Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Operation Hollywood: How the Pentagon Shapes & Censors the Movies

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Echo In Light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-10 10:01 AM
Original message
Operation Hollywood: How the Pentagon Shapes & Censors the Movies
How the Pentagon bullies movie producers into showing the U.S. military in the best possible light
By Jeff Fleischer

To keep the Pentagon happy, some Hollywood producers have been known to turn villains into heroes, remove central characters, change politically sensitive settings, or add military rescues to movies that require none. There are no bad guys in the military. No fraternization between officers and enlisted troops. No drinking or drugs. No struggles against bigotry. The military and the president can’t look bad (though the State Department and Canada can).

<snip>

During his years as a journalist for Daily Variety and The Hollywood Reporter, Robb heard about a quid-pro-quo agreement between the Pentagon and Hollywood studios, and decided to investigate. He combed through thousands of Pentagon documents, and interviewed dozens of screenwriters, producers and military officials. The result is his new book, "Operation Hollywood." Robb talked with MotherJones.com about deal-making that defines the relationship between Hollywood and the Pentagon.

MotherJones.com: How far back does collaboration between the U.S. military and Hollywood go?

David Robb: The current approval process was established right after World War II. Before that, the Pentagon used to help producers, but it wasn’t very formalized, like it is now. They helped producers going back to at least 1927. The very first movie that won an Oscar, “Wings,” -- even that got military assistance.

MJ.com: What steps does a producer take to get assistance from the military? How does the process work?

DR: The first thing you have to do is send in a request for assistance, telling them what you want pretty specifically -- ships, tanks, planes, bases, forts, submarines, troops -- and when you want this material available. Then you have to send five copies of the script to the Pentagon, and they give it to the affected service branches -- Army, Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, Coast Guard. Then you wait and see if they like your script or not. If they like it, they’ll help you; if they don’t, they won’t. Almost always, they’ll make you make changes to the military depictions. And you have to make the changes that they ask for, or negotiate some kind of compromise, or you don’t get the stuff.

So then you finally get the approval, after you change your script to mollify the military, put some stuff in about how great it is to be in the military. Then when you go to shoot the film, you have to have what I call a “military minder” -- but what they call a “technical advisor” -- someone from the military on the set to make sure you shoot the film the way you agreed to. Normally in the filmmaking process, script changes are made all the time; if something isn’t working, they look at the rushes, and say, “let’s change this.” Well, if you want to change something that has to do with the military depictions, you’ve got to negotiate with them again. And they can say, “No, you can’t change it, this is the deal you agreed to.” As one of the technical advisors, Maj. David Georgi of the Army, said to me, “If they don’t do what I say, I take my toys and go away.”

After the film is completed, you have to prescreen the film for the Pentagon brass. So before it’s shown to the public, you have to show your movie to the generals and admirals, which I think any American should find objectionable -- that their movies are being prescreened by the military.


http://motherjones.com/politics/2004/09/operation-hollywood
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Speck Tater Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-10 10:04 AM
Response to Original message
1. Then why is it that the US military is the bad guy in so many Hollywood movies?
I simply don't believe it. Virtually every Army brass depicted in the movies is shown as a heavy-handed, war-mongering moron who always gets everything wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arcadian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-10 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Hey! Guess what?
Those films didn't get script approval from the DoD and didn't get to use multi million dollar hardware in their films.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-10 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #1
10. Movies don't always need direct military help
Movies that actually need to film on carriers, or want to use actual equipment or facilities, will be the ones to get access to the help. And you can make a film about a "rouge" military officer, as long as the military is the one that finds him and brings him to justice.

It's getting more and more possible to make a "war movie" without needing the military. Between stock footage, and CGI, you can piece together pretty much what you need. As such, the whole article is a tad "dated".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arcadian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-10 10:05 AM
Response to Original message
2. One statement in the above article is inaccurate
Edited on Wed May-12-10 10:06 AM by arcadian
Didn't Tranformers 2 slam Obama? They got a nod from Straub at the DoD's film liaison office and a big thank you in the credits.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Tires Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-10 10:08 AM
Response to Original message
4. This was known awhile ago...
five years before this piece came out, Brill's Content did an even bigger story on it (also illustrated which famous war movies had official Pentagon support or assistance, and how much)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-10 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. Hell, DOD approved of On The Beach, They Were Expendable, etc.
So, they've actually participated in some movies that do not end happily.

Films like Apocalypse Now used the military of the Philippines.

The Russians Are Coming The Russians Are Coming made its own submarine because Canada also would not participate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arcadian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-10 10:13 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. Home Alone 3
Got military approval.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Tires Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-10 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #7
13. i wish i remembered the list...there were some surprises
i do remember that Catch-22 didn't get any support, iirc
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Brickbat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-10 10:42 AM
Response to Reply #4
14. Brill's Content FTW.
What a great magazine that was. I think I remember that piece.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mari333 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-10 10:08 AM
Response to Original message
5. Avatar somehow got made
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arcadian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-10 10:15 AM
Response to Reply #5
9. Not relevant to the discussion
The movie was futuristic and didn't use contemporary military hardware. Plus Cameron didn't need the DoD he has his own money.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-10 10:45 AM
Response to Reply #5
15. They didn't use any military equipment in Avatar
IT was all props or CGI.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-10 10:09 AM
Response to Original message
6. This is not new. Everyone knows it. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Echo In Light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-10 10:36 AM
Response to Reply #6
12. I ran a similarly themed thread yesterday that by and large side-stepped this issue
... it became more about arguing WW2 casualty/strategy stats than the notion of mainstream movies being 'managed' for propagandistic purposes
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ieoeja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-10 10:23 AM
Response to Original message
11. I certainly do not find it objectionable.

If you want my to help you depict me in a film, then it's a pretty good bet I'm not going to help you unless you give me a lot of say in how I am depicted. If you want to depict me without my assistance, then knock yourself out. But don't expect me to help you depict me in a bad light.

Heartbreak Ridge was supposed to be about a US Army unit in Grenada. But the US Army forbade swearing. When producers learned the US Marines had no problem being depicted using vulgar language, the movie became about a US Marine unit.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Echo In Light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-10 12:19 PM
Response to Original message
16. Bump
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Echo In Light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-10 04:18 PM
Response to Original message
17. Bump
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 13th 2024, 02:31 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC