This movie, like Ford v Ferrari released in 2019, contains themes that can be interpreted as allegories to dedicated filmmakers struggling to follow their passions within a constrained Hollywood system
The 2019 movie Ford v Ferrari, directed by James Mangold and starring Matt Damon and Christian Bale, has a story that is often interpreted as an allegory of a group of talented creators forced to work within the constraints of a capitalist/Hollywood system. Upon closer look, Top Gun: Maverick also shares various similar themes as well. Like Carroll Shelby and Ken Miles, Pete 'Maverick' Mitchell is someone who prefers to play by his own rules and follow his passion as a military pilot who lives an intense yet fulfilled life who unfortunately finds himself in an era where such things aren't as valued anymore.The film begins with Maverick's reckless yet valiant effort of trying to save the Darkstar project and the men and women who dedicated their lives to it, only to be met with a cold reception by Rear Admiral Cain who wished to fund drone projects instead. This could be compared to how dedicated old school filmmakers in Hollywood who wanted to follow their passion and creates a film featuring great practical effects, dedicated actors and actresses who played their own stunts, an uncomplicated and unpretentious storyline delivering exactly what the creators wanted to tell, only to be screwed by Executive Meddling because that's not what the studios wanted or afforded to do.
And now we come to Maverick's time as an instructor at TOPGUN. His risky training methods which sometimes outright violate the laws of the school put him at odds with Vice Admiral 'Cyclone' Simpson, who would much prefer a more by-the-book approach to the training. Maverick's aggressive style of teaching is presented as the only way of getting everybody out alive while accomplishing the objective, even if the sheer difficulty of the conditions he set initially discouraged his trainees because of how seemingly impossible it is to achieve. On the other hand, Cyclone's more relaxing conditions allow the trainees more breathing room to execute their mission without risking themselves too much. However, it also exposes them to fifth-gen fighters which considerably lowers the chance of the mission succeeding with no casualties, something that Cyclone justifies as acceptable risks because "it's what the pilots signed up for".
The topic of actors/actresses risking their lives and limbs by playing their own stunts in order to create authenticity has constantly been a heated topic in Hollywood, and most studios understandably don't want to deal with the problems caused by movie stars injuring or even getting themselves killed. Tom Cruise, however, is one of the few actors/producers in Hollywood who is infamous for risking his own life for the sake of entertainment numerous times over - a dying breed in the CGI-dominant modern Hollywood where movie stars usually don't have to do anything that couldn't be achieved with extensive editing and special effects.
As the success of both Ford v Ferrari and Top Gun: Maverick (and to an extent other similar 'authentic' action films like the Mission: Impossible Film Series, the John Wick series, Mad Max: Fury Road, and works by Christopher Nolan) has shown, evidently there is still a place for authentic action films with a focus on movie stars giving genuine performance despite the risks posed to themselves in modern entertainment, and that movies such as these leave a more lasting impression on the audience than other big-budget films that are overly reliant on special effects, capitalization on nostalgia, and indistinguishable from other films that follow the same formula set by studio execs (which is often one of the main criticisms of "Shared Universe" movie series like the Marvel Cinematic Universe or Star Wars).
So what do we get from here? Sometimes it may be necessary for studios to allow their creators to push their own limits, to be allowed the creative freedom to pursue their passions, even if it demands more from actors/actresses and the studios themselves. It's a considerably big risk on the studios' part, yes, and there's no guarantee that the final work won't end up as a disaster for everyone involved, but it does provide the opportunity for creators to create a truly memorable work of entertainment that doesn't just leave the audience satisfied after the movie is over, but the work itself also leaves a lasting impact that can be appreciated for years as a modern classic.
Unfortunately, movies like this are dying.
In fact, the parting quote by Cain to Maverick represents the current state of modern blockbuster films quite nicely:
"The end is inevitable, Maverick. Your kind is headed for extinction."
And Maverick doesn't really have a refute to that. Cain was right. Maverick's flying days are numbered and his career is effectively done once Iceman (another old school icon) is gone, and it's implied that while he has bought some time for the Darkstar team, eventually the future of aerial combat is going to be unmanned drones in the place of human pilots. It's an End of an Era for people like him.
For that, Maverick (or rather, Tom Cruise himself) has only one thing to say:
"Maybe so, sir, but not today."
This movie is the first mainstream triumph of Metamodernism (otherwise known as the philosophy of Reconstruction) as it tries to overtake Postmodernism as the dominant art form
A major conceit of Metamodernism/Reconstructionism is to take the Postmodernist criticisms of Modernist ideas and then use them to create something new and hopefully stronger than what was there before. The original Top Gun was one of the last examples of a hit Modernist film, as it hued close to many Modernist tropes and principles, to critical derision (as the bulk of new film critics had their values and roots firmly in Postmodernist philosophy and found the movie's bald-faced sincerity cheesy or downright appalling). Many of those same critics, however, love this sequel, because the sequel does address the criticisms of the original movie in a deconstructionist manner.
For example, Maverick himself. We discover the consequences of him being the way he is throughout this movie. He has never been able to move up beyond Captain despite 30 years in the service, has been unable to settle down with a loved one (whether Charlie or Penny Benjamin), and the only reason why he's been able to avoid dishonorable discharge has been via the protection of Iceman, who became the Admiral of the Pacific Fleet. He isn't even liked by Goose's son, Rooster, and there is a clear conflict between the two throughout much of the film. Later on, the protection of Iceman goes away, and the first thing the brass tries to do to Maverick is cast him out of the service for his reckless behavior. This is textbook deconstruction, something many films, especially legacy sequels of beloved franchises, tend to do the aging heroes of previous films.
But the movie doesn't stop there. Instead, we see a re-contextualization and reconstruction of Maverick throughout this film, not just a relentless teardown of his character. We discover that he is still a damn good pilot and can school the new TOPGUN pilots in simulations. Maverick, once the brass tries to ground him, through sheer determination, shows that his method of completing the mission can still be done. We find out that the reason Iceman has been protecting Maverick is that Maverick is a damn good friend of Iceman. Even early in the film, Maverick pushing the Darkstar as far as it can go saves the jobs of the entire development team of that plane. And, in the end, Maverick's leadership and determination lead to the success of the mission and to him splashing two planes, making him the first formal ace pilot since Vietnam. He also finally commits to Penny Benjamin and flies off into the sunset, content with his life and what else lies forward to him. This is an ending more common with Modernism with Postmodernism, but it shows that via the deconstruction of Maverick that happened earlier that it was a harder, more difficult road to achieve that, and achieves sincerity.
It's there beyond Maverick's character arc as well. For example, Hangman is built as an insufferable douche who has no loyalty to anyone but himself. Yet, during Maverick and Rooster's dire moment of truth at the end, Hangman comes through and saves them by shooting down the final Felon that was mere seconds away from killing both men, firmly showing that Hangman, despite his cockiness, is fundamentally a decent man and a hero in his own right.
The story is itself a Reconstruction of the previous Top Gun story beats as well. It's played more realistically with more conflict than in the original, the characters have more struggles throughout, and Penny Benjamin is way more down to Earth than Charlie ever was, but the movie is still unabashedly sincere. Yes, there will be struggles in your life, and despite your best efforts sometimes things will never be perfect, but you can still save the day and be a hero. It is that hope, and the sincerity in a genuinely heroic if flawed daredevil in Maverick getting one final moment of glory and getting to end his career and set the course of the rest of his life, on his own terms, that makes this movie firmly Metamodernist.
Even the score, while having the ambient texture of many a recent Hans Zimmer score, nevertheless is focused on the original melodic theme, unabashedly sincere despite the sound design-focused electronic elements that have been a focal point in theatrical scoring since the early 2000s.
With audiences responding well to this film in reception and box office, it is quite possible that we will see more Metamodernist works in the coming years, slowly trickling into other media, using the base of postmodernism to nevertheless create a "New Sincerity" that rebuilds Modernism into something more aware and realistic, but still escapist and evocative. While works with similar themes already exist and have gained popularity (such as My Hero Academia or the Sonic the Hedgehog (2020) film series), this is the first time an American work of this nature has hit on this scale. We won't know the true answer for years to come, but if, or when, it arrives, this movie was where it started.
