Tom Cruise can persuade me to watch a great many things. Few actors understand cinema as spectacle so well, the importance of a packed theater, and the pleasure of watching someone who seems willing to do the impossible to entertain us. But when I think about Days of Thunder 2, my first reaction is skepticism. Some returns seem to answer a collective desire. This one, for now, seems to depend more on its leading man’s wishes.

Released in 1990, Days of Thunder was already being compared to “Top Gun on wheels.” It wasn’t difficult to understand why: Cruise, Tony Scott, Jerry Bruckheimer, and Don Simpson were once again bringing together speed, competition, a talented and arrogant young man, and a romance along the way to his transformation. The problem was that the combination didn’t have the same impact. The film found an audience, gained defenders, and left some memorable images, but its reception was mixed and its commercial performance fell short of expectations. It didn’t become another Top Gun.

Its lasting place in Cruise’s biography also has a dimension beyond cinema: it was where he met Nicole Kidman. For anyone who followed them over the years that came afterward, it’s difficult to separate the film from that encounter. That gives it significance in the actor’s personal history, but doesn’t necessarily create a narrative need to revisit Cole Trickle almost four decades later.

I understand the temptation. Top Gun: Maverick turned a long-delayed sequel into a phenomenon, and Cruise emerged from that flight with his superstar status reaffirmed. But the result brought together circumstances that can’t be commissioned along with a screenplay. The experience of returning to theaters after the pandemic, nostalgia for an era, the pleasure of physical spectacle, and the reunion with an aging hero all helped turn its release into an event. The film had the quality to sustain all of that, but it also found its moment.

The success of F1, starring Brad Pitt, added fuel to that bet. A veteran star, speed, big-screen spectacle, and a story about overcoming adversity: the combination owes much to the formula Cruise helped establish, but this time it paid off for Pitt. It’s difficult not to see that result as an additional incentive to revive Days of Thunder. That doesn’t mean F1 prompted the sequel, but its performance made the idea more commercially seductive. Between the Maverick phenomenon and renewed interest in the racetrack, Cole Trickle seems to have found an opportunity to return. My question remains whether that opportunity also comes with a good story.

The passage of time was part of Maverick’s strength. Its protagonist could still be exceptional, but he had to live with loss, consequences, and the arrival of a generation that would take his place. There was an emotional weight to the return that didn’t depend solely on recognizing a face or hearing a song. Seeing that man again also meant measuring how much we ourselves had changed.

That’s where my confidence in Days of Thunder 2 begins to falter. I don’t feel Cole Trickle’s absence from cinema. His story doesn’t seem to have been waiting for a conclusion, nor does his return appear to carry a similar emotional weight from the outset. A screenplay may be able to build that interest, of course. But Maverick’s success doesn’t automatically turn every old Cruise character into a cherished piece of our past waiting to be reclaimed.

This moment in his career makes the choice even more interesting. Cruise enjoys a level of recognition as a star that few can rival, but recognition of his work as an actor remains a recurring issue. It would be unfair to leave Born on the Fourth of July, Jerry Maguire, or Magnolia out of that conversation. He has already demonstrated his dramatic ability. Even so, after so many years in which physical commitment has become his defining signature, every return to a prestige project arrives surrounded by an almost anxious expectation of recognition.

Digger, with Alejandro González Iñárritu, entered that territory. The pairing seemed tailor-made to fuel Oscar predictions, but the initial reception has made the path less comfortable. The film’s lukewarm reviews don’t erase the praise for Cruise’s performance or put an end to his awards prospects. They simply remind us that bringing together a major star, an acclaimed director, and an image transformation doesn’t guarantee the acclaim everyone expects.

Anne Hathaway adds another layer to my reservations about Days of Thunder. She is an actress with dramatic range and an Oscar, although her screen image still makes me think primarily of romance and comedy. Her arrival in Cole Trickle’s world doesn’t immediately click for me. The material released so far presents her as a team owner and engineer, which could give her an interesting role in that environment. But appearing alongside Cruise doesn’t, in itself, confirm that they will play a couple.

If there is a romance, it will have to be built. For now, I don’t see that spark in the promotional images, although a photograph cannot determine two people’s chemistry on screen. My unease is an initial reaction, not a conclusion about Hathaway’s work. What interests me is whether the film will find a relationship that makes sense for this character today, with his age and the history he carries.

It’s still too early to declare a failure, but not to question the bet. A sequel on this scale requires money, time, and energy that Cruise could put into so many other stories. He certainly has the ability to turn an unexciting premise into a spectacle. The question is whether that effort will find an equivalent desire on the other side of the screen.

I still consider Tom Cruise cinema’s greatest superstar. That is precisely why I expect his choices to offer something beyond reviving familiar titles. Maverick showed how a return can acquire meaning. Days of Thunder 2 still needs to convince me that anyone was waiting for it.