If Kelly McGillis wasn’t so ugly would they have brought her back?
I’d say yes
shareStill, probably not. Even in the original, people noticed the difference in attractiveness between Charlie and Maverick, so after three decades with Cruise making a deal with the Devil to maintain his looks, close to zero chance. Replacing her with Jen Connelly (who is age appropriate and has maintained her looks) was appropriate.
"Replacing her with Jen Connelly (who is age appropriate and has maintained her looks)"
Age appropriate? She was born in 1970; mid December 1970 no less, so almost 1971. She was 15 when Top Gun was released, which means she would have been jail bait for Tom Cruise, who was 24 at the time.
As for maintaining her looks, let's see how 51-year-old Connelly looks at age 65 (McGillis' age). I doubt there's any 65-year-old woman on the planet who looks good. Connelly's not looking so hot herself these days, for that matter. When she was in her prime she was at least forty-eleven times better looking than she is now.
You'll see actors playing parent and child that are only a couple of years apart. You'll see actors playing siblings and the younger actor is playing the older sibling. Clearly, Penny the character is supposed to be a few years older than Jennifer is in real life.
And she is age appropriate. It would have been distracting as hell if Maverick's new love interest was playing by like Scarlet Johansson. Jennifer is 9 years younger than Cruise. Thats age appropriate.
As for not looking so great, you're probably the only person who thinks that way about her. Pretty much everyone else says she looks great.
"You'll see actors playing parent and child that are only a couple of years apart. You'll see actors playing siblings and the younger actor is playing the older sibling. Clearly, Penny the character is supposed to be a few years older than Jennifer is in real life."
What does that have to do with anything? I replied to someone who said that Connelly is "age appropriate," not that her character is.
"And she is age appropriate."
No, she isn't. This thread is about Kelly McGillis who played Maverick's girlfriend in the original movie, which was set in present day, so, 1986. Then the person I replied to said they replaced her with Connelly who is age appropriate. Connelly was 15 when Top Gun was released, so she is not age-appropriate for someone who was supposed to have been Maverick's girlfriend from around the time of the original movie. She could be considered age-appropriate for someone who was supposed to be his ex girlfriend from a later period in time, e.g., the 1990s.
"As for not looking so great, you're probably the only person who thinks that way about her. Pretty much everyone else says she looks great."
Yeah, right. No 51-year-old woman "looks great." At best it can be said that she looks great for her age. She looked great when she was a few decades younger. If you take someone who looks great and add a few decades' worth of the degenerative effects of aging, you don't end up with someone who still looks great.
It has to do with what you said because you're focusing on how old Connelly was when the original movie came out. Thats meaningless. Her character clearly was not 15 in Top Gun. Since we can safely say Maverick wasn't sleeping with a 15 year old, Penny is supposed to be at least 54 now. Connelly is 51. Thats age appropriate. Shes a 51 year old playing a 54 year old. It works perfectly. What would make her not age appropriate is if she was clearly too young to play a 54 year old. If she was 40, that would be ridiculous.
9 years also isn't a big age gap. A lot of movies have the male actor be a lot older than the female actress playing his love interest. Like Mark Ruffalo and Scarlett Johanson. People find it refreshing that this movie cast a woman over 50, within a reasonable age gap of Tom Cruise, to play his love interest.
"It has to do with what you said because you're focusing on how old Connelly was when the original movie came out."
I already told you why. Again: I replied to someone who said that Connelly is "age appropriate," not that her character is.
"Thats meaningless."
Wrong. Again: I replied to someone who said that Connelly is "age appropriate," not that her character is.
"Her character clearly was not 15 in Top Gun."
Again: I replied to someone who said that Connelly is "age appropriate," not that her character is.
"Since we can safely say Maverick wasn't sleeping with a 15 year old, Penny is supposed to be at least 54 now. Connelly is 51. Thats age appropriate. Shes a 51 year old playing a 54 year old."
First, you're making stuff up here. The Penny character's age is never established in the movie. Second, even if the Penny character's age is "at least 54 now," that doesn't make Connelly "age appropriate," because she's not 54 obviously. It doesn't matter that Hollywood makes a habit of having actors play younger or older characters; "age appropriate" still means the right age, not a "close enough by Hollywood standards" age. Hollywood doesn't define the word "appropriate."
"It works perfectly."
No, only a 54-year-old actress playing a 54-year-old character works perfectly with regard to age.
"People find it refreshing that this movie cast a woman over 50, within a reasonable age gap of Tom Cruise, to play his love interest."
They didn't actually cast a woman over 50 to play Cruise's love interest. She was cast in July 2018 when she was 47, and she was 47 and/or 48 during her scenes in the movie, depending on when exactly they were filmed (she was never over 48 because principal photography ended in mid 2019).
Okay well I guess most people feel differently on what age appropriate than you do. Most people think an actress being 3 years younger than what her character is supposed to be is age appropriate. It's absurdly rare for an actor to be the exact age their character is supposed to be, so in your logic I guess 99% of actors aren't age appropriate?
share"Okay well I guess most people feel differently on what age appropriate than you do."
It doesn't matter how they feel. If they said, e.g., "close enough," or "right age range," for a relatively small age difference between the actor and character then I'd agree. But unless the ages match, "appropriate" is the wrong term.
"It's absurdly rare for an actor to be the exact age their character is supposed to be, so in your logic I guess 99% of actors aren't age appropriate?"
You're making stuff up again. How do you know how rare it is? In many, if not most, movies, exact character ages aren't even mentioned, so there's nothing to say that the character and actor aren't the same age.
I've never researched how many movies or TV shows have characters that are the same age as the actors playing them (I doubt anyone has), but off the top of my head: Rocky and Adrian were both 30 years old in Rocky (1976), as were Stallone and Shire.
Of course it matters how they feel. You really think this a fact either way? Sorry dude, but its not. You view age appropriate as the actor and character are the exact same age. Fine. Most people think it means they're close to the same age. Feel free to think your way, but your way is certainly not a fact or the correct answer. It's just how you personally feel and define age appropriate as.
share"Of course it matters how they feel."
No, it doesn't, and I already explained why. Again, "age appropriate" is the wrong term to use for someone who isn't the same age.
"You view age appropriate as the actor and character are the exact same age. Fine. Most people think it means they're close to the same age."
Making Stuff Up Alert: Part III
"Age appropriate" isn't some standard, household term. It's just the two words that the person I replied to happened to put together. There have been no polls to determine what "most people" think it means with regard to actor vs. character age. So you have to look to the meaning of the individual words. Since he used the term "age appropriate" (which is the same thing as saying that she's "the appropriate age") rather than something like "appropriate age range," then that's one age, and the only age it could be is the one that matches the character's age. If Connelly was the appropriate age to play Penny, then that means Maverick was hooking up with a 15-year-old in 1986.
"Feel free to think your way, but your way is certainly not a fact or the correct answer. It's just how you personally feel and define age appropriate as."
No, it's what the words actually mean.
I say most people feel that way because most reviews and responses have said she is age appropriate.
Where is it said that your way of thinking is the correct way? Please tell me. Because when I Google "age appropriate" it says "suitable for a particular age OR age group". Do you have a different definition?
"I say most people feel that way because most reviews and responses have said she is age appropriate."
Even if that were a fact rather than a mere assertion, it would in no way establish that "Most people think it means they're close to the same age."
"Where is it said that your way of thinking is the correct way? Please tell me. Because when I Google "age appropriate" it says "suitable for a particular age OR age group"."
That's a different sense of the term, which you should know, since you pasted a definition that you found. See here for more details:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_appropriateness
It has nothing to do with actor age vs. character age, obviously. People using the term "age appropriate" to refer to a person rather than, e.g., a behavior, movie, or a toy, are using it in a nonstandard way. What TearofLys was saying is that Connelly is the appropriate age to play Penny. Go ahead and explain how the wrong age is also the appropriate age.
You've shared nothing that is a fact. You're saying it is a fact that if an actor is even one year off from the age of the character they play, then they are not age appropriate. Please show where that is considered a definitive fact. Something other than a Wikipedia article especially please.
As for my explanation? She's playing a character that is 3 years older than herself. I consider a 3 year difference to be age appropriate. If an 18 year old is playing a 16 year old, I also consider that age appropriate. Clearly, so do others such as the OP. You disagree, which is fine. But you've offered nothing to suggest what you're saying is a definitive, proven fact unfortunately.
"You've shared nothing that is a fact."
Yes, I have. A wrong age isn't an appropriate age, by definition. Things which are true by definition are, in fact, true, obviously.
"Something other than a Wikipedia article especially please."
The Wikipedia article shows the standard usage of the term "age appropriate," which has nothing to do with actor age vs. character age. It isn't even used to refer directly to people, but rather, to behaviors, media, and items. I linked you there because you were clearly confused, as evidenced by you posting a brief definition of the irrelevant Wikipedia sense of the term.
"As for my explanation? She's playing a character that is 3 years older than herself. I consider a 3 year difference to be age appropriate. If an 18 year old is playing a 16 year old, I also consider that age appropriate."
First, you're not only making stuff up again, but this is a repeat of something you made up earlier, so once again: "The Penny character's age is never established in the movie." Second, even if your "explanation" weren't negated by your fabricated-out-of-whole-cloth premise, it would still be wrong, because the wrong age can't possibly be the appropriate age, by definition.
"But you've offered nothing to suggest what you're saying is a definitive, proven fact unfortunately."
False. What I've said is true by definition. Claiming that something which is wrong is also appropriate is no different than claiming that black is white. We know that Connelly is the wrong age to play Penny (unless you want to argue that Maverick was committing "statutory rape" in 1986), therefore Connelly is not the appropriate age to play Penny. "Wrong age" and "appropriate age" are mutually exclusive terms, obviously.
A nine year difference is age-appropriate, especially for two people who are in the later stages of middle age. Just because she would not have been age-appropriate for Cruise when Tom was 24 doesn't mean that she's not now.
share"A nine year difference is age-appropriate, especially for two people who are in the later stages of middle age. Just because she would not have been age-appropriate for Cruise when Tom was 24 doesn't mean that she's not now."
She's not playing a character that Maverick only recently hooked up with for the first time. She's playing a character who was mentioned by name in the first movie (1986), and she was someone with whom he'd already slept with. That means a 9-year age difference is not "age-appropriate," because she was under the age of consent in all 50 states in 1986.