Notes on
Operation Hollywood: How the Pentagon Shapes
& Censors the Movies, by Emilio Pacull
1. Since
most civilians have never been to war, most of what we know about it comes from
films.
2. Hollywood
constantly makes war films, covering wars of the past, present, and future. In
order to make these films realistic, they often seek help from the military,
who act as a technical advisor. They can provide props, uniforms, and video
footage of real planes and bombs, etc. They correct dialogue based on military
jargon, and make sure the haircuts, etc, are all accurate, to provide greater
realism. This can save a film millions of dollars to produce.
3. It's
important to note that the US military has trained millions of personnel over
the years, many of whom are retired. Any filmmaker can hire retired soldiers to
provide technical support and advice, and this happens all the time. Retired
soldiers don't need to censor themselves in any way. So, filmmakers can learn
details about real wars and make accurate films, even without the official
support of the military. But, it costs much more.
4. In
the late 1920's, the US military opened an office to work with Hollywood. The
first film to benefit from military cooperation was Wings in 1927. The
military even provided logistics for the film's production.
5. Hollywood
worked most closely with the US military during WWII. Actors entertained
soldiers at the front. Directors went to film the various campaigns: John Ford
in the Pacific, William Wyler & John Sturges followed aerial combat in Europe,
and George Stevens filmed the landing of Normandy on D Day. George Stevens also
filmed the Nazi concentration camps.
6. Certain
war films were banned in America, like Let There Be Light (1946) a
documentary showing wounded veterans returning from WWII. It was banned until
1980 and the reason the military was able to do this was they were the ones who
had produced it, and owned the legal rights to it.
7. The
Longest Day (1962) was another collaboration between the military and
Hollywood, pushing the narrative of heroic soldiers in a just war, WWII. Such
patriotic films were important to politicians and the military, as America
began controversial wars in Asia against communists. People saw real shooting
and bombing every day on the news, and wondered when it would end.
8. Hollywood
tried to distance itself from the military during the Vietnam War. As a
business, it wanted to make films that would sell, and many Americans were
against the war. Still, it produced Patton (1970), MASH (1970), Catch
22 (1970), Tora! Tora! Tora! (1970), and The Green Berets (1968).
9. But,
Hollywood held off on many films that seemed risky at the time, including Platoon
and Full Metal Jacket, which weren't made until the 1980's.
10. The Green
Berets was a project started by actor John Wayne. The military gave tons of
assistance and props for free. The film was a commercial success, despite being
trashed by leading film critics. Roger Ebert put the film on his Ten Most Hated
List.
11. Apocalypse Now (1979),
by Francis Ford Coppola, shows a totally different view of the war. It was
inspired by Conrad's Heart of Darkness, and received no support from the
US military.
12. Full Metal
Jacket (1987) by Stanley Kubrick is infamous for R. Lee Ermey, who played
the role of drill sergeant for the new recruits. He was an actual drill
sergeant and Vietnam War veteran, and repeated much of what he did in actual
troop training.
13. Full Metal
Jacket was very critical of the war and the military, and it's amazing that
Kubrick got Ermey, who supports the military, to play in it. Ermey sees his
character in a positive light, refusing to recognize his role in warping a
cadet into a suicidal state. Ermey saw the role as a major stepping-stone for
his career, and is proud he was able to change the script to make his character
more benevolent (at least in his mind). Ermey supported the military (still
does), but also wanted people to know the truth of marine training and combat.
14. Hollywood and the
military came back together in the 80's to make Top Gun (1988), selling
the story of America's new technological superiority. The military loved it.
15. During the 1st
Gulf War in 1990-91, the military continued this Top Gun approach. It
was much more careful to monitor and control news footage. Images of dead
bodies were replaced with video footage of "smart bombs." There were
few films about this war. It was over so fast, there was little dramatic
tension.
16. The Siege
(1998) portrayed a series of fictional terrorist attacks in NYC, addressing
this threat years before 9/11. Military characters in the film ordered martial
law and hindered law enforcement. The military refused any assistance.
According to Dave Robb, a
Hollywood journalist
1. American
cinema is formulaic. It revolves around action and war. There's always a good
guy and bad guy, and the good guy always wins. It becomes a recruitment tactic
for the military to target children.
2. The
military wants to present itself as superior, even invincible. Any war film
they collaborate on will have as its central theme that war is the answer.
3. Any
time a film or TV show wants military assistance, the military requires that
they get to review the script and demand changes.
Example: In Lassie,
one episode contained a military plane crash. Originally, Lassie heard a
strange noise before it crashed, and realized the plane was faulty. The
military "strongly recommended" the script be changed, so that there
was nothing wrong with the plane, in exchange for film footage of a Cesna plane
flying. Otherwise, they wouldn't help.
Example: In Windtalkers
(2002) there was a scene were an American dentist pulled gold teeth from dead
Japanese soldiers. The military, which cooperated with the film, demanded the
scene be removed, so the dentist character was erased. The military claimed
such behavior was un-marine-like, even though it actually happened.
Example: The film 13
Days (2000), recounts the Cuban Missile Crisis, in which Kennedy and
Krushchev nearly started WWIII. There are tape recordings of all top-level
discussions between Kennedy and his military advisors, who wanted to go to war.
Kennedy rejected their advice, finding a peaceful resolution. Even though the
conversations were accurate, word for word, the military wouldn't help with the
film, because it made them look bad.
4. Not
only is censorship an issue, but self-censorship. Any filmmaker who wants help
from the military will self-censor from the beginning.
5. The
problem with censorship isn't simply about falsifying history. Filmmakers are
artists; they change the facts all the time to make a good story. But, when the
military is involved in this process, and it shapes how the public views the
military, then you get a pro-war population that accepts more and more wars,
oblivious to the cost. And then, when a filmmaker actually wants to tell a true
story, with all the facts in place, the military should have no influence in
stopping that.
According to Pentagon
spokesman, Philip M. Strub:
1)
"First of all, when we look at scripts, are we conducting
damage control? And the answer is, absolutely. It's not my role here to vilify
the armed forces because I'm a believer of the armed forces. I wouldn't be in
this job if I didn't. And my colleagues feel the same way. Those who are in the
military, obviously, are adherents. Otherwise, they'd vote with their feet and
quit. So, we are all very much of the opinion that the military is an
institution for the betterment of the United States. So, any picture that is
contrary to that fundamental premise is going to be a problem for us."
2)
"Is the American will in favor of our involvement in
these pictures? I have no way of knowing because there have never been any
surveys. But, I can tell you one thing. Their elected officials are certainly
not opposed to it. Because, it's nothing that we keep quiet or secret. We don't
advertise it. We don't choose to try to be prominent to gain attention for
ourselves. The public affairs world wants to stay behind the camera, not in
front of it. But, there's certainly nothing we're hesitant about. We're not
ashamed of their relationship, nor have we ever heard any complaints or any
requests to modify it from the elected officials of the American public. So, I
can only say that, though we may get an occasional letter saying, why did you
work on this picture? Why did you work on that TV show? Most of those we
didn't! They just think we did."
3)
There are two categories for films the military won't work on.
One is a show-stopping premise, like Apocalypse Now or Crimson Tide,
when US soldiers do something that real soldiers would never do, like orders to
kill a fellow officer.
4)
"Top Gun was a milestone picture because it
signified the rehabilitation of the military as acceptable subject matter in a
positive context. It showed . . . you could make film that portrayed the
military . . . in a positive way and make money, and not become a pariah in
Hollywood. It wasn't the first, but the most important picture that symbolized
that change in public opinion."
5)
13 Days was too unrealistic to support, in that it
portrayed the military as debating against the Kennedy's.
The Pentagon knew and accepted
that Pearl Harbor (2001) wouldn't be historically accurate. But, what makes the
film acceptable, in his mind, is that it drew attention to the story, and the
survivors, more so than the 50th anniversary.