Since its incorporation into Los Angeles in 1910, Hollywood has played an instrumental role in shaping the way the world perceives the American military. Early on, during air shows and other productions, films often featured military hardware in the background. However, the military was cautious about lending its assets to filmmakers, ensuring that every scene and video depicted its beliefs and soldiers in a positive light.
As the United States became embroiled in the great wars of the 20th century, the need to showcase American might and determination took center stage. During both the First and Second World Wars, Hollywood produced realistic yet patriotic films with the assistance of military advisors. These films not only entertained the public but also contributed to the war effort by bolstering morale and support.
One of the watershed moments in the relationship between Hollywood and the military occurred in 1927 with the release of “Wings.” This film, which featured 3,000 infantrymen and U.S. planes and pilots, wove a romance plot between two pilots, all set against the backdrop of Hollywood’s leading lady, Clara Bow. “Wings” not only clinched the Best Picture Oscar that year but also demonstrated how Hollywood and the military collaborated to achieve mutual benefits. Hollywood gained access to an authentic military experience, leading to critical and commercial success, while the military received a fantastic recruiting tool showcased in theaters nationwide.
The post-war years witnessed a string of notable war films, including “They Were Expendable” (1945), “Sands of Iwo Jima” (1949), “The Flying Leathernecks” (1951), “Stalag 17” (1953), “The Bridges at Toko-Ri” (1954), “The Longest Day” (1962), and “The Great Escape” (1963). These films consistently depicted brave men whose causes invariably triumphed, underscoring the indomitable spirit of the American military.
Moreover, Hollywood continued to paint the war and its soldiers in a positive light with films like “From Here to Eternity” (1953), “Mister Roberts” (1955), “South Pacific” (1958), and “Operation Petticoat” (1959). This phenomenon was aptly termed “mutual exploitation” by Lawrence Suid, who observed that Americans had never witnessed their country losing a war onscreen. Consequently, when President Johnson declared that the United States could win in Vietnam, the public was more inclined to believe him, having been exposed to decades of positive war depictions in Hollywood.
Recognizing the significance of this enduring connection, the Pentagon established a continuous liaison with Hollywood from the mid-20th century onwards. Donald Baruch served as this liaison until 1989, bringing his expertise from the world of New York theater production to the role. He wielded final screenplay approval for films involving the military, ensuring that the military and its members were portrayed in a virtuous and authentic manner.
After Baruch’s tenure, Phil Strub took over as the liaison, a position he held for four decades. Strub had a filmmaking background from his time at USC and began his career as a Navy cameraman before rising to the role of entertainment liaison, thanks to his access to the Army’s medical research unit. However, Strub no longer works in isolation. Today, a dedicated facility in Los Angeles houses service members from every branch, collaborating with Strub and higher-ranking military officials to review and influence scripts for movies and TV shows.
This collaborative effort goes beyond mere script review. The military’s contributions encompass suggesting strategies, providing input on the authenticity of military tools and equipment, and even guiding the portrayal of military initiatives in popular media. For instance, reports suggest that the Navy Secretary influenced the TV series “NCIS” to air an episode about the department’s efforts to combat sexual assault.
Strub’s involvement also extended to pushing for script revisions in major Hollywood productions. One notable instance was his recommendation to cut out the Thunderbolt warplane (A-10) from “Jurassic Park III,” as he believed its presence would make audiences empathize with the dinosaurs due to the plane’s overpowering capabilities.
While the military actively participates in shaping its portrayal in certain films and TV shows, many combat-themed productions are created independently of the military’s involvement. These films often present a wide spectrum of perspectives. For example, films like “Apocalypse Now” (1979) and “The Thin Red Line” (1998) offer predictable portrayals of warfare, while others, like “Independence Day” (1996), depict the military as helpless against technologically superior invading aliens.
In cases where the military’s assets are used, it’s essential to note that the military does not allocate additional taxpayer funds for these endeavors. The responsibility for covering operating costs, which can range from $1,000 per hour for a tank to as high as $25,000 per hour for an F-15, falls on the producers. However, once authorized, they are granted access to capture footage of routine military activities, thus providing authenticity to their productions.
A Century of Hollywood and the Military
Hollywood and the American military have shared a unique and enduring partnership that has spanned over a century. This alliance has not only shaped the way the military is portrayed in popular media but has also influenced public perception and support for the armed forces.
The origins of this partnership can be traced back to the early days of Hollywood, shortly after its incorporation into Los Angeles in 1910. In these formative years of the film industry, military hardware often made appearances in movies, particularly during air shows and other productions. However, the military was cautious about allowing filmmakers to use its assets, ensuring that any depiction of the military in films aligned with its beliefs and represented its soldiers in a positive light.
As the United States became increasingly involved in major global conflicts, such as the First and Second World Wars, the need to showcase American might and determination became paramount. Hollywood played a pivotal role during these periods by producing realistic yet patriotic films with the assistance of military advisors. These films not only entertained the public but also served as powerful propaganda tools, boosting morale and support for the war effort.
One of the defining moments in the Hollywood-military partnership occurred in 1927 with the release of “Wings.” This groundbreaking film featured an impressive display of 3,000 infantrymen and U.S. planes, complete with actual pilots. Against this backdrop, a romance unfolded between two pilots competing for the affections of Hollywood’s beloved star, Clara Bow. “Wings” not only clinched the Best Picture Oscar that year but also exemplified how Hollywood and the military could collaborate to their mutual advantage. Hollywood gained access to authentic military experiences, resulting in critical and commercial success, while the military received a compelling recruiting tool showcased in theaters nationwide.
The War and Its Heroes on the Silver Screen
The years following World War II witnessed a slew of notable war films produced by Hollywood. Titles like “They Were Expendable” (1945), “Sands of Iwo Jima” (1949), “The Flying Leathernecks” (1951), “Stalag 17” (1953), “The Bridges at Toko-Ri” (1954), “The Longest Day” (1962), and “The Great Escape” (1963) populated the silver screen. These films shared a common theme of depicting courageous men whose causes ultimately triumphed, reinforcing the image of the invincible American military.
Moreover, Hollywood continued to cast the war and its soldiers in a positive light with films like “From Here to Eternity” (1953), “Mister Roberts” (1955), “South Pacific” (1958), and “Operation Petticoat” (1959). This persistent portrayal of the military in a positive and heroic manner was aptly characterized by film scholar Lawrence Suid as “mutual exploitation.”
Suid’s observation was astute. Americans had rarely, if ever, seen their country lose a war onscreen. Consequently, when President Johnson declared that the United States could prevail in Vietnam, the public was more inclined to believe him. Decades of positive depictions of war in Hollywood had cultivated an unwavering faith in the military’s capabilities.
The Pentagon’s Role in Shaping Hollywood’s Narrative
Recognizing the enduring connection between Hollywood and the military, the Pentagon established a continuous liaison in Hollywood during the mid-20th century. One of the pivotal figures in this role was Donald Baruch, who served as the liaison until 1989. Baruch brought with him a wealth of experience from his career as a successful New York theater producer. In his capacity as liaison, he wielded final screenplay approval for films involving the military, ensuring that the armed forces and their members were portrayed in a virtuous and authentic manner.
After Baruch, Phil Strub assumed the mantle of the military’s liaison in Hollywood, a position he held for four decades. Strub possessed a filmmaking background, having studied at USC, and began his career as a Navy cameraman. His rise to the role of entertainment liaison was fueled by his access to the Army’s medical research unit, which he documented through video. Strub’s tenure marked a new era in the relationship between the military and Hollywood.
Today, the military’s involvement in shaping its portrayal extends beyond a single liaison. A dedicated facility in Los Angeles houses service members from every branch who collaborate with Strub and higher-ranking military officials to review and influence scripts for movies and TV shows. This collaborative effort goes beyond mere script review; it includes suggesting strategies, providing input on the authenticity of military tools and equipment, and guiding the portrayal of military initiatives in popular media.
Influence Beyond the Screen
The military’s influence in Hollywood reaches far beyond script revisions. It encompasses a wide range of activities aimed at ensuring that the portrayal of the armed forces remains accurate, positive, and aligned with the military’s values and objectives. For instance, the Navy Secretary reportedly convinced the producers of the TV series “NCIS” to air an episode highlighting the department’s efforts to combat sexual assault.
Strub’s role also extended to advocating for script revisions in major Hollywood productions. One notable example was his recommendation to remove the Thunderbolt warplane (A-10) from the script of “Jurassic Park III.” Strub believed that the presence of this powerful aircraft would have led audiences to empathize with the dinosaurs due to its overwhelming capabilities.
Independent Productions and Varied Perspectives
While the military actively participates in shaping its portrayal in certain films and TV shows, many combat-themed productions are created independently, without direct military involvement. These films often present a diverse range of perspectives on warfare and the military.
For instance, films like “Apocalypse Now” (1979) and “The Thin Red Line” (1998) offer more conventional and predictable portrayals of warfare, delving into the psychological and emotional toll it takes on soldiers. These films provide a nuanced exploration of the human experience during times of conflict.
In contrast, movies like “Independence Day” (1996) depict scenarios where the military is depicted as powerless against technologically superior invading aliens. In such cases, the military’s assets are often not utilized due to the portrayal of overwhelming external threats. This leads to the creation of computer-generated imagery (CGI) for military hardware and even soldiers, as seen in “Zero Dark Thirty” (2012).
Financial Aspects of Hollywood-Military Collaboration
It’s important to note that the military does not allocate additional taxpayer funds for its collaboration with Hollywood. Instead, the responsibility for covering operating costs falls on the producers of films and TV shows. These costs can vary significantly, ranging from $1,000 per hour for the use of a tank to as high as $25,000 per hour for an F-15 fighter jet. Once authorized, however, filmmakers are granted access to capture footage of routine military activities, adding an extra layer of authenticity to their productions.
In conclusion, the enduring partnership between Hollywood and the military has had a profound impact on the portrayal of the American armed forces in popular media. This alliance, which dates back to the early days of Hollywood, has evolved and adapted over the years, with military liaisons playing a pivotal role in ensuring the accurate and positive depiction of the military in films and TV shows.
Through collaboration and consultation, Hollywood and the military have produced a wide range of war films, each offering unique perspectives on warfare, heroism, and the challenges faced by soldiers. While some productions benefit from direct military involvement, others are created independently, contributing to a rich tapestry of narratives that explore the complexities of armed conflict.
This enduring bond between Hollywood and the military serves as a testament to the power of storytelling and its ability to shape public perception and support for the armed forces. As audiences continue to engage with these narratives, it is essential to recognize the influence of this partnership and the role it plays in both entertainment and education. The relationship between Hollywood and the military is a fascinating and ever-evolving aspect of the entertainment industry, showcasing the intersection of art, patriotism, and public relations.