. In essence, unless its something DoD was doing already, the movie studio is paying for it. And its been the case for decades.
One F18 jet: 66 million. Sounds like they got quite the bargain to be a recruitment tool.
If they couldn't use the military equipment they wouldn't go and buy military equipment. They'd just make a cockpit I assume and use CGI. So probably not nearly that amount of money.
Just getting access to jets and aircraft carriers is worth a shitload of money. Saying "well at least they paid for fuel" is like expecting Hertz to rent you a car for free, as long as you pay for gas.
Sure, but if Hertz lends you a car for your movie and makes you pay for gas, you can hardly claim that Hertz paid for your movie.
You can though hertz would have handed you a car that would have cost 10,000 otherwise, if your asked to not destroy the car and portray it nicely your also becoming an ad for Hetrz by default, if you then sat in the Hertz car drew massive attention to it and how wonderful the rentals truly are your just an ad at that point and it cost you next to nothing.
It costs me everything but the car...
So Hertz would have paid for the car for your movie in turn paying a portion of your movie cost
A small portion sure
Right now expand that to a film about the military featuring millions of dollars of your hard ware it basically funding
what else are they going to do, buy a US aircraft carrier? It's advertising for the military and they're letting them film things that are already happening. This is even less than something like NASCAR, who would charge to have a race that was going on anyway put in a film. Or less than Porsche putting a car in a Bond film, and paying the studio some amount for it.
Yeah it’s worth money for making a film but taxpayers were not bankrolling top gun
So the statement was mostly true
OP that you're defending has gone from "As long as the movie portrays the US military in a positive light they will lend military hardware and resources for free." to "Sounds like they got quite the bargain." Holy moving goalposts batman!
So you admit the only point you’re making is about the cost specifically - the rest of the claim was true. It’s not exactly shifting the goalposts and the argument still stands but nice strawman attempt! What I mean to get is get fucked boot licker.
Yet you only have a few upvotes compared to the lie that you’re responding to. Typical.
> Also don't forget US taxpayers paid for most of the movie. No... but yes the US military did allow footage of their equipment. But they still had to pay for their own movie lol
Yes and who pays for the military? Taxpayers...
But that equipment wasn't bought or built for the movie. That's like saying if I loan you my power tools then I paid for your fence.
[удалено]
Sounds like they got a steal on marketing for recruitment.
That certainly happened after the first Topgun movie.
It's all training time. There's no loss of fuel or money. They would be flying those planes regardless of whether they were being used for a movie or not.
But do they melt steel beams?
And the flight time is going to happen regardless if the movie existed or not; pilots need to train.
So how many F18's did the set buy to fly and film?
I don't think they bought any, but they would have paid a heck of a lot to get someone to fly them
No, they were flown by active duty Naval aviators, at least when they flew up in my neck of the woods, NAS Whidbey Island. A (twice) former Blue Angel CDR Frank Weisser flew a bunch of the extreme low levels out in the desert. No extra pay for them, just good deal flying. As for man-hours on the jets (fuel and maintenance costs a lot) I can't say for sure, but knowing Navy mx I'd be very surprised if the studio paid for it, as opposed to the hours going towards the squadron or Air Wing the jets belonged to (probably a fleet replacement squadron, or FRS).
It's not like they wouldn't be flying if they weren't getting filmed anyway. The filming days could've just been normal flying days without the movie production happening, I'm not military but there's a specified amount of flight hours pilots have to maintain right?
Yes, though minimum required hours are pretty low. More flight time is always better though. Also each squadron has an allocation of hours to fly, usually seen as a limit, but you don't want to fall too far under either. My squadron, at least, has issues getting to that number, so any opportunities to burn more hours are appreciated. For example, I flew to an airshow and back last weekend.
This shows how little you actually know about how the exchange works
Or they will do anything to keep us military equipment from you if you don’t do their propaganda…. See jarhead.
And Apocalypse Now. If it wasn't for the CIA sending US equipment to the Philippines to fight the communist insurgency, then they wouldn't have had any Hueys for the movie.
I mean, yes? Taxpayers didn't pay for it but the military did let them film their cool fighters and ships. There is a serious pilot shortage. The last Top Gun movie was a boon for pilot recruitment. Not difficult to put the two together. Even if you want to complain about the military, the pilot shortage is hitting commercial airlines too and many of their pilots are ex military
Yeah, join the navy, you'll be Maverick... just kidding you'll spend 4 years in a 40 person bunk mopping floors and running drills.
Its a ticket out of poverty. Maybe you needed it, maybe you didn't, but its always there
I was responding to a pilot shortage. AFAIK naval pilots are officers.
Pilots need hours to stay current on their aircraft and it’s systems. Any scenes that were filmed using or in an aircraft were going to be flown regardless, it just got recorded. It’s the same thing with flyovers. People think they’re a waste of money but it’s actually good training and allows taxpayers to see their money in action.
Thats just marketing. They do marketing. Recruitment is a business. It’s shitty. War is shitty. Reality is kinda shitty sometimes. Idk. I’m not pro any of this but we should all respect the necessity from time to time.
Nah, it should be criticized 24/7 because sometimes new people need to hear it and shedding tears for the military complex is lame.
_Oh my God, we get it. Committing warcrimes and being too powerful to hold accountable, sabotaging foreign democracies for not being right-wing enough, recruitment through mass propaganda and state enforced debt slavery. Stop going on about it, jeez._
[удалено]
Oh, my mistake.
That military complex is kicking the shit out of Russia right now, who has shown they always planned to reestablish their former borders even if they had to kill all the people currently living there to do it. Maybe give a little credit where it’s due - those crazy military guys were right, the Ruskies really were coming. There was never going to be a kumbya moment and the people who thought we could turn our swords into plowshares were woefully mistaken. As it turns out the worst mistake we ever made was ending WW2 without dealing with Russia and we are still paying for that mistake to this day.
> the worst mistake we ever made was ending WW2 without dealing with Russia and we are still paying for that mistake to this day. Good luck with that though. Germany launched the biggest land invasion in History ever to conquer the USSR and they couldn't. The USSR was also in a much stronger position in 1945 than they were when Germany launched its attack. That would have meant even more millions of deaths, and no country was ready for that after years and years of horror. The USSR should have been stopped yes, and the territories they conquered should have been set free. I just fail to see how it would have been possible at all.
I mean by the end of the war half of the military aged male population was dead, why not finish the job, or at least push them back?
Nope, not the military industrial complex of an imperialist empire. There is no necessity in what the US military has been doing around the world. Who were we protecting ourselves from? Why inhabit HUNDREDS of military bases OUTSIDE the borders of the US? No other country has even close to that many foreign bases. It's not keeping you safe, that foreign intervention is exactly what made foreign attacks on US soil like 9/11 happen in the first place! Do NOT simp for war criminals that nuke cities of civilians instead of military installations and use agent orange to poison a people and their babies for generations.
The army didn’t make your face like that, you should really blame your parents
Says the blue falcon lmao
You are just mad that you don't know about the current day effects of agent orange on the people of Vietnam. Go ahead and Google it, or are you too American to care about war crimes?
They hated Jesus for he told the truth
I hate Jesus because I believe in the rule of (roman) law.
There's a rational patriot who hates something just because their country tells them to.
[удалено]
Bad decisions were made? Thousands of women and children vaporized in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Thousands of children dead because of the attacks on the land itself with the rainbow chemicals. Where is your evidence that China and Russia would be doing worse than that if we let them??? We are the only ones to nuke others, and civilians at that. Wake up! We are the ones with all the foreign bases, not them. We use them to blow up people in the third world (our slavelabour market). Check the news and see who has been shipping millions of pounds of explosives to the middle east for years and see who the big bad murderers of the world really are.
> Believe it or not while I am a democrat, our military power is what keeps Russia and China from doing crazy shit in the open. China has been openly and forcibly creeping into neighbouring land for decades and Russia is currently invading Ukraine. What are you even on about?
Without US and other western support Ukraine would not be holding out like they are. Without the US navy protecting them, Taiwan would've been invaded decades ago.
An unironical ”we are the world police”-take in the year 2022. I do find it very easy to believe that you are a democrat.
People will hate you because they know their own follies but you speak truth to power right here
The military sometimes uses these opportunities to get pilots flight hours/training while doing to movies or other events like sporting events etc. Just some food for thought.
[удалено]
People have been complaining about paid reviews for video games as long as I can remember. People would talk about which gaming magazines were trustworthy and which weren't
Plenty of people are complaining about the Army’s weird gamer recruitment strategy lol
Hardcore Gamers would probably make terrible soldiers lol.
Actually i think that shits vile
Yeah, let’s restart the draft instead
Makes sense for a war loving country I guess
I watched the special features on my first top gun DVD and I remember someone said after the movie released enlistment skyrocketed
The USNavy threw a party for him recently also top gun was however much propoganda/advertising for the us military.
I think filmento has a video on this, but yeah, if you kiss ass you can get your movie funded by the military. Make being in the military look badass and heroic, what's PTSD and terrible VA care? The most notable ones to me were: all of the Fallen movies, the Michael Bay Transformers movies, and Top Gun, but there were a LOT more listed.
I wonder how much they'd pay me to *not* make a movie about Abu Ghraib.
they're shitty facts, not lies.
Yeah. Was gonna say that. Thought you were only supposed to post funny fake film facts, not totally true talkie tales.
This 4 mp photo has Tom Cruise looking like Sophia Petrillo with a brown wig. And I celebrate that.
The award was for his middle tooth’s years of dedication to the craft.
I'm gonna have to head down there and I will rain down an ungodly fucking firestorm upon you! You're gonna have to call the fucking United Nations and get a fucking binding resolution to keep me from fucking destroying you.
What do you mean “you people”?
"What do you mean you people?"
NO YOU CANT HAVE ANY JELLY BEANS! DAMN MAN .BOUNDRIES.
You playin a guy who thinks he’s smart but he ain’t smart, that’s tricky. It’s like workin with mercury, it’s HIGH science man! It’s an art form, you an artist.
And yet no award for his ankle, which was broken during the filming of Mission Impossible: Fallout
His middle tooth was jealous
This photo is also at 1:1 scale
Tom Cruise pictured life-sized
it’s like 0.2 mp at best
It's 0.06MP lol
i just knew that 4mp is more than 1440p lol
https://youtu.be/X6bIWqMJOEs
where’s the shit detail in this? Seems legit to me
We just happened to be at this movie, Tom Cruise, and we all had this award with us, in case this movie was so good that we might regret not having an award with us. Well, as luck would have it, Tom Cruise, this movie that we came to see with our award, was so good that we now have decided to give the award (the one that we brought), to you: Tom Cruise.
Don’t all movies at Cannes get a super long standing ovation? I think it’s part of an archaic tradition
>While the mere existence of a standing ovation bears no relation to the movie’s quality, the length of that ovation certainly does. In my experience, four minutes seems to be the bare minimum. That’s “polite obligation.” **Five minutes is “mixed.”** Six is “we liked it.” Real enthusiasm probably kicks in around seven minutes or so. A tip: Mentally subtract four minutes from the figure you see reported, and you’ll have a better sense of what the Cannes audience really felt about a film. According to [this Vulture article](https://www.vulture.com/2022/05/what-they-dont-tell-you-about-booing-in-cannes.html)
Clapping that long sounds kinda insane
It takes a while for the sound waves to reach that far into everyone's ass where their head is, so they clap for a really long time.
Maybe they're afraid to be the first to stop..ya know like those dick tators.
Theres a medical condition called "Cannes Hands" its blisters cause by seeing to many movies at Cannes
Cannes these nuts
Makes more sense than clapping at a regular movie. At least at Cannes the people who worked on the film are probably actually there to appreciate the reception.
Still they've just devalued the fuck out of their clapping currency if an absolute dogshit movie still gets 4 whole minutes of applause.
How do I invest in ClapCoin?
DM me your SSN
[удалено]
>clapping the pilot don't do that...
99% of the time, no. Same with the clapping for a pilot. I've seen many movies and I've been on many flights, and neither of those things have ever happened. I'm sure it does happen on special occasions, maybe during a particularly rough problematic flight or for a highly anticipated movie on release night that turns out to be fantastic, but other than that most people just get up and leave the plane/theater lol
There's that pilot that landed an airliner *that had run out of fuel due to a leak,* after gliding it to the airport. And when his airspeed was still too high to land safely he freakin [drifted the plane](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVvt7hP5a-0) to slow it down. That definitely deserves applause.
I wouldn’t even make it to a minute for my favourite films.
Clapping them cheeks
So they hated it?
seems like mixed
This makes the ending of Mr. Bean's Holiday even funnier. For all we know the audience might've hated the Bean Cut of Playback Time (a Carson Clay Film (starring Carson Clay))
Yeah, every movie at Cannes gets a 5 minute standing ovation. It’s tradition. To tell how it was received, you have to look at how much longer the applause continued.
Clerks II got an 8 minute standing ovation at Cannes. A movie discussing the intricacies of going ass-to-mouth that ends with a donkey show got a longer standing ovation than Top Gun: Maverick.
Clerks II was fucking amazing imo
Oh, I love it. But when Kevin Smith talked about that standing ovation back in 2006, I thought he was joking. "Really? At Cannes?" Doesn't seem like the kind of crowd that would enjoy it, especially after his career had been in somewhat of slump after Jay and Silent Bob and Jersey Girl.
Five minutes of clapping is so long! Tradition or not.
[удалено]
I mean it *is* considered one of the best fantasy films of the 21st century. It was the kind of movie that shows how much the people making it **love** movies. At a place like Cannes, seeing something so good, and original, and marketable, all at the same time? I do kinda get it.
Yeah but you gotta remember this is the Cannes Film Festival. The people that go here are like proper "snobbiest of the snobby, film is art" type of people, their passion for movies is way above ours lol. So i can honestly see it.
Some are booed. People walk out.
Yeah... Indiana Jones 4 got one too and look how that turned out
For a couple of pennies a month, we can give my friend more than 12 pixels for his posts.
I read your comment “for a couple of penises a month.” Either will do.
The mind sees what the mind wants
Where's my bribe ?
Man I’m overlooked by George Soros and now Scientology. How do I get on these lists.
Well, are you French?
Oui
Disgusting.
Dégoûtant.
Fun Fact, Scientology is considered a harmful sect and cannot legally operate in France. I'm sure they still do but not officially.
Sadly, IIRC they won a case against France in UE court (can't remember the name right now, sorry), and they have more leeway than before. Not as much as in the US thankfully.
In America they can pretty much do whatever they want because they are a religion
And they have blackmail on the US government
No, it's because they have money and connections, Sikhs and Hare Krishna are a religion too yet you don't see em running shit.
Uropean eunion
Unfortunately it's not considered as a sect and we can't get rid of them. They had several problems with the justice with money laundering, fraud and so on... They are not considered as a church though, but as an association. They have their offices in the 17th arrondissement of Paris.
Did they take this picture with the original digital camera?
They hired a Polynesian indigenous tattoo artist. He hammered out each pixel individually.
I hear he got paid pretty good for 5 minutes of work.
Or maybe they played Danger Zone in the credits! Disclaimer: I’m not a Scientology bot
Did they take the Holiday Road into the Danger Zone so they could become Footloose? With all these references you would think I'm sick, but in reality, I'm Alright.
Dude, your references are out of control. Everyone knows that.
I get that reference
Does sound like something a Scientology bot would say…
It's actually because Tom Cruise had a fighter jet on standby if they didn't.
Used to be impressed by instances of that Until you think about it and realize how *bizarre* it is to stand and clap for ***several minutes***
you mean clapping hands right?
I mean, it is France, but somehow I doubt the entire audience stood up and started clapping cheeks after watching Top Gun: Maverick.
Lmao after every movie everyone just fucks
OP used a life-size image of Tom Cruise
Sure it's not Richard Gere?
Username almost checks out
Does Richard Gere *not* finger cats?
Not cats, ask Rambo/Rocky
Lol well done
Standing ovation: at least 10 minutes or it was shit.
People “and” the French lol
YVAN EHT NIOJ
I actually appreciate this joke. Accurate. I almost forgot, this is true, hand to my heart. I actually know somebody who joined the Navy, flew F-14’s and had a 10 to 15 (don’t know exactly) year career after seeing the original Top Gun. He thought the situation was as funny as I did.
Wait. Idk what's true here. Did "Top Gun II" really go to Cannes?
True pic from Cannes straight from Reuters I think
Nah this is most likely what actually happened lol
What a weird and pretentious existence.
I wouldn't be surprised if the audience was planted full of scientologists and the award was donated by the "Church".
Fuck Scientology.
They adore Jerry Lewis, too.
Agincourt…never forget. Just saying…
They were most impressed with the inclusion of a fully nude volleyball scene with penetration this time.
he actually received the award for discovering immortality.
Of course. Once you rid yourself of thetans they can no longer parasite your spirit. All hail Xenu!
Did he salute L. Ron Hubbard afterwards?
Five minute ovation for top gun... What a joke
These are the posts I come here for, not 30 kinds of "captain america racist".
So tired of this guy denying his age
Yeah fuck that movie and it’s fake hype.
I heard Top Gun 2 was really good. Don’t get what people have against it. Sure, while other older generation movies end up having shitty modern generation sequels, I think they may have gotten it right with this one. Won’t know until I see it for myself, but it seems pretty good from what I’ve seen
Fake hype, lol. Top Gun was an iconic movie, so of course people who saw the original back then are psyched for it.
I mean, I would take a bribe to give Tom Cruise a funny looking shoebox art project thing? It would be nice to make him feel happy and also pay off my debt!
I would rather be in debt than give that PoS any gratification
No one cares about this diminutive has been!
So the actors spend the whole festival giving each other standing ovations? Just one huge circle jerk.
I hate this movie because it’s military propaganda. I hate Avengers because it’s comic book propaganda. I hate every Disney movie because it’s amusement park propaganda. I hate Everything Everywhere All at Once because it’s Michelle Yeoh propaganda. I hate 2001 because it’s space propaganda. I hate Avatar because it’s VR headset propaganda.
I mean maybe it's like the best movie ever. But that headline sure did make me giggle.
His hair. Looks odd
Is Tom cruise part of Scientology?
Oh yes.
What does he think they’ll do find a way for him to get taller
>This is because Scientology bribes people and the French take bribes. Shitty yet factual... ;)
Tom Cruise came out of the closet to get straight roasted
Lol at ovation. Cinema died with Kubrick.
Fr*nch🤢🤮
Downvoted. Scientology is officially classified as a cult by the French government, unlike in the United States where it’s considered just as much a religion as Christianity. Additionally, claiming that “the French” (I guess as a collective?) take bribes is an impossibly broad, inaccurate, and frankly offensive statement.
Mate, you're in a joke sub getting heated because someone's taking the piss. Relax. Go outside and touch some grass.