How the CIA Transformed Leonardo DiCaprio, Matt Damon & Tom Cruise into Propaganda Assets
How intelligence agencies use A-list celebrities as propaganda assets to rewrite history and why it matters.
Why Do the Same Actors Keep Selling You Government Fairy Tales?
Ever wonder why it’s always the same handful of actors starring in movies that make the FBI look like saints, the CIA look necessary, and every U.S. war sound like a humanitarian mission?
This isn't a coincidence. It’s a system. And it’s been running so long most people don’t even see it anymore.
The Open Secret: Propaganda Works Best in Plain Sight
Forget the cliche of shadowy CIA handlers whispering in actors’ ears. Real propaganda doesn’t need to hide. It just needs a good press release and some “technical advisors” from the Pentagon.
When the Department of Defense announces it’s helping out on a war movie, that’s not framed as government meddling. Nope, that’s “collaboration to ensure accuracy.” So the press eats it up. Studios love it because cooperation means access to military toys and locations that save millions. And the actors? They’re not getting phone calls from Langley, they’re getting awards season buzz.
The system works for everyone, except the public. They leave the theater believing they’ve glimpsed “Based on a true story" truth, when all they’ve seen is a carefully crafted story designed to rewrite history or create a false reality.
This isn’t entertainment, it’s historical revisionism delivered in Dolby surround, and the credits don’t list the real producers. But they always seem to list one of only a handful of main actors.
These actors are all connected to CAA (Creative Artists Agency) the most powerful talent agency in Hollywood.
You can think of CAA as Hollywood’s version of the State Department. They represent, or have represented, almost every A-lister who lands roles in these government adjacent blockbusters.
Tom Hanks? CAA.
Tom Cruise? CAA.
Leonardo DiCaprio? Connected through LBI and CAA networks.
If the government wants to influence narratives, why waste time bribing individuals when you can cozy up to the agency that controls the pipeline of stars?
CAA packages the actors, directors, and scripts that get greenlit. They’re the middlemen who make sure the right people are in the right projects. And guess what kind of projects get fast-tracked? The ones with Pentagon and CIA support. The ones with “patriotic” storylines that guarantee cooperation, lower costs, and Oscar potential.
It’s not just about who gets the job, it’s about what stories get told, and CAA is the ultimate narrative gatekeeper.
The Roster Of Elite CIA Assets
Below is the leaderboard of actors with the most government funded projects. They have become the intelligence community's most reliable storytellers.
Tom Cruise: The Government's Golden Boy
Top Gun – (U.S. Navy cooperation, 1986) – Recruitment propaganda and glorification of Navy fighter pilots
Top Gun: Maverick – (U.S. Navy cooperation, 2022) – Modernized recruitment push showcasing cutting-edge military tech and patriotism
A Few Good Men – (Marine Corps setting, 1992) – Frames military honor and loyalty as sacred values despite internal corruption
Mission: Impossible – Fallout – (CIA framing, 2018) – Portrays CIA black ops as morally gray but ultimately necessary for global security
Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation – (CIA involvement, 2015) – Legitimizes U.S. intelligence supremacy over rogue international factions
Jack Reacher – (Military Police background, 2012) – Romanticizes the lone military investigator as a justice figure
American Made – (CIA cooperation narrative, 2017) – Softens CIA’s role in drug-running by casting Cruise as a charming rogue
Tom Hanks: The Government Castaway
Apollo 13 - (NASA cooperation, 1995) - American space program heroism
Saving Private Ryan - (DoD cooperation, 1998) - WWII American military valor
Charlie Wilson's War - (CIA cooperation, 2007) - CIA as freedom fighters in Afghanistan
Bridge of Spies - (CIA Cold War framing, 2015) - American moral superiority during Cold War
Captain Phillips - (U.S. Navy cooperation, 2013) - Navy heroism and American maritime strength
The Post - (Pentagon Papers narrative, 2017) - Controlled opposition that ultimately reinforces institutional credibility
Greyhound - (Navy WWII throwback, 2020) - More military valorization
Six major government-aligned films in 25 years. That's not an acting career, that's a psychological operation with an Oscar winner as the frontman.
Leonardo DiCaprio: The Institutional Rising Star
DiCaprio has become intelligence agencies new favorite method for delivering complex political narratives to younger audiences:
J. Edgar - (FBI origins biopic, 2011) - Humanizes the founder of America's domestic surveillance state
The Revenant - (Massive Canadian + U.S. subsidies, 2015) - American frontier mythology
Don't Look Up - (Climate policy allegory, 2021) - Reinforces "trust the experts/institutions" messaging
Killers of the Flower Moon - (FBI origin story, 2023) - FBI as saviors of Native Americans (conveniently ignoring FBI's role in suppressing Native activism)
Notice the pattern? DiCaprio's "prestige" films consistently position federal agencies as either heroic or necessary, even when depicting their historical failures.
Matt Damon: The CIA's Action Hero and Private Ryan himself.
Damon has specialized in making intelligence work look cool and necessary:
Saving Private Ryan - (DoD cooperation, 1998) - WWII American military valor
The Good Shepherd - (CIA history, 2006) - CIA origin story that makes the agency look tragically noble
Green Zone - (Iraq War framing, 2010) - Pentagon-adjacent narrative that criticizes the war while reinforcing intelligence credibility
Jason Bourne Series - (CIA-centered, 2002-2016) - Even when CIA is the "bad guy," the solution is always better CIA oversight, not accountability
Oppenheimer - (Department of Energy cooperation, 2023)
The Bourne films are particularly clever because they allow audiences to feel like they're seeing "anti-establishment" entertainment while reinforcing the idea that intelligence agencies are necessary and just need better management.
How the System Works
This isn't a conspiracy where actors get secret phone calls from Langley. It's much more sophisticated:
Financial Engineering: films with "patriotic" themes get massive tax incentives and subsidies. Actors' agents know which projects will be financially supported.
Access and Authenticity: Want to make a realistic military/intelligence film? You need Pentagon/CIA cooperation for equipment, locations, and technical advisors. That cooperation comes with script approval.
Awards and Prestige: Films that reinforce American institutional mythology consistently get Oscar nominations and critical praise. Actors learn what kinds of roles get them industry respect.
Narrative Shaping: Intelligence agencies don't need to control every detail. They just need to ensure that even "critical" films ultimately reinforce the idea that American institutions are legitimate and necessary.
The Recruitment Pipeline
Without getting into the Hollywood occult conspiracy theory, here's how actors supposedly get pulled into this system:
Phase 1: The Bait - Young actors get offered prestigious, well-funded projects that happen to involve government cooperation.
Phase 2: The Success - Media pushes these films hard, causing them to perform well critically and commercially, making the actor's career.
Phase 3: The Pattern - Agents and producers know this actor is "reliable" for government-friendly projects, leading to more offers.
Phase 4: The Identity - The actor becomes known for "serious, important" films that just happen to consistently support institutional narratives.
Phase 5: The Asset - The actor is now serving as a delivery mechanism for intelligence-approved narratives to millions of Americans.
Why This Matters
These aren't just movies. They are much more than that. They’re narrative creation machines. As sad as it is, movies are the primary way most Americans form their opinions about intelligence agencies, military interventions, government legitimacy, historical events and a whole host of other issues.
When Tom Hanks plays a heroic CIA operative or when Leonardo DiCaprio shows the FBI saving Native Americans from the evil white man, millions of viewers absorb those messages as entertainment. But the cumulative effect is a population that's been conditioned to trust institutions that have repeatedly betrayed that trust.
The children who grew up watching Hanks save Private Ryan are now adults who are more likely to support military interventions.
The moviegoers who saw Damon's complex CIA operatives think intelligence agencies just need better oversight, not abolition.
This is propaganda at its most effective because the audience doesn't realize they're being propagandized.
What You Can Do
Recognize the pattern when you see these actors in new "prestige" projects involving government themes.
Ask questions about why certain narratives consistently get massive budgets and awards while others get ignored.
Follow the money - look up which films received government cooperation and subsidies.
Think critically about whether entertainment that consistently reinforces government legitimacy is really just entertainment.
Support independent filmmakers who aren't dependent on government cooperation and subsidies.
The Bottom Line
Hollywood's biggest stars have become intelligence assets. Through a combination of financial incentives, access, and prestige, actors like Tom Hanks, Leonardo DiCaprio, and Matt Damon have become the most effective propaganda delivery system in American history.
They pretend to make important art. However, they are well aware that they're shaping public opinion.
And millions of Americans are absorbing pro-government narratives disguised as entertainment, never realizing they're being recruited too.
Have you noticed these patterns in other actors' filmographies? What other Hollywood "coincidences" make more sense when you follow the government money?
The entertainment industry doesn't want you connecting these dots. Subscribe for more investigations into cultural manipulation and narrative engineering, and share this with anyone who thinks Hollywood and Washington operate independently.
What do you make of the more “out there” claims regarding Hollywood? For instance, Isaac Kappy made the claim that these stars, particularly Tom Hanks, are being blackmailed just like the politicians; do you think there’s any truth to these claims? (The others in this article aren’t much better.)