I'm not sure what was your intended use of the word "either", but I'd be careful calling movies like Maverick "US propaganda". Maverick is a privately produced movie that appeals to the American national sentiment, and the world's fascination with the US Military, but it's NOT government propaganda. The US Military was happy to see the movie, obviously, and fully supported its development with consulting services and realistic equipment, as it is generally the case with movies that help their struggling recruiting efforts, but they were not the reason the movie exists.
Battle at Lake Changjin was literally commissioned by CPP's government, literally including its department of propaganda and is part of a concerted government effort.
Also have in mind that the Chinese government imposes actual bans on content, such as "can't have this and that flag, or this or that line, or your movie can't be shown in China" in a way similar to Vietnam and Philippines. Actual Chinese propaganda movies can be shown in the US - they don't get shown often, if at all, because nobody wants to see them.
Movies like Maverick are indeed propaganda. In exchange for all that fancy military hardware, the Navy was able to exercise editorial control over the script. In fact ‘ Jerry Bruckheimer, a top producer, said that “Top Gun” and 2001’s “Pearl Harbor” simply wouldn’t exist without military approval.’
You're just confirming what I said: "In exchange for all that factory military hardware". But we're conflating multiple uses of the word "propaganda" here.
Sure, the movie advocates the interests of the military, that's why they accepted to share the equipment, and they wouldn't share if the movie was against their aims. In the US, you can create movies for or against the aims of the government. Private initiative here was seizing an opportunity to do business with the government and pay less for realism.
These two movies wouldn't exist without military approval due to their planned use of military resources for realism/quality. It's a business deal to get low cost, top quality props. Have you seen Maverick? It looks awesome, even if you disagree with the theme. Actually, getting approval from the military is a good thing for the business purpose of the movie, it gives the movie credibility. If I was creating a movie about military success, I'd beg the military to approve it formally!
But in reality, the movie wouldn't exist if the filmmakers hadn't had the idea to produce it, rather than a government commissioning a literal propaganda movie to further their aims. It's a somewhat subtle, but major difference.
We need to immediately end the false moral equivalency between China and the US. It's very easy to come with a fallacious argument and say "it's all the same here as it is there". It's not. Go create a major blockbuster movie in China documenting the government's failures like, let's say, the old "Born on the 4th of July" with the same Tom Cruise and see what happens.
Battle at Lake Changjin was literally commissioned by CPP's government, literally including its department of propaganda and is part of a concerted government effort.
Also have in mind that the Chinese government imposes actual bans on content, such as "can't have this and that flag, or this or that line, or your movie can't be shown in China" in a way similar to Vietnam and Philippines. Actual Chinese propaganda movies can be shown in the US - they don't get shown often, if at all, because nobody wants to see them.