​"Jurassic World Dominion" stars Chris Pratt, Bryce Dallas Howard, Sam Neill, Laura Dern, Jeff Goldblum, DeWanda Wise, Mamoudou Athie, BD Wong, and Omar Sy. Released on June 10, 2022, the film has Owen Grady and the gang dealing with dinosaurs on the mainland.

The film was directed by Colin Trevorrow, who also directed "Safety Not Guaranteed", "Jurassic World", and "The Book of Henry". It is the sixth film in the "Jurassic Park" franchise and the third in the "Jurassic World" trilogy. We tried to warn them about what would happen if they continued messing with God's oldest creations. Now, they pay the price, as the dinosaurs found a new home for them to live and hunt: our world. No one is safe with them roaming around, not even the innocent and their pets. Stupid scientists. "Jurassic World" brought audiences back to the awe-inspiring world of Steven Spielberg's "Jurassic Park", which introduces them to new characters and a brand new environment: a dinosaur-themed amusement park. But, of course, if it wasn't obvious enough, something went wrong, and the dinos are running loose outside Isla Nublar. Is now a good time for them to leave nature alone? "Jurassic World" was a highly entertaining continuation that didn't match Spielberg's sci-fi classic but retained the wonder, tension, and visual splendor that made "Jurassic Park" a cultural phenomenon. Its 2018 follow-up, "Fallen Kingdom", helmed by J. A. Bayona, was a reasonably watchable sequel that led the human race to coexist with the savage beasts. This long-awaited chapter in the "Jurassic World" trilogy sees Colin Trevorrow returning to the director's chair to conclude the 30-year-old storyline that started in "Jurassic Park". Seeing that I enjoyed the previous films in the dino-infested franchise, it's no surprise that I was eager to see how they will wrap this series…and leave things open for another trilogy if it does well. So was it a fitting conclusion to the era, or were we better off with the franchise being eaten alive? Let's find out.

The story takes place four years after "Fallen Kingdom". The dinosaurs are running loose on the mainland and are now living (and hunting) alongside the human race. One of the surviving humans in this fragile balance is Owen Grady (Pratt), a former employee at Jurassic World attempting to raise his adoptive daughter Maisie Lockwood (Sermon) with Claire Dearing (Howard). They recently discovered that Owen's old velociraptor friend Blue has a baby in its care. When a group of poachers captures Blue's baby and Maisie, Owen and Claire set out on a global mission to rescue them with the help of former Air Force pilot Kayla Watts (Wise). They also gain some additional support from the previous Jurassic Park survivors: Alan Grant (Neill), Ellie Sattler (Dern), and Ian Malcolm (Goldblum).

"Dominion" is what happens when you take the final act of "The Lost World: Jurassic Park" and expand it by around two and a half hours. Combine that with its action blockbuster vibes and loads of nostalgia, and you get a dinosaur-sized experience that an entire island couldn't contain. You know, because the volcano destroyed Isla Nublar in the previous movie. "Jurassic World" has molded itself into a trilogy-like story arc that sees the characters and dinosaurs transition from Isla Nublar to the mainland. Thanks to Maisie's decision to free the dinosaurs in "Fallen Kingdom", the entire world is now the creatures' natural habitat.

The concept is one of the film's most interesting aspects because it represents the reality of people's consequences of reviving and creating dinosaurs for profit. The coexistence of dinosaurs and humans causes a fragile balance that could jeopardize either species. It has heavily been teased in the earlier installments, including "Jurassic World", and people have a lot of chances to stop. But they just keep on doing it. Hopefully, they'll finally learn this lesson after this movie. It's a different scenario that gives the franchise a boost since surviving on a dinosaur-infected island has been done a bunch of times since the beginning. Unfortunately, it also leads to some moments that were done to death in the other global action blockbusters before it. It's not without a few entertaining (and silly) sequences regarding the dinosaurs and human characters, but "Dominion" shows that the franchise's impact is still wearing itself thin.

The story follows two different scenarios from two sets of characters that eventually intertwine with one another. One has Owen and Claire on a rescue mission to find Blue's child and Maisie. The other has Ellie Sattler reuniting with Alan to investigate a swarm of giant locusts, leading them to the heart of a genetic company called Biosyn. I would describe these subplots as this: Owen's mission plays out like any other action blockbuster filled with tiring cliches and set pieces. On the other hand, the scenario involving Ellie and Alan resembles a "Jurassic Park" reunion special and an enjoyable one at that. I can admittedly say that there were a couple of moments that were tolerable for me, including the "Jurassic Park" trio and Maisie's history. But sadly, they're not enough to capitalize on its intriguing background and only settle for standard blockbuster affairs for better or worse.

Colin Trevorrow returns to the director's chair to close the trilogy he started with "Jurassic World". I was impressed with what Trevorrow accomplished in the 2015 sequel, so I was hoping he'll strike gold again with "Dominion". Unfortunately, that wasn't the case. Trevorrow maintained the energy of its action scenes as he did with "Jurassic World". However, he struggled to capture the tension and wonder that made "Jurassic Park" a cinematic landmark and the previous "Jurassic World" movies entertainingly heart-pounding. The chase scene in Malta and the Giganotosaurus encounter were the only two sequences I enjoyed the most regarding Trevorrow's direction. The rest of them didn't come close to them. There are also some issues with the editing, which was a bit choppy at times and messes with the tension's flow compared to the previous installments. Regardless, it delivered what people should expect from a movie about dinosaurs: dinosaur fights and humans avoiding being their all-you-can-eat buffet. It's been like this since "Jurassic Park", and it hasn't changed here, even though this movie could've done more with its themes and storytelling.

Chris Pratt is still enjoyable in his role as Owen Grady, as did Bryce Dallas Howard as Claire. The trio from "Jurassic Park" (Dern, Neill, and Goldblum) also did a suitable job reprising their roles as the original characters. These three actors were some of the reasons for the original trilogy's success, and seeing them back together after almost 30 years is enough to make me smile. As for the new characters, I can at least say that they've done what they could to make their presence known amid the main leads' star power. DeWanda Wise delivered some decent moments onscreen regarding her role as Kayla Watts, and Mamoudou Athie did all right as Ramsay Cole, the Head of Communications of Biosyn.  

Like the previous installments, "Dominion" has visual effects that consist of CGI animation and animatronics, mainly for the dinosaurs. The franchise is always known for providing both types of visuals for the creatures, so I'm glad the filmmakers kept the trend going instead of taking recent shortcuts. As usual, they offer a solid balance that makes the dinosaurs feel almost realistic, cute, and terrifying. The CGI wasn't anything spectacular, but it effectively represented the dinosaurs' scientific designs and movements.

Overall, "Jurassic World Dominion" delivers plenty of dinosaur mayhem in a new setting but lacks a strong desire to conclude its new Jurassic trilogy on a satisfying note. It's enjoyable in some places regarding its cast, nostalgia, and action sequences. However, it doesn't do much else besides those elements to make its conclusion more impactful than it should've been. Part of that is due to the screenplay full of cliches and silly moments that were done better in other films, uninspired editing, and Trevorrow's middling direction. Compared to the previous films in the franchise, I would say "Dominion" is on the low end of this list above "Jurassic Park III", with the original "Jurassic Park" still reigning supreme in my eyes. It might not save the franchise from going extinct, but I can assume that it might impress people with a thirst for action and dinosaurs, especially ones who grew up watching the Jurassic films.

​"Crimes of the Future" stars Viggo Mortensen, Léa Seydoux, Kristen Stewart, Don McKellar, and Scott Speedman. Released on June 3, 2022, the film has a performance art duo performing grotesque acts in a climate-ravaged future.

The film was written and directed by David Cronenberg, who also directed films such as "Stereo", "The Fly", "Crash", "A History of Violence", and "Eastern Promises". Arthouse movies tend to make audiences scratch their heads in confusion or feel underwhelmed by their experimental storytelling. However, there are also specific types of artful films that'll leave them puzzled while searching for the nearest barf bag. These movies have a habit of going beyond their unsettling nature with their gross-out imagery and disturbing body horror elements and classify them as cinema. The film I'll be talking about today happens to fit in that category. This latest addition to the body horror genre has been getting a lot of attention lately, aside from its glowing reviews. It features the long-awaited return of filmmaker David Cronenberg in his first dive into sci-fi horror since 1999's "Existenz". More importantly, it caused some viewers to walk out of the theater during its premiere at the Cannes Film Festival due to its graphic scenes. So they're okay with characters getting hurt in gruesome ways in the "Saw" movies, but when another movie does it, they find it a problem? I don't get these people sometimes. Now that the film has been released to the public, it's time for me to see if it's as grotesque and artistic as the concept suggests.

The film centers on Saul Tenser (Mortensen), a performance artist in the distant future. He's diagnosed with "Accelerated Evolution Syndrome", a disease that allows him to grow new organs inside his body. Along with his partner Caprice (Seydoux), Saul uses his disease as an artistic practice to produce and remove his organs on stage before a live audience. Their growing fame catches the attention of the National Organ Registry, with investigators Timlin (Stewart) and Wippet (McKellar) overseeing Saul's success. It also captures the interest of Lang Dortrice (Speedman), a husband seeking Saul's help in performing an autopsy on his dead son Brecken (Sozos Sotiris).

I've seen plenty of movies that tend to be philosophical with their themes while making audiences cringe at some unsettling moments. Some people may call them weird or even disgusting, while others may find them confusing and underwhelming for their little brains. "Crimes of the Future" attempts to be one of those films, with Cronenberg exploring a world where watching someone perform surgery is more captivating than a Broadway musical. To no one's surprise, the film managed to be both uncomfortable and reflective, but its execution isn't enough to provide any vital significance in its artistic value.

The story examines human evolution and the government's stance against it. With the restriction of evolution and the world's condition, people are left without physical pain and disease, while others have unexplainable changes to their bodies. For the latter, a group of evolutionists attempts to go against the government by modifying their digestive system. It's an interesting study that benefits from its bleak, unsettling nature, but it can also be complicated to process after viewing it. That's how I can best explain my experience with "Crimes of the Future".  

This element has always proven to be a make-or-break part of a film's success, depending on one's expectations. As long as the story and characters are engaging, the complex themes shouldn't be an issue, in my eyes. The plot certainly has its share of intriguing moments, including Saul's disease and the film's estranged world of the performance arts. However, their intrigue was the only thing carrying the movie's middling storytelling until it reached the point of mediocrity. Along with its slow pacing and average characters, the film quickly resembles a divide in people's taste by providing something that's visually pleasing yet narratively underwhelming.

One of the things in "Crimes of the Future" that I enjoyed was its cast. Viggo Mortensen delivers an authentic performance that sees his character Saul infected by a disease that affects his throat and digestive tract. Mortensen must have taken a lot of effort to act like he's constantly got a frog in his throat, but he pulled it off reasonably well. Léa Seydoux and Scott Speedman also did very well with their performances as Caprice and Lang, respectively. Additionally, Kristen Stewart is still on top of her acting game regarding her role as Timlin. It's far from her best work, but Stewart's determination to move away from her "Twilight" fame should continue to be noticed.

I was also impressed with the movie's production design. David Cronenberg has crafted a modern, dystopian-ish world that's genuine in its bleakness and discomforting in its visuals. Add that with Cronenberg's magnetic artistic style, and you got an unnervingly grounded setting filled with gross elements and elegant flair. It's a future that you would like to live in, but at the same time, you prefer not to, based on its residents.  

Then there's the matter of its grotesque content. The movie offers plenty of sequences that tend to gross its audiences out, including surgery, self-mutilation, organs, and a child eating plastic. I'm serious. That child consumes the plastic trash can like it was a giant chocolate chip cookie. This was supposed to be one of the main reasons the film caused plenty of walkouts, but it seemed pretty tame from my perspective. Maybe I've seen so many movies with gross-out appeal that I've gotten used to watching people doing disgusting things? Whatever the case is, those elements didn't match the impact it intended to reach or make me lose my lunch. On the bright side, it benefited from its admirable makeup design, especially for a dancer with multiple ears sewn all over his body.

Overall, "Crimes of the Future" is admittedly grim and stylish in its world-building, themes, and imagery. Unfortunately, its narrative leaves much to be desired. The film's cast, Cronenberg's direction, and production design are the only elements that make this experience eerily compelling. However, its story and characters couldn't capitalize on them, resulting in it being a lackluster piece of performance art. It'll likely impress other people with artistic taste in film and enjoy some of Cronenberg's other works. Everyone else would either feel bored or gag at the sight of organs, self-mutilation, or both. As for me, it's another film that left me feeling conflicted but later understood why some people liked it more than I did.

​“Hustle” stars Adam Sandler, Queen Latifah, Ben Foster, Juancho Hernangómez, and Robert Duvall. Released on June 3, 2022, the film has a former basketball scout recruiting an overseas player to play in the NBA.

The film was directed by Jeremiah Zagar, who’s known for directing documentaries like “In a Dream” and “Captivated: The Trials of Pamela Smart”. Zagar is also known for directing “We the Animals”. Playing basketball takes a lot of work. However, choosing someone to join the NBA is a challenge in itself. Adam Sandler’s Happy Madison Productions is back with another sports film for Netflix this year, although this one appears to be a bit more dramatic than Kevin James’s version of the New Orleans Saints coach. While it’s not based on a true story like “Home Team”, it does feature Sandler’s latest attempt to showcase his dramatic chops outside of his comedic zone. Here’s hoping this game is more invigorating than the one we got in January. While I still enjoy Sandler as a comedian because of his earlier films, I’m also happy to see him focusing on winning back his fans by taking on more serious roles. The film is scheduled to drop on Netflix in a few days, but the streaming service was kind enough to release it in select theaters beforehand for people who don’t have it. Luckily, my closest cinema happens to be one of them, which gave me an excuse to check it out earlier than expected. So was it able to score a few winning shots? Let’s find out.

The story centers on Stanley Sugarman (Sandler), a basketball scout getting his career back on track as an assistant coach for the 76ers. However, he also struggles to balance his job with his family, including his wife Teresa (Latifah) and daughter Alex (Jordan Hull). While attempting to find a new player overseas, he runs into a construction worker named Bo Cruz (Hernangómez), residing in Spain with his mother and daughter. Seeing Bo as a way to revive his career due to his skills on the court, Stanley recruits him to play in the NBA, but Bo’s past could jeopardize their shot at the big leagues.

This is another film that showcases what goes on behind the court and the drama that drives the game. Whether it’s from the perspective of a player or a coach, life outside of the sport is usually as thrilling as watching the action unfold. In the case of “Hustle”, the film focuses on the basketball scout who recruits talented players from around the globe, including Spain. It may not sound as exciting as a person’s journey to becoming a sports star, but it does play a vital role in a player’s success. “Hustle” not only portrays this role engagingly, but it also translates well as a feel-good sports drama consisting of heart and a bunch of basketball superstars. Seriously, there were a lot of players that appeared as themselves or fictional characters. It’s no wonder LeBron James is involved as one of the film’s producers.

Now, I wouldn’t be quick to call it “the greatest sports movie ever made” or something like that since it has some minor issues that affect its performance. One of them is the plot. The movie offers a story about determination, redemption, and the importance of a family’s support. Its redemption arc comes from Bo Cruz, whose journey to become an NBA player is heavily affected by his criminal record. The family aspect has Stanley working with his daughter Alex to get Bo’s talents noticed and Bo leaving his basketball dreams behind to support his own. The themes portrayed in many other sports movies are undeniably fundamental. Still, the inspiration behind them is enough to warm plenty of sports fans’ hearts, and “Hustle” managed to fit into that category. However, the movie’s formulaic nature and pacing prevented it from scoring more points than those that inspired it. Despite that, the film has plenty of entertainment value in its sports action, screenplay, and heartfelt drama.

Adam Sandler’s latest role as a dramatic actor is unsurprisingly another successful attempt for him regarding his magnetic performance as Stanley. It doesn’t top his career-best performance in “Uncut Gems”, but it does show Sandler’s desire to be more subtle in his dramatic portrayals. More importantly, he never lost sight of the traditional charisma he’s known for during the process. Sandler also did a splendid job balancing his sense of humor with some of the film’s serious aspects. The rest of the cast was also very talented in their roles, including Queen Latifah as Teresa and Ben Foster as Vince Merrick. Juancho Hernangómez becomes the latest basketball player to shine in the movie business as he portrays Bo Cruz instead of himself. All I can say is that I’m very impressed with how Hernangómez balances his skills on the court with his acting. Another real-life player invading the screen is Anthony Edwards. He plays Kermit Wilts, another basketball star aiming for a shot at the NBA and Bo’s rival. Edwards played the role of this heartless jerk pretty well, but his character’s arc felt one-dimensional and unfinished.

Jeremiah Zagar has maintained his career with his slew of documentaries and short films. However, he didn’t shy away from doing narrative-driven projects, with “Hustle” being the second feature-length film he directed following “We the Animals”. As someone who’s experiencing his filmmaking craft for the first time, I thought Zagar handled the film’s style well enough for me to support his future projects. However, I wasn’t a huge fan of some of the movie’s swift camera movements during specific sequences, especially the zoom-ins and zoom-outs that made it more documentarian than cinematic. These camera movements were more of a distraction than a storytelling tool.

Overall, “Hustle” dribbles past its formulaic elements to deliver a game-winning shot for moviegoers and sports fanatics. Unfortunately, its skills may not be enough to score past the other great sports dramas regarding its story and pacing. Nonetheless, it’s an entertaining and heartfelt basketball movie that’s worthy of the cast’s talents, especially Adam Sandler, who delivered a riveting performance as the basketball scout. If it’s playing at your closest theater and you’re a fan of feel-good sports movies, it’s worth checking out before it lands on Netflix this Wednesday. If you want to wait to watch it on the streaming service at home, that’s fine too. Just don’t miss out on this appealing piece of talent. 

​"The Bob's Burgers Movie" stars H. Jon Benjamin, Kristen Schaal, John Roberts, Dan Mintz, Eugene Mirman, Larry Murphy, Zach Galifianakis, and Kevin Kline. Released on May 27, 2022, the film has the Belchers attempting to save their restaurant.

The film was directed by Loren Bouchard (in his feature directorial debut) and Bernard Derriman. It is based on a television series of the same name created by Bouchard. The Belchers have experienced many different obstacles while running a burger restaurant on Ocean Avenue. However, none of them can compare to what they're about to encounter during their first trip to the big screen. Fox is usually known for providing animated content for teens and adults, mainly "The Simpsons", which seemed to be going on forever, for better or worse. Unfortunately, its shows rarely got an opportunity to generate a film adaptation compared to the cartoons aimed at kids. The last (and only) time this happened was back in 2007 with "The Simpsons" wowing its fans with "The Simpsons Movie". Luckily, that's all about to change this weekend, with another Fox animated series making its theatrical debut this Memorial Day weekend: "Bob's Burgers". Loren Bouchard's series about a family running a restaurant didn't make that much of an impression when it first aired a decade ago. It wasn't until its second season that it gained enough momentum to win over viewers with its deadpan humor and sitcom-like plots. Its popularity resulted in Fox putting a fast track on a theatrical film during its seventh season. Multiple delays and seasons later, we finally have the Belchers in their cinematic glory. I didn't get into "Bob's Burgers" until its 11th season, and based on what I saw, it's an enjoyable addition to my list of shows I wouldn't mind going back to often. So now I have a perfect excuse to check out its film adaptation this weekend. Was it as tasty as Bob's mouth-watering burgers? Let's find out.

The story centers on the Belcher family, which consists of Bob (Benjamin), his wife Linda (Roberts), and their children Tina (Mintz), Gene (Mirman), and Louise (Schaal). They're on the verge of planning for a successful summer at their restaurant. However, trouble arises to ruin those plans as Bob struggles to make his payment to keep Bob's Burgers running. Even worse is that a ruptured water main creates a sinkhole in front of the restaurant's entrance. While Bob and Linda try to find different ways to promote the restaurant, Louise, Tina, and Gene set out to investigate the cause of the sinkhole. Their shocking discovery resulted in the family preventing an even bigger catastrophe from closing down their business for good.

Like the other films based on television shows, "The Bob's Burgers Movie" offers the same style and brand of humor that you'd expect from its source material. The only difference is that it added a cinematic flavor to its recipe to stand apart from the show's low-budget appeal. Because of this, it becomes something that'll depend on people's taste in "Bob's Burgers". If they've been enjoying the show since day one, they'll find many things to savor in "The Bob's Burgers Movie". On the other hand, the people who aren't interested in the show itself, possibly due to the character designs and humor, may not love it as much as its fans. However, it does have plenty of tasty moments to satisfy those hungry for entertainment.

The movie's plot is more of a cinematic version of the show's slice-of-life episode involving the Belchers facing everyday obstacles while running their restaurant. Bob and Linda are faced with an uncertain future when their burger restaurant is in danger of being closed down. Meanwhile, the children have their own problems during their last day of school. Tina struggles to take her relationship with Jimmy Jr. to the next level. Gene creates a new instrument for him to use in his band, and Louise fears losing her hat while performing a stunt. While Tina and Gene's subplots didn't impact the story's murder mystery element that much, they easily compensate with the film's solid use of awkwardly goofy humor.

The subplots that do make an impact were suitable in providing some entertaining and heartfelt sequences that made the show iconic in the first place. Louise's subplot was my favorite part of the movie because it showcases her journey of bravery and adolescence. After being called a baby due to her wearing her signature hat, she sets out to prove the other students wrong by solving a murder mystery. Unsurprisingly, the storyline didn't explore this element further, but its message about bravery and feel-good vibes made up for its basic plot. The moments involving Bob and Linda keeping the restaurant open to pay their loan were also gratifying to watch. It wonderfully reflects the show's sitcom-like nature while delivering some chuckle-worthy dialogue to keep its business booming.  

My only issue with the plot is its runtime, clocking in at around an hour and 40 minutes. Despite its proper pacing, the film bit off more than it could chew regarding its narrative. With a story as fundamental as the show itself, I don't think it needed to be that long, especially when considering its concept. If it were somewhere between 80 and 90 minutes, I would be more forgiving towards it. Anywhere over that can spell trouble if its audience didn't enjoy "Bob's Burgers". There's also this one scene that dragged on a bit too long and is somehow convoluted. Other than that, I was constantly entertained by this fun-loving, low-stakes adventure worthy enough to receive the big-screen treatment.

The main cast is just as charismatic and humorous in the movie as they were in the show. H. Jon Benjamin and John Roberts were superb in delivering great chemistry for Bob and Linda. Schaal, Mintz, and Mirman also did a splendid job carrying the film as Louise, Tina, and Gene, respectively. But, of course, the cast is not without its share of celebrities joining in on the fun. Although, most of them have limited roles that didn't divert our attention from the film's story. The only two celebrities that served a purpose in its plot were Kevin Kline and Zach Galifianakis, who both reprised their roles as Calvin and Felix Fischoeder from the show. Long story short, these two were also enjoyable in the film.

"The Bob's Burgers Movie" maintains the traditional animated look from the show but with some added lighting, texture, CGI, and shadows to make it more detailed and cinematic. Additionally, it features smoother movements for the characters' faces and body motions. This approach is similar to "The Simpsons Movie", which also features a movie-like quality in its 2D style and character designs. I'm happy that they decided to use 2D animation for this movie because we don't get as many traditional animated films as often as those with 100% CGI. More importantly, it's one of the elements that define the show itself—the other ones being its heartwarming family dynamic and comedy. The animation in "The Bob's Burgers Movie" gives the characters and their world a fresh coat of paint while keeping its style consistent with its source material. The result is a pleasingly vibrant and nicely-detailed movie full of fluidity and lively flavor. It's nothing too spectacular regarding its style, but like its story, its simplicity is good enough to fulfill my animation needs.

Despite the film being marketed as a musical, it only features three songs written by Bouchard and Nora Smith. So don't expect it to be in the same veins as "The Little Mermaid" or even "Encanto" regarding the number of musical numbers. All I can say about them is that they're decent. They may not come close to being as memorable as "We Don't Talk About Bruno" or "Let It Go" from "Frozen", but they're fun to listen to regardless. Out of the three songs that appear in the movie, "Sunny Side Up Summer" and "Lucky Ducks" were the only two I enjoyed the most. The third song was okay. Not excellent, not terrible. It's just okay.

Overall, "The Bob's Burgers Movie" is a delectable and hilarious treat that'll cater to its fans and newcomers hungry for teen-rated animation goodness. Its bloated runtime and condensed plot may be too much for a casual moviegoer's stomach to handle. However, it has enough moments in its story and characters to deliver a worthy addition to the "Bob's Burgers" franchise. The movie is a delightfully amusing adaptation of the source material thanks to its voice cast, solid animation, and a story that effectively combines humor and heart. It's worth a watch if you like the show or if you're looking for animated content aimed towards an older crowd.

​“Top Gun: Maverick” stars Tom Cruise, Miles Teller, Jennifer Connelly, Jon Hamm, Glen Powell, Lewis Pullman, Ed Harris, and Val Kilmer. Releasing on May 27, 2022, the film has Pete Mitchell training a new generation of Navy aviators.

The film is directed by Joseph Kosinski, who also directed “Tron: Legacy”, “Oblivion”, and “Only the Brave”, and it is a sequel to the 1986 film “Top Gun”. Audiences got the need for speed back in the 1980s, thanks to a small movie that pushed Tom Cruise’s career to new heights. Tony Scott’s “Top Gun” is one of cinema’s national treasures for people who grew up in that decade. While it wasn’t a critical hit when it first came out, it gradually grew into a cultural phenomenon due to its astounding aerial sequences, soundtrack, and Cruise’s magnetic performance. Less than 40 years later, the world of “Top Gun” is soaring back into our hearts as it becomes the latest nostalgia-filled classic to get the legacy sequel treatment. Well, at least it’s better than getting a remake. “Top Gun” is one of the films that I neglect to go back to every so often. It’s not that I didn’t like it or anything. It’s because it didn’t have enough moments for me to revisit other than people flying their jets in the sky. The last time I watched “Top Gun” was nearly ten years ago when my family and I attended the IMAX 3D re-release for my birthday. That was one birthday present I’ll never forget. Regardless, I was pretty stoked to see Tom Cruise take to the skies again with a long-awaited sequel to Scott’s 80s cult classic. Since Cruise’s recent “Mission: Impossible” installments got me to revisit the earlier movies, maybe this one would probably change my perspective on its predecessor. With that said, let’s soar into the “danger zone” and see if this follow-up lives up to the hype.

The story follows Captain Pete “Maverick” Mitchell (Cruise), a test pilot in the U.S. Navy. He recently dodged advancement in rank to continue flying after years of service. Following an incident involving testing a prototype, Rear Admiral Chester “Hammer” Cain (Harris) places Maverick in charge of training a group of young Top Gun graduates for a specialized mission. Among them is Bradley “Rooster” Bradshaw (Teller), the son of Maverick’s late best friend Nick “Goose” Bradshaw, and Jake “Hangman” Seresin (Powell). They’re tasked to destroy a hostile nation that’s been constructing facilities for creating enriched uranium. Despite not seeing eye to eye with each other, Maverick and the young pilots must learn to trust one another to accomplish this dangerous mission.

The original “Top Gun” featured a humane story of a reckless pilot who faces responsibility and the importance of teamwork amid its aerial dogfights and shirtless men playing volleyball. While it’s enjoyable for the cast’s charisma and direction towards the flight sequences, the emotional core of its characters and story struggled to be as riveting as the dogfights. “Top Gun: Maverick” expands on those themes by pitting the main character against a new generation of pilots and a high-stakes mission that determines the lives of those involved. Hollywood has been pretty consistent with delivering solid legacy continuations so far. While some of them are far from perfect, these sequels have effectively provided elements that made their predecessors well-known while offering something for newcomers to enjoy. So it’s no surprise that “Top Gun: Maverick” follows the same pattern as the other ones like “Ghostbusters” and “Scream”. However, what I didn’t expect to see from a movie about men flying their jets is how amazing it was compared to the original.

Like the other legacy sequels, the film’s plot provided several nods to Tony Scott’s 1986 cult following, even going as far as recreating that movie’s opening title and end credit sequences. Fortunately for me and its audience, it didn’t go out of its way to deliver a shot-by-shot sequel that only serves as nostalgia bait. Instead, it uses those callbacks to create a thoughtfully compelling tale of Maverick’s relationship with Rooster and their struggles to overcome the past and put their trust in each other’s instincts. But, of course, it isn’t without a couple of stunning aerial sequences that impressively put the original’s dogfight scenes to shame. Basically, the film took the elements that worked in “Top Gun” and made them better, which the late Tony Scott would be proud of. It hits the right emotional beats for those passionate about the original, including myself, and possibly some newcomers who want more than just mindless blockbuster action. More importantly, the narrative balances exceptionally well with its incredible flight sequences and layered characters.

On another note, “Top Gun: Maverick” is another movie that showcases Joseph Kosinski as one of the most impressive underdogs in the film industry. After delivering mediocre results in the Tron sequel and his previous collaboration with Cruise, “Oblivion”, Kosinski exceeded our expectations with the well-crafted “Only the Brave”. Several years later, he continues to shine with “Top Gun: Maverick”, which saw him putting plenty of effort into honoring the original while maintaining his own visual appeal. His direction towards the human drama was engaging and heartfelt, and his take on the dogfight sequences was visually exhilarating to a fault without any far-fetched elements slowing them down. The movie’s screenplay was also superb in understanding the characters and honoring the duties performed by the aviators. Surprisingly, two of the film’s writers were Christopher McQuarrie, another collaborator for Cruise, and Ehren Kruger, known for writing the three critically-panned Transformers sequels. It’s nice to see that Kruger has a great movie on his hands despite him not being the sole writer.

Tom Cruise returns to one of the roles that made him a superstar in the movie business. He also serves as one of the film’s producers, just to make sure everything is good enough to match the original’s quality. Unsurprisingly, he delivered a performance that retains the charm and spirit of Pete Mitchell from the original while providing some extra depth into the reckless pilot. This resulted in it being one of my favorite performances by the actor. The film also saw the return of Miles Teller, who hasn’t been on the big screen since 2017, possibly due to the movie’s series of delays. He was also fantastic as Rooster. Jennifer Connelly and Glen Powell also offered some solid performances as Penny (Maverick’s new love interest) and Jake Seresin, respectively. I also respect the film crew for bringing Val Kilmer back to reprise his role as Iceman, Maverick’s former rival. Even if it’s only for a brief moment, it warms my heart to see Kilmer sharing the screen with Cruise again after three decades.

It’s easy to admit that “Top Gun: Maverick” is made as a theaters-only exclusive in mind, and it shows, thanks to its aerial sequences. Regarding Claudio Miranda’s cinematography, Kosinski’s direction, and the sound editing, the movie literally puts me in the cockpit as I’ve been taken for a wild ride that doesn’t overstay its welcome. Despite being 20 minutes longer than the first movie, the film’s pacing and heart-pounding moments helped maintain my interest in the experience. It does run the risk of straying into action blockbuster territory, but its focus on delivering realism into the dogfights prevents it from being another standard bloated action film. If someone asks me what my favorite parts are regarding these elements, I will pick the beginning sequence and the uranium facility mission as my top two best scenes. It’s no contest. I would also give props to the movie’s splendid musical score by Lorne Balfe, Harold Faltermeyer, Hans Zimmer, and Lady Gaga, who performed the single, “Hold My Hand”. It respectively hearkens back to the original while providing some enticement in its emotion and action.

Overall, “Top Gun: Maverick” pushes itself beyond the limitations of its predecessor and the other legacy sequels with spectacular results. It’s an emotionally enthralling and heart-pounding experience that’s backed up by its strong narrative and likable characters. With its stellar cast, Kosinski’s direction, riveting screenplay, and impressive aerial sequences, the film is not only the best legacy sequel I’ve seen so far, but it’s also one of the best blockbusters of the decade. Admittedly, it’s quite an impressive feat given the film’s numerous delays and the original’s mixed reception. Hopefully, this will allow Hollywood to continue taking these types of sequels seriously in the future. If you enjoyed the first “Top Gun” movie and you’re a fan of the theatrical experience, “Top Gun: Maverick” is worth seeing on the biggest screen you can find.