In many popular narratives of the period, it was the Baby Boomers (born 1943-1960) who “ruined” the movies. Here’s the pretentious film snob summary of the death of Hollywood’s alleged second Golden Age, as popularized by Peter Biskind. The seventies were filled with bold, dark art and transgressive intellectualism. Then the greedy Baby Boomers – like Steven Spielberg and George Lucas – made “Jaws,” “Star Wars,” “Raiders of the Lost Ark,” and “E.T.” All of a sudden Hollywood did not want to make serious, grown-up pictures. Now it was the age of blockbusters so simple that 3-year-olds can summarize them.

It was the 1980s when Boomer Blockbuster filmmaking would arrive in the event pictures of Jerry Bruckheimer and Don Simpson. We see this tendency further in the films of arch-Boomers Ron Howard and Brian Grazer. For a definition of Boomer cinema just look at the output of their company Imagine Entertainment. These aren’t the New Wave-influenced pictures of Roger L. Simon’s generation.

It was the Boomers who also gave us our most strident and simpleminded cinematic leftists: Spike Lee, Oliver Stone, and Michael Moore. Think about these three careers. Over the past 30 years have any of them shifted an inch in their political thinking? Of course not and neither have most Boomers who are still arguing over sex, race, and the Vietnam War as though it were still 1975.

If I speak with some hostility about the Boomers’ failings and excesses it’s partially because that’s my nature as a Millennial/Gen Yer. According to William Strauss and Neil Howe’s books each generation acts as a check on the excesses of its parent generation. As young adults in the ‘60s and ‘70s the Baby Boomers declared war on the cultural institutions of their GI Generation parents. The GIs (born 1900-1924) are what Howe and Strauss describe as a “civic” generation; they were driven toward creating social harmony. The Boomers (an “idealist” generation) were a check on that, fomenting greater individualism in the 1970s and culture wars in the 1990s. That our electoral maps are so split today is their fault. When the Civic GI President Ronald Reagan won in 1984 it was almost a solid red map. My generation – also a Civic generation – is a reaction against Baby Boomer extremes and will seek to create greater social harmony. This will become much more apparent as the younger Gen Yers in junior high and high school now start to make waves in 10 years.

Pulitzer Prize-winning playwright David Mamet (born 1957) has been emblematic of the divisive Boomer paradigm for his whole career. His plays and films are famous for the “Mamet style” of short bursts of memorable dialogue and the mainstreaming of casual profanity.

And so in his book detailing his rightward shift away from a “Brain-Dead” Hollywood leftist, The Secret Knowledge: On the Dismantling of American Culture, the reader finds this same mindset applied to the political essay. The need to divide the world into clear cut categories of Liberalism and Conservatism pervades the text. Mamet even capitalizes them to Emphasize the Great Importance of the Political War between Boomer Liberalism and Boomer Conservatism. Gone is Simon’s sense of skepticism in Turning Right at Hollywood and Vine.

The Secret Knowledge is a collection of 39 short essays. Mamet has crafted an experience like the signature Boomer film “Forrest Gump.” Life is like a box of chocolates – and devouring the delicious morsels of Mamet’s book is an addictive treat, filled with surprises. Who cares if it’s just a political sugar rush? Most conservatives are familiar with the bibliography Mamet cribs his ideas from: Sowell, Hayek, VDH, Friedman, etc. Thus they won’t learn anything life-changing but will still enjoy the thrill of Mr. Mamet’s Wild Ride. And if that sentiment doesn’t summarize the Boomer cinema of Lucas-Spielberg-Bruckheimer-Moore-Stone then what does?

The endowment of the Baby Boomer Hollywood Apostates is the call to fight, the drive to confront with big special effects, and the need to divide ourselves from the intolerable. This makes for satisfying blockbuster popcorn films and effective (James Carville-Karl Rove style) political warfare. While there is plenty to critique in the failings of the Boomer presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush credit must be given: the Boomer political strategists were masters. Too bad they wasted their brains on winning the electoral fights while ignoring (and sometimes exacerbating) the more vital policy fights.

In Part 4 of the Hollywood Revolt, we’ll see how the Gen X leader Andrew Breitbart is reinventing this confrontational spirit – what he calls Righteous Indignation — and redirecting it in a more pragmatic, effective way than the Boomers ever could.

The “Forrest Gump” star works relentlessly on behalf of the troops via his rock outfit the Lt. Dan Band, but he’s much less willing to toot his own horn.

Director Jonathan Flora convinced the humble star that a documentary could help spread the word to people and places Sinise would otherwise never get the chance to visit.

“Lt. Dan Band: For the Common Good” hits streaming devices everywhere July 4th. People who want to screen the film can pay a $3.99 fee, with $1 going to The Gary Sinise Foundation which continues his work on the troops‘ behalf.

Flora had met Sinise several years ago, but he recalls the first time he saw the actor’s band on stage: “I was on pins and needles,” he recalls, echoing a common fear about actors who pick up a guitar. “You hope they don’t stink.”

Flora quickly learned what soldiers, sailors, and their loved ones have over the past eight years: The Lt. Dan Band rocks.

“They play songs everybody knows. [Audiences] can reflect back and remember where they were when those songs were a hit and forget where they are for a while,” Flora says.

But he didn’t want to make a straightforward rock music documentary.

“We used Gary and the band as a vehicle to introduce viewers to other people who support the military, like the first responders,” says Flora, a veteran himself.

It’s not enough that Sinise gives so much of his free time to the troops. He also travels to places other entertainers wouldn’t, hot spots where real danger lurks.

“Our military, they’re pretty perceptive. They know who’s there for a photo op and who’s got their back,” he says.

Flora recalls accompanying Sinise on a trip to entertain some troops. Sinise met the soldiers, shook hands with them, and posed for snap shots. Two days after Sinise returned home from the trip one of the soldiers who had had his picture taken with the actor was killed by sniper fire in the area where they formerly stood.

“Gary treats the last guy [he meets] just like he treats the first guy. He knows that tomorrow’s not promised for some of these guys,” he says.

Flora says he could have released “Lt. Dan Band” in theaters, but he eventually decided to go the streaming route.

“As a filmmaker you always want to be on the big screen with that perfect Surround Sound,” he says, adding the film will be released on DVD later this month for people whose movie rooms sport top-notch speaker systems.

And, he adds, the movie doesn’t have to live or die by its first weekend grosses.

Flora hopes the film’s investors will be rewarded by the streaming method, and that other filmmakers benefit from its potential success. Streaming doesn’t limit the number of cities the film can be shown in. Even big name documentaries often find themselves restricted to art house venues.

Other films have debuted online before, but Flora can’t think of another documentary like “Lt. Dan Band” which hopes to both entertain and inspire others to action. Should viewers be moved by “For the Common Good,” they can simply surf over to the Sinise Foundation website and make a contribution

“This movie is all about giving back,” he says. “When people watch this movie, something we found in all of our screenings, they’re right away motivated and want to do something.”

But even then, some dumbass would do this.

The nominees:

“Forrest Gump” – The part that always confused me was he said, “She tastes like cigarettes,” like it was a bad thing.

“Four Weddings and a Funeral” – For my money, the oddball nominee at the time. I like it more now, but back then I was convinced it was only nominated because it’s British.

“Quiz Show” – I love the part when Herb Stempel cranes his neck to see what’s going on in the other soundproof booth, CLONKS his head on the glass, then checks-real-quick to make sure no one in the studio audience saw him. We saw ya, ya sponge-memoried freak.

“The Shawshank Redemption” – Great movie, saved by the studio’s rejection of the alternate ending, in which Red goes to Buxton, but can’t distinguish one hayfield from another because he’s never read a Robert Frost poem, screams in agony; meanwhile, the grocery store owner calls his P.O., who calls the fuzz, who come to Buxton, and gun him down. As life flickers from his eyes, he realizes he’s laying on a piece of volcanic glass that has no business being in a hayfield in the middle of Maine. He laughs to FADE OUT.

“Pulp Fiction” – I think you know how this is going to end.

What should have been nominated:

“Forrest Gump” – I mean, I don’t smoke anymore, but cigarettes are really tasty.

“Quiz Show” – Also, when Rob Morrow gets embarrassed because mustard is on his face. You can read Morrow’s mind: Trying to fit in with the WASP, and this happens?!

“The Shawshank Redemption” – I love that actor that plays the mean guard. He was awesome in “Bad Boys,” in which Sean Penn mashes his nose all over his face with a six pack inside a pillow case.

“Speed” – Pop quiz, hot shot: There are only five spots available for your favorite movies of 1994. What do you do. What do you do? You leave off “True Lies,” “Dumb & Dumber,” “Hoop Dreams,” “Nobody’s Fool,” and “Police Academy: Mission to Moscow,” even though they’re all totally awesome.

“Pulp Fiction” – During my 4 1/2 years of college, no movie was as debated with friends and in classes as much as “Pulp Fiction.”

The winner: “Pulp Fiction.”

Its immediate impact turned out to be a lasting impact. It felt like Quentin Tarantino was a flash in the pan for sure — but we’re still debating that point after a few more love-it-or-hate-it movies. I remember a couple of conversations in particular: One was in a writing class, where a grad student who was no doubt friends with Michael Stipe snarked, “The only reason anybody likes that movie is because the critics loved it.”

A friend of mine responded, “Then why did so many people like ‘Ace Ventura?’”

“Same reason,” shot back Mr. Detached and Oh So Cool.

I’m still scratching my head about that one.

It’s a movie of moments, real movie moments. Tarantino rips off so many movies by way of other movies and TV shows, it’s dizzying. Gangster hit men talk like my roommates at the time–sarcastic snide–”Well, you are aware that there’s this invention called television and on this invention they show shows, right?”

A boxer tough enough to kill a man in the ring flips out on his girlfriend, then acquiesces in shame, only to continue the flip out later when he’s alone in the car. Boxer’s name is Butch. Which means nothing. Because he’s an American, and our names don’t mean shit.

The crime boss casually strolls to a doughnut shop and grabs a dozen doughnuts. Just like me. Everyday. Sometimes twice a day. Oh, except that in the middle of the crosswalk at Fletcher and Atwater, he spots a guy who crossed him sitting in a Honda, whips out a gun, fires as he’s creamed by the Honda, the bullet nearly hitting Margaret Cho and Kathy Griffin.

Tarantino rips everyone off, but his movies work because they’re populated with characters we can relate to; that behave like us and converse like us. Only different.

My wife and I still say we “ain’t got no friendly people in the eight-one-eight,” even though it’s no longer true.

As late as 1997, a guy I worked for was still claiming he was the “Foot fuckin’ master.” Everyday.

It’s close, but it’s the movie that to me has had the most lasting impact of all the movies released in 1994.

At the time, I loved that the movie had inspired such debate. The conservative crowd pointed out that Forrest’s beloved Jenny, in her relentless pursuit of pleasures of the flesh, was left with an incurable disease (AIDS, presumably, though the movie never explicitly confirms this assumption). Liberals pointed out the compassion Forrest showed his Jenny upon hearing of her disease was confirmation of the film’s liberal message.

The flaw in this liberal point of view is that it sees the conservative take on Jenny’s life as lacking in compassion. It confuses the problem with the solution. The conservative take is rooted in fact: Jenny did run around, take drugs, sleep with any swinging Dick who would have her. Pointing out Forrest’s heroic compassion to her situation doesn’t erase the reality of how she got in the situation to begin with.

It’s a conservative movie, no question about it.

Neither Jenny nor Forrest experience an easy childhood. Forrest has a spine as “crooked as a politician” leaving him confined to leg braces. Jenny has an abusive father. It turns out that Forrest has an uncanny ability to run, which gets him into college on a football scholarship. Did Bear Bryant’s compassion to Forrest’s academic deficiencies stem from a liberal mindset? I doubt it. Winning ballgames subbing in for the profit motive led to Bryant’s decision. Jenny, too, goes to college, and has dreams of being a big star. Whether she pursues these dreams to the fullest extent of her abilities is unclear, but their derailment appears to be the result of her inability to get out of her own way. Oh, and she picks bad men, including one abusive lout who calls Forrest, the Vietnam Vet, a “Babykiller.” He also badmouths a Democrat, Lyndon B. Johnson, but still, something tells me homeboy didn’t cast a vote for Nixon.

After Vietnam, Forrest holds true to his word and buys a shrimping boat. But, lo and behold, shrimping is not as easy as returning kickoffs for the Tide. Does Forrest quit? Or wallow? He works harder, and an act of God helps him to become successful in the shrimping business. So, he blows all his money on booze and hookers and hires Van Halen to perform at his birthday party – no wait. With the help of his friend, Lieutenant Dan (Gary Sinise, who was nominated for an Academy Award), he invests the money and becomes rich.

Obviously, “Forrest Gump” is a fable, not to be taken literally. Forrest is a simpleton whose values run deep. For much of the film, Forrest lacks self-awareness. He treats people the way he wants to be treated, and doesn’t expect anything from anyone. When a Drill Sergeant asks why he disassembled a rifle so quickly, his response, “Because you told me to, Drill Sergeant,” sounds almost like a question. What other reason would he do it?

The result of this lack of self-awareness is a character that doesn’t feel real for much of the film. But there is a moment, when Jenny rejects him for the forty-eleventh time, when he says, “I’m not a smart man, but I do know what love is.” His self-awareness surfaces again when he learns he has a son. Choking back tears, his voice trails off before he can finish asking if the boy is stupid like him. I think that without these two scenes, the movie would not have enjoyed as much success or raked in the Oscars.

In these moments we connect with Forrest, the conservative hero of the movie.

The key to any great year at the movies is a great summer at the movies, and 1994 had that. I can’t personally decide which movie that summer was my favorite, so I’m starting with my wife’s favorite. My wife grew up in a small town in South Georgia. They didn’t have a movie theatre. Not that she was in the stone ages, but going to a movie was, to her, an event, not a regular occurrence. We had been dating for only about a month, when one Tuesday afternoon in December of 1991, I said, “Hey, let’s go to the movies.” Puzzled, she replied, “It’s Tuesday.”

As good a day as any, I replied, before whisking her off to see “The Last Boy Scout.”

Three years later, she was worse than me. We would watch two movies in an afternoon, three if they weren’t playing at the General Cinema theatre, with its uncomfortable red seats. Our tastes were not discriminating, we would see anything. On July 15, 1994, we went to see Disney’s Angels in the Outfield (co-starring Matthew McConaughey and Adrien Brody!), then ducked into the next auditorium to watch True Lies. My wife saw it at least ten times that summer.

Proving that some things don’t change for Cameron, it was at the time the most expensive movie ever made. It cost a reported $100 million, a sum for which you can now make the first act of a summer movie. Every dollar is up on the screen in this gloriously self-aware action comedy. For those who haven’t seen it, it’s about a spy who believes that his wife is cheating on him. Taking time off from saving the world from Nazis and Muslim terrorists, he sets a trap to catch her in the act, which inadvertently drags her into the world of international espionage and terrorism.

Has it stood the test of time? I think so. The scene where Schwarzenegger, under the influence of truth serum, tells a roomful of terrorists how he’s going to dispatch each and every one of them only moments before he dispatches every single one of them is alone worth the price of a rental. The acting is solid, Curtis is great, Tom Arnold is surprisingly good, future Clooney collaborator Grant Heslov is funny, and no one can out-Ahnuld Ahnuld.

Culturally, I think it’s a relevant piece of work because of the controversy it inspired. With True Lies, Cameron came under heavy criticism for depicting Arabs as terrorists. Whenever a group complains about their depiction in a movie, I always side with the movie. At no point in True Lies did I think the as yet to be anointed King of the World was making any sort of comment on all Arabs or all Muslims. Two years earlier, Muslim terrorists had attacked the World Trade Center. Seven years later, Muslim terrorists would again attack the World Trade Center. And a year after that, Hollywood officially caved to the demands of politically correct Muslims by changing the bad guys in a Tom Clancy movie from Muslim terrorists to Nazi terrorists.

True Lies was also called misogynist at the time, due in large part to the trap set by Schwarzenegger to catch his wife cheating – he forces her to strip. All in all, Cameron got beat up pretty bad on this one, and had no rewards or box office titles to show for it. It made nearly a hundred fifty million domestically, almost four hundred million globally – but this was before anyone gave a rip about the global box office. Domestic was all that mattered, and True Lies was certainly no bomb, but it was not a humongous success, either.

Where does True Lies fit in the canon of Cameron’s work? It’s not his best movie, but it’s not his worst either – although I wouldn’t even call my least favorite of his movies a bad movie. But I think that as gifted as he certainly is, he is a cynical kid, eager for recognition and acceptance, and I believe that the criticism from the cultural elite stung him badly. The misogyny angle really had to stick in the craw of the guy who gave us badass Sarah Connor. The hero of his next movie, Titanic, was a little guy, a poor street urchin slash artist, who was paired with a female protagonist who willingly strips naked for him. The villains were greedy and rich and free of ethnicity. Result: jackpot, baby! No one that I can recall rushed to his defense in the wake of his perceived racism and misogyny in 1994. Cut to Avatar, 2009: in the wake of criticism from the right, the cultural elite had his back.

Ultimately, True Lies exists as a bridge between Cameron’s Terminator/Aliens phase, and his King of the World status. Nothing in the movie gives the impression that he feels he has anything to prove, so in that sense, it’s a pretty honest piece of work. He only means to entertain, doesn’t care about preaching to us, and that’s a good thing.

Hope you’ll come back next week for my ruminations on Hoop Dreams. I’m not sure what ruminations means, but it sounds appropriately pretentious.

That was the best year for movies that I can recall. That summer alone we had “Forrest Gump,” “True Lies,” “Speed,” and everyone was eagerly awaiting the arrival of Cannes winner “Pulp Fiction.” And we also had “The Lion King.” I remember the critic for my campus newspaper, The Red & Black (Go Dawgs!), panned the film, noting that the “Circle of Life” song, sung by a gay man, was really about keeping groups of people, particularly minorities, in their place. I thought this was bizarre and brought it up with some of my classmates.

I was a drama major. Hellooooo! What was I thinking!

Turns out the movie was homophobic and racist. Scar, the villain, was clearly gay, I was told. I missed that. By missing it, i.e. not having an opinion on the sexual preference of a cartoon lion, I was also a homophobe. Huh? As for the charge of racism, the hyenas, famously voiced by Cheech Marin and Whoopi Goldberg, were stereotypes of blacks and Mexicans. But, as I pointed out, James Earl Jones, a black man, voiced the role of Mufasa. The response still floors me: Yes, but he wasn’t portrayed as a black person.

Did you catch that?

Because Mufasa’s not shucking and jiving, he’s not a black person. I can’t pretend to have called my friends on this; frankly, I was stunned. The PC mindset had led my friends to charge the film with racism, and in doing so they revealed themselves to be slaves to stereotypes. Racists? Probably not. But certainly not deserving of their pious attitude toward Uncle Walt and Company.

Which brings me back to “Borat.” I happen to agree with Christopher Hitchens, who notes that the film makes Americans look more tolerant than the left seems to believe. The sequence in a “black” Atlanta neighborhood doesn’t work as humor if the viewer doesn’t have some pre-conceived notions about black street culture. The elitists were falling all over themselves to point out the rodeo audience cheering Borat’s pro-Bush, pro-War on Terror speech–guess they didn’t notice the woman rolling her eyes. I bet there were more reactions like this…on the cutting room floor, of course.

The elitists’ favorite scene, though, was the one that made fun of them intolerant southerners. The one where Borat insulted the host, crapped in a bag, and, in a move that busted up the party, invited over a prostitute. To the elites, the fact that she was OBVIOUSLY a prostitute had NOTHING to do with her presence breaking up the party. You remember, she was black. And this crowd was clearly offended to be in the presence of a black woman.

I don’t think this is the case and the reaction reveals more about the elites than the scene itself reveals about the great unwashed southern masses. In the end, the Liberal elites had to interpret the movie in this way, if only to excuse themselves for embracing a movie with wall-to-wall juvenile poop and penis jokes. With “Brüno,” they’re taking the “Lion King” approach, embracing it less than they did “Borat” and pointing out the stereotypes. I can’t wait to see what it reveals about them.

J.R. Head: Thanks so much, Dale, for taking the time to talk with me.

Dale Dye: You’re most welcome. It’s a pleasure to be anywhere talking about the business we love these days. Hopefully, things will loosen up a bit, we’ll all go to work and I won’t have time for this in the near future.

JRH: Well, I’m glad I caught you when I did. First, let me say that I’ve enjoyed so many of the projects you’ve worked on.

DD: That means a lot coming from a guy with a military background. The reason I work so hard at it is to ensure guys like you and millions of others who served get a fair shake from Hollywood.

JRH: With more than twenty years in the business under your belt, there’s a lot I’d like to cover. Let’s start at the beginning. To many folks, making the jump from the Marine Corps to Hollywood seems counter-intuitive. You seemed to make headway very quickly, retiring from active duty and getting right to work on a high-profile project, Oliver Stone’s “Platoon”. How did that come about?

DD: Well, that takes a little explaining…so bear with me here. I guess it does seem counter-intuitive to come out of a full career as a Marine and just head to Hollywood to find work in the motion picture or TV industry…and frankly, if I’d known anything about this industry at the time, I probably wouldn’t have tried it. You can do a lot of things people tell you are impossible when you’re blissfully ignorant. You might want to write that down. I had no idea back in 1985 when I came to Hollywood what it takes to get in the door out here. I just had this notion that someone who knew what they were talking about regarding the military needed to show these guys doing the writing, directing and performing what the real military was like…how we look, how we think, how we walk, talk and fight in the real world. That came from decades of watching military or war movies and walking away pissed off at what I was seeing. I knew that what was on the small or large screen at the time was not what I’d experienced and I sensed that it could be corrected if someone who’d lived that life could just demonstrate that the reality was much more dynamic, interesting and dramatic than what was being imagined by people who were clueless about our military. So, thinking it was just that simple, I cadged a plane ticket and came on out to set things straight. And wallowing in my own ignorance of how things get done in this town, I just started making calls and kicking down doors and sort of turning it into an all-out frontal assault. Needless to say, I didn’t have much luck except with the security guys who were constantly called to escort me off sets and studio lots. What I was trying to bring to the table was a whole lot more than just advice on which ribbons were correct, or how to get a proper military haircut, how to wear the uniform or how to handle a weapon. There were people out here already who could do that. I wanted to work from the inside and find a way to make the writers, director and actors really understand what it’s like to soldier. As I said, I wasn’t having much luck. People said…you know, we’ve made war movies for years and did just fine without you, so take a hike. I had trouble making them see that there could truly be a significant difference and it would make for a better movie or TV show. Then I ran into a guy named Oliver Stone who was a combat vet from Vietnam. He understood what I was trying to get done. He knew from his own military time as a combat soldier that you can’t translate the experience believably without living the life in some sort of full-immersion training regimen. He let me do it my way on Platoon. When we eventually won four Academy Awards, including Best Picture, I began to find a little more receptive attitude with people. The rest is history, I guess.

JRH: Now, I’m just going to run down a list here…and I’m omitting a lot: “Born on the Fourth of July”, “JFK”, “The Last of the Mohicans”, “Forrest Gump”, “Starship Troopers”, “Saving Private Ryan”, “The Thin Red Line”, “Tigerland”, The Great Raid”, “Tropic Thunder”… the list goes on and on. These are some tremendous films and you’ve had a hand in all of them. Which one did you most enjoy working on?

DD: Well, I’ll always have a soft spot for “Platoon” as it kick-started my career and gave credibility to my methods. I’m also partial to a few others. I loved working on “The Beast” with Kevin Reynolds. It was a story about Russian tankers in Afghanistan and we shot it with real captured Soviet tanks in Israel. It was something like being Erwin Rommel for a while. And I love working with Steven Spielberg and Tom Hanks so I’m quite fond of the experiences on “Saving Private Ryan” and “Band of Brothers”. I guess from the perspective of satisfaction derived as a Military Advisor, I’d have to single out “Band of Brothers”. It took us a full year to get that done and because of the training we gave the guys, we stayed in character as a WW II airborne infantry company the whole time. I was filling some mighty big boots following in the footsteps of Major Dick Winters, but it was nice to be the second guy in command of a second Easy Company for an entire year. It’s really hard to play favorites when I’m searching around in the memory banks. Every project has its merits, its personalities and its wild experiences. They all add up to a hell of a ride for an old military guy.

JRH: Speaking of (the HBO miniseries) “Band of Brothers,” many of our readers will recognize you from your fantastic portrayal of Colonel Robert Sink. You were also working as an advisor on the series…

DD: Thanks for the kind words about my portrayal of Col. Bob Sink. It was an honor that few actors get to bring a real, legendary character to life on screen. And that brings me to a word or two about my humble efforts as an actor. You’ve probably noted that I tend to double-dip in many of my projects as both Military Advisor and actor in one role or another. I never started out to be an actor, farthest thing from my mind early on…but Oliver Stone had a different view. He watched me training troops and decided it would be effective if I could bring that sort of professional military persona to the screen. So, I became Captain Harris, the Bravo Company Commander, in “Platoon”. I was scared shitless when we started shooting scenes with me and pros like Tom Berenger, Willem Dafoe, Charlie Sheen, Johnny McGinley and others but I just did what I would do in real life and Oliver loved it. That was the start of it all and now I really enjoy it. I think I’m probably the most typecast guy in Hollywood and that’s OK…but one of these days I’d like to stretch a little. Maybe someone out there will give me a shot at the homosexual hairdresser role…but I’m not holding my breath. So far I think I’ve played everything military from a senior sergeant to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. When I do military roles on screen, I see it as just another high-profile opportunity to give audiences a factual look at a professional military guy.

JRH: Well, it has always come across. Let me tell you, Dale, “Band of Brothers” was, in my opinion, the most important thing to come out of this town in the last twenty years. Airing, as it did, during a very dark time in our nation’s history, I believe it helped lift people’s spirits by illustrating the courage and sacrifice of the people who serve our country. Is this a common sentiment among fans of the series?

DD: That series really hit an emotional note with viewers. It’s probably one of our best known efforts in the WWII genre and fans of the series are both legion and fanatically loyal. To address your question about it being aired in a dark time in our nation’s history, I guess that likely had something to do with it. It’s hard to say. Certainly my experience leads me to believe that well-made and effectively presented World War II films, mini-series or TV shows are likely to get good reception from worldwide audiences practically anytime. If there’s a war movie sub-genre that you can take to the bank, it’s likely something based in World War II. That was the last military struggle where so much was at stake and both the bad guys and the good guys were clearly identifiable and unambiguous. You don’t have the blame-game political machinations, political correctness or ideology and cultural elements involved as you do with so many modern conflicts. It was a simpler time and the conflict was fairly black and white. For some elements of the fan base for “Band of Brothers”, I think that was both refreshing and reassuring. We may be in a similar position right now with all our economic and geopolitical woes. That’s part of the reason I’m getting ready to do another World War II D-Day film that I think will be very well received. In fact, I’m hoping it will do for the 82^ND Airborne Division what “Band of Brothers” did for the 101^st Airborne. We’ll talk some more about that later if you want.

JRH: Absolutely. First, I’ve always wanted to ask you about this: you often run a “boot camp” for the actors you’re working with. Have you gotten any particularly good results with any actors?

DD: I don’t “often” do it, I always do it unless the Producers adamantly refuse and that usually doesn’t stop us either as the actors nearly always demand the experience. After “Platoon” for which I spent three weeks in the Philippine jungles with the cast making them live the life of combat soldiers 24/7, and after which we got such phenomenal, convincing performances out of them, my so-called “boot camps” became de rigeur on all war films; whether I did them or not. I’d guess we’ve put about a thousand performers through the full-immersion field training at this point and they all seem to point to it as the highlight of their experience; something that taught them a whole lot more than acting techniques. I hope that’s true because that’s what it’s designed to do. I won’t bore you with a lot of military leadership philosophy here, but in broad strokes I’m more interested in getting to a performer’s heart and mind than I am his body. Sure, we teach them by doing how to look and act like a field soldier, how to handle the weapons, equipment and their bodies so they look convincing on the screen, but that’s really a small part of the equation. What I want them to understand is how real soldiers rely on each other, how a unit functions above and beyond the concerns of any one member, how there are things in the military mind-set that make a mission more important – more worthy – than any one individual. I want them to understand the concepts of comradeship, service and sacrifice from first-hand experience. Now that’s a tough lesson for young actors full of ego and self-importance who grow up in pursuit of success or notoriety thinking the sun rises and sets on their ass and their ass alone. I understand that and it’s one of the reasons we make our “boot camps” so physically rugged and so mentally demanding. In essence, we do what the real military does. We tear them down and build them over again in the right mind-set. I’ll let the record speak here, but there’s no doubt it works. Their perspectives and performances alter and improve radically. It’s rugged – some would say brutal – but it works. If it didn’t we wouldn’t be allowed or encouraged to do it.

And here’s an interesting sidelight to the whole boot camp question. Most people don’t know that we usually train a unit of enemy forces at the same time we’re training the good guys. It’s always been my opinion that you ruin the effect – diminish the jeopardy – if you field a bunch of clueless extras to play the enemy in war movies. In the real world our enemies have never been cartoon characters and they shouldn’t be portrayed that way. Over the years we’ve trained units of German and Japanese soldiers, NVA and VC forces, Mujahideen resistance forces, Cubans, Native American warriors and a bunch more. It always pays huge dividends in how the combat scenes look. 

–

JRH: You recently finished work on “The Pacific” which follows the Marines in their battles with Imperial Japan. What battles can we expect to see?

DD: This new HBO miniseries is really close to my heart as a Marine. It follows my old outfit – the 1st Marine Division – through all of its major battles in the Pacific campaigns of World War II. We follow three major characters – one from each of the division’s rifle regiments, 1st Marines, 5th Marines and 7th Marines – from the opening salvos at Guadalcanal, re-fitting in Australia after the Solomons Campaign, on to Cape Gloucester on New Guinea, to Peleliu and then on to Okinawa and back home at war’s end. 

JRH: How would you compare this series to “Band of Brothers”?

DD: “The Pacific” is presented in the same ten-part format as “Band of Brothers” and I think it will prove to be just as popular as the ETO series…especially among Marines and veterans of the Pacific Theater of Operations. That said, it’s very different from “Band”. It’s as different as World War II in the Pacific was from World War II in Europe. It’s much darker and more brutal but that was the nature of fighting on those Pacific islands. Just ask any veteran for confirmation of that. Tom Hanks who is one of our Executive Producers likes to say it will take the audience on a brutal journey to hell and back; the same sort of journey that was experienced by the men who fought the real battles. I think he’s right on the mark with that. From a personal perspective as the Senior Military Advisor, it was an honor and a real treat to command a unit of World War II Marines – actors and special ability extras – for a full year. As we did with Band of Brothers, we stayed in character the entire time. And the training in the jungles of Far North Queensland, Australia was really rugged. I don’t think any of the guys will ever forget that. 

JRH: When can we expect to see it?

DD: We’re finishing post-production on “The Pacific” right now. HBO tells me they plan to air it beginning early in 2010. I’m trying to get them to do an exclusive preview at the traditional home of the 1st Marine Division just down the road at Camp Pendleton.  

JRH: Outstanding. I’d like to change gears here for a second… One of the things that drives me insane, and I’m sure I’m not alone in this, is when a film or television show screws up the military stuff. For example, simple things like uniforms. Nothing takes me out of a scene faster than realizing that some actor’s rank insignia is upside down or a “Marine” is saluting indoors, uncovered, etc. Tell our readers a bit about exactly what it is you bring to a production as a military advisor and why it’s important that Hollywood get it right. 

DD: Well, you’re getting to the very heart of my philosophy as a Military Advisor and filmmaker here. For years there was a sort of arrogant attitude on the part of a lot of filmmakers that audiences didn’t know or care what was real about war or the military, so they’d willingly suspend their disbelief to accept whatever the writers or directors saw fit to present. That mind-set was ignoring a couple of facts that I quickly recognized. First of all, entire generations of Americans – but very, very few filmmakers – had personal experience with the military through the draft that lasted right up through the mid-70’s. Secondly, we live in a media-saturated society where news footage or live feeds from battlefields around the world show potential audiences what the real military, real conflict looks like. Ignore that and you’ve got what the psycho-babblers call “cognitive disconnect.” People watch the nightly news and see what real soldiers in real combat look like and then you want them to give you twenty bucks to see make-believe soldiers doing something that looks entirely different? Won’t work…and no marquee star or powerhouse director is going to make it work. It goes against human nature. I started thinking about this on a minor-league level early in my efforts to get into the business as a Military Advisor. I’d had the same experience you talked about, you know, ribbons worn wrong, bad haircuts, sloppy salutes and all the inaccuracies that piss us military veterans off so badly when we see them on screen. That led me to wonder why filmmakers got these simple, easy-to-fix things wrong all the time. And that led me to understand the arrogance situation and that, in turn, led me to develop my own techniques of getting it right from the inside out by training performers and carefully staging combat scenes to reflect the realities or what people were seeing on the nightly news. That’s what I was bringing to the table. It just took a long time and a lot of hard work in proving the point to get filmmakers to eat it. In our business nothing succeeds like success, so as time went on and I became more skilled, producers and directors wanted me at their shoulder as a reality check and they let me do more and more of the staging and coaching for them. It was a process of education for both of us.  

JRH: You are the founder of Warriors, Inc., the military advisory company. What kind of services do you provide? 

DD: I’m very proud of Warriors Inc. I think it’s still the preeminent military advisory service in the industry although there are a lot of imitators out there. That’s OK. Competition just improves the product or service. But we still bring the big stick and produce the most tangible results. We do it differently on a whole different level and bring a huge amount of experience to a project. That said, I recognized early on that relying on standard military fare in movies or TV was not going to pay our bills. There were just too few appropriate projects to keep us busy all the time. So I started chasing films that you wouldn’t think necessarily needed a full-time Military Advisor. We worked very successfully on Last of The Mohicans and Starship Troopers, for instance. I also started looking around to work with established writers, providing them ideas and advice on military-themed projects. And Warriors Inc. has expanded into a lot of different fields these days. We do themed entertainment work such as the Star Trek ride at the Hilton in Las Vegas and the Terminator T-2/3-D rides at Universal Studios in Hollywood, Orlando and Osaka, Japan. We’ve got a Warriors Inc. imprint for publishing now that’s been getting my novels out on the market. We’re doing corporate leadership and team-building seminars based on the military model for major clients around the world. We’ve even consulted on several music videos. And I’m always writing screenplays with military themes, so we stay busy even in the down times. Anyone who’s interested can track all this at www.warriorsinc.com.  

JRH: Do you actively recruit veterans to work for Warriors, Inc.? Or do they find you? 

DD: Warriorsinc.com is probably the first hit for veterans searching for work in showbiz when they get out of uniform. At least it seems to be according to our webmaster. She’s regularly flooded with requests from veterans who want to work as Military Advisors to film and TV and my email gets jammed with similar requests all the time. We’re very selective about the people we respond to because our guys have to be leaders and teachers as well as combat vets. We get a lot of requests from high-speed, low-drag types – Army SF, Rangers, Marine Force Recon, SEALs, etc. – but ironically those guys don’t work out very often. What we need are basic infantry squad leaders who can teach and who can think creatively. That’s hard to find, believe it or not. We need guys who can do extensive research; who can flex and bring their military leadership experience to bear in any uniform we may have to wear for a project. It’s about a hell of a lot more than weapons and tactics. And I run Warriors like a rifle company. We don’t have a CEO or managers. We have a Commanding Officer, an Executive Officer, an Adjutant and Platoon Sergeants. That makes the suits in Sacramento crazy, but it’s the way we operate. I’m a stickler for loyalty and in my outfit loyalty runs up and down the chain of command…with emphasis on the latter direction. I have a staff of good, proven guys – no surprise that most of them are Marines – who always get first shot at projects before we go looking for new Cadre recruits. My XO Mike Stokey, for instance, has been with me now for twenty years and he often runs shows on his own while I’m off working on a different project but it’s always under the Warriors Inc. umbrella. We were young sergeants together in Vietnam and share the same leadership philosophies and filmmaking techniques. In fact, all the Warriors Inc. Cadre guys share those things. We teach them and demand a very high-level of performance. I guess another of the reasons we’re so particular is that I’m not interested in training people who will take what we offer and then quit to form their own military advisory service in direct competition with us. It’s happened before. I’m not brilliant but I’m not stupid either. 

JRH: What advice would you give to an active duty service member that is considering a career in the entertainment industry? 

DD: I get this question all the time and the answer is always the same. First, narrow your focus. What is it specifically you want to do in the entertainment industry? Do you want to be a Military Advisor, a writer, a director, a producer, a cameraman, work in props, special effects, visual effects or what? Most folks coming off active duty have no idea how segmented and synergistic making films is these days. So, I tell them to do a little practical research and a lot of soul-searching to determine what it is they really want to do beyond “make movies.” The next thing I tell them is to get a regular day-job to pay the bills while they work toward cracking the showbiz nut. And in the most discouraging, harsh and realistic terms I can express, I tell them what a bitch-kitty this industry can be for people trying to get a start. Those that survive that usually have the guts, tenacity and determination to make it one way or another. I hate to do it that way, but painting some sort of pie-in-the-sky rosy picture would be a disservice to veterans and I won’t be a part of that. What’s really tough is talking to young vets – men and women – who want to be actors. This business is built on the bones and carcasses of wonderful young people who’ve driven themselves to destruction trying to make it big because they’re focused on stardom and not the creative process. Still, I find it hard to burst a bubble or destroy a dream. I do what I can through contacts and sage advice to give them a little hand up.  

JRH: I’ve read that you’ll be directing your first feature. Earlier, you mentioned something about the 82nd Airborne. Is that the project? Can you tell me about a bit about that? 

DD: Lord knows I’ve been to the finest film school in the world with no classroom time involved. I’ve worked with the best writers, directors and producers in the business – Oliver Stone, John Frankenheimer, Steven Spielberg, Michael Mann, Wolfgang Petersen, Bob Zemeckis, Tom Hanks, Billy Friedkin, Dave Nutter, Roberto Benini and a whole host of others. They were all kind enough to teach me filmmaking on a very practical level while we worked together and now it’s time for me to put that knowledge, skill and creativity to work on my own projects. The first of these is a World War II film that I wrote titled “No Better Place To Die.” It’s a really impactful story of the stand made by elements of the 82nd Airborne Division on D-Day to take and hold open a vital bridge over the Merderet River in Normandy. Had those guys not held that bridge, the break-out from Omaha Beach and subsequent capture of the vital deep-water port at Cherbourg never would have happened. Much of the success of the allied landings on D-Day depended on what these 82nd Airborne paratroops were able to do in the face of astronomical odds. I’m raising money to do it right now and trying not to depend too heavily on traditional sources. I want to do this my way as a writer/director. We’ve got deals in place to shoot it on the actual battlefields in Normandy where the fighting took place in 1944. And it’s going to be a film made by genuine combat veterans. Our line producer Marty Katz, Director of Photography Levie Isaacks and myself as writer/director are all combat veterans, so we’ll bring a very special look and feel to the film. If there are any real money players in your audience, I’m open to make a deal.  

JRH: (laugh) All the real money players read my stuff. “No Better Place to Die” sounds like it will be a great piece and I’ll be looking forward to it. That said, after more than twenty years slugging it out in Hollywood, are there any other goals you want to achieve? 

DD: Well, obviously I want to get this first Dale Dye film made and turn it into a hit. If I can pull that off, I’ve got a slate of three other military pictures already written that I want to do using the World War II film as proof of performance. I want to do a film on the Chosen Reservoir Campaign in Korea, a true-story Vietnam film based on a Combined Action Platoon and a story from Iraq that involves events in Mosul during the first free Iraqi elections. These are all written by me and I’ll want to direct them all. I’m approaching all this in the same way I approached breaking into showbiz in the first place twenty-five years ago: fix bayonets and charge. Remember what I said earlier. You can do a lot of things people tell you are impossible when you’re blissfully ignorant. I’ll get these pictures done through sheer force of will if nothing else.  

JRH: I have no doubt at all about that. Captain Dye, it’s been a real pleasure.