 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
24.190.149.34
Harry doesn't believe in criminals' rights: Miranda, shmiranda: That's a dangerous attitude for a man that carries a gun with all the freedoms police officers enjoy. He doesn't seem to understand the responsibilities.
Harry has no problem in being judge, jury, and executioner: he'd fit in very well on the Rio de Janeiro police force where Death Squads freely exist.
Harry's female partner (the second film?) is portrayed as a stereotypical bumbler: no woman would make it to detective OR officer with that lack of basic police professionalism.
Most of the criminals are stereotypical long-hairs or else minority members. White clean cut perpetrators? They're Mafia...
Few if any violent criminals in these films are short-haired or white, excepting the clean-cut rogue cops in one film.
Great entertainment but ridiculously biased, hence "guilty."
Follow Ups:
You might like it. Not quite at the "Return" level, but something that is bound to touch a human chord.
and all of your other pat generalizations can be easily refuted. And it is telling that the issues raised in the original ring true today: great verbiage on criminals' rights while the victim slowly suffocates to death after being buried alive.
criminals almost all were portrayed as "counter-culture" types. Yes, the arch villain was white, but he was an executive.
Now make a distinction between the Dirty Harry movies and the Bronson (Michael Winner) movies.;0)
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
