The request to the Pentagon was fairly routine: The makers of "Clear and Present Danger" wanted to borrow three heavily armed helicopters.
Normally, this would be no problem for the Pentagon's film office, which handles hundreds of such requests from Hollywood each year. The film companies pay all the costs, and the Pentagon makes sure the military gets some positive P.R.But there was a problem. The filmmakers were going to use the helicopters in Mexico, about 200 miles from the southern state of Chiapas, where very real shooting was taking place between rebels and government troops.
To Phil Strub, who coordinates the Defense Department film liaison office in Washington, it was a delicate situation. Would a Mexican government beset by civil unrest ever grant permission just to make a U.S. film crew happy? And what would Mexicans think?
"We were very concerned that there could be a misconception that they were real," Strub said of the celluloid battle scenes starring Harrison Ford.
Like a seasoned diplomat, Strub went to work. The Hollywood producers agreed to tone down some of the script's ugly American portrayals, the Mexican concerns were satisfied and permission finally was granted for the filming.
"Everyone was really understanding," Strub said. "It happens very often where people have the attitude, `Hey, this is a movie, don't bother us.. . . The last thing we want to hear about is a movie."
So it goes at Strub's office - where the Pentagon lends a hand, or a tank, to Hollywood to ensure that films reflect accurately, and positively, on the military.
"We feel strongly that the images people see of the military in Hollywood are the most formative images," said Major Nancy LaLuntas, director of Marine public affairs in Los Angeles.
"(We've) maintained all along that if we have the ability to accurately influence those images, the American public will have a better image of the military."
Filmmakers send scripts with wish lists to the military film offices asking for tanks, aircraft carriers, active-duty officers to play extras or just technical advice to make a story more accurate.
The Pentagon then uses its leverage to persuade filmmakers to change parts of the story deemed inaccurate or too negative.
"You can do anything in the movie business with enough money. But it's easier with (Pentagon) approval," said producer Mace Neufeld, who worked with the military on "Clear and Present Danger," "The Hunt for Red October," "Patriot Games" and "Flight of the Intruder."
How much filmmakers are willing to revise depends on how much help they need, Strub said. A movie like "Top Gun," about Navy fighter pilots, could not have been made without the military - because "you can't just rent aircraft carriers."
And some moviemakers balk at Pentagon interference. For example, "A Few Good Men," which starred Tom Cruise as a Navy lawyer investigating a death at a Marine base headed by a brutal colonel (Jack Nicholson), was made without help from the Pentagon. In this case, the military objected to the "unrelentingly negative" portrayal of some of the Marines.
Usually, he said, both sides bend a little.
"We say `These are areas that are unrealistic. We know this isn't a documentary, we know this isn't news, but you've got to have some plausibility,"' said Strub.
Pentagon approval certainly makes life easier, said Amy Lemisch, who co-produced "Renaissance Man," starring Danny DeVito as an English teacher hired to educate U.S. troops.
Filmmakers pay the Pentagon the costs of operating the expensive equipment, such as helicopters, planes or tanks, that they rent. The military says the charges do not bring in a profit.
What the Pentagon gets is publicity.