Dirty Harry. Jake Van Dorn (GeorgenC. Scott) swings into action in Hardcorenwhen he sees his runaway daughternin a pornographic film and resolvesnto find her and bring her home. Farnfrom being nihilistic or antisocial, thencumulative effect of vigilante filmsnsince Dirty Harry has been tonstrengthen respect for the family as thenorganizing force of society. Their heroesnare not steely-eyed at home, onlynin the streets.nFar from painting a “black-andwhite,nheroes-and-villains” picture ofnsociety, these films seldom fail to pointnout the similarities between the vigilantenand his adversaries. In the firstnplace, both operate outside the law.nBut filmmakers use other ways as well,noften quite consciously.nThe writers of Dirty Harry, for example,nwere very careful to point outnthe similarities between Harry and thenScorpio Killer. Both are unmarriedn(Harry widowed), each resorts to subterfugenin order to entrap the other,neach stalks his victim(s) methodicallynand emohonlessly, and each spends anconsiderable amount of time on rooftopsnor high floors of buildings. Thenimplied comparison is taken to annextreme in Eastwood’s one criticallynacclaimed crime movie. Tightrope.nLeftist critics have accused all thesenmovies of being right wing, but thenamount of overt political content innthese films is actually pretty small;nselective quotation by disingenuousncritics make them seem far more polemicalnthan they really are. Furthermore,nmost of these same critics havenshown a corresponding streak of “anticonservatism,”nas in the following bynPauline Kael, in her review of PeternYates’s Eyewitness (screenplay by StevennTesich): “Still, about midway, Inthought, I wish Tesich would get overnhis love affair with America, or at leastnstop trying to authenticate the Americanndream.” As if that weren’t blatantnenough, Robin Wood recently callednStar Wars and Rocky “precisely thenkind of entertainment that a potentiallynfascist culture would be expected tonproduce and enjoy.”nIn point of fact, vigilante films go tongreat lengths to establish liberal credentialsnby showing the deleteriousneffects of vigilantism on the hero, hisnfamily, and society. Clearly their creatorsndon’t advocate that audiences gonoutside the law to seek justice; theynmerely want fairer and more rigorousnenforcement of the laws that are alreadynon the books. Far from “propagandiz[ing]nfor para-legal police powernand vigilante justice,” as Kael said ofnDirty Harry, vigilante films are notncalls to action, they are laments.nThere is always a sting of sadness innthe ending of a vigilante film, as theninjured but indomitable hero goesnback to a broken home to await thennext outrage against society. Thesenfilms lament the moral dissolutionntheir makers see in the society aroundnthem. They lament the slaughter ofnAmerica’s children in the schools andnon the streets. They lament the fearnand anger in which ordinary peoplenspend their lives due to rampant streetncrime. They lament the interferencenof nitpicking civil libertarians whonblock effective law enforcement. Andnthey lament, above all, the dissolutionnof family, neighborhood, and communitynties which help make crime sonprevalent and difficult to stop.nIf vigilante films and their filmmakersnsometimes seem angry, perhapsnthey have a right to be, even if thatnright happens to be one of the few notnsanctioned by the American pseudointelligentsia.nIn this opinion, the filmmakersnare clearly in sync with thenfeelings of their audience. MichaelnWinner, director of Death Wish, hasnsaid:nThe picture was a release; itnshowed somebody doing whatneverybody else is too afraid tondo themselves. Don’t tell menthat if there was an item inntomorrow’s paper about a mannwhose wife and daughter hadnbeen raped and killed, and whonwent out and shot thenattackers, the whole countrynwouldn’t be delighted. I wouldntoo; and all the liberals whonwrite this ass-hole nonsensenabout what a fascist picturenDeath Wish was, I believe theynwould as well.nThe box-office grosses of these oftennpoorly made films and the reaction tonthe Bernhard Goetz incident attest tonthe accuracy of Winner’s comment.nRelevant as they are to the times,nthese films are telling a story that is bynno means new. Vigilante stories have annnlong history, from Robin Hood andnthe Scarlet Pimpernel through thenfilmic exploits of the Lone Ranger andnZorro and the comic-book adventuresnof Batman, Superman, Spiderman,nand the like. Much of the most popularnAmerican detective fiction has featurednvigilantism, in characters such asnSam Spade, Phillip Marlowe, andnLew Archer. Such stories and charactersnseem to be most popular whennsocial cohesion is weakest. The lawlessnessnand social chaos of WeimarnGermany, for example, provided thencontext for such films as Fritz Lang’snDr. Mabuse, Der Speiler {Dr. Mabuse,nthe Gambler) and M and GerhartnLamprecht’s Emil und die Detectiven{Emil and the Detectives). Thatnvigilante films are so popular nownwould seem to be considerable causenfor concern.nVigilante films say it in many differentnways, but they all say the samenthing: The social order in America isnin such a mess that there is no assurancenof justice to be found by workingnwithin the system. This is not thenplace to discuss the accuracy of thatnperception, nor its causes. Both sidesnof the controversy will be happy to trotnout the usual suspects. It is, however,nimportant to note that when the publicnbegins to show such a monumentalnlack of faith in their country’s leadershipnas is implied in these films, thatncountry would seem to have a considerablenproblem on its hands. Andnwhen popular television series such asnMagnum P.I., The Equalizer, HillnStreet Blues, and The A-Team providenweekly lessons in that message, you’dnthink even the dullest members of thenAmerican nomenklatura would takennotice and begin to question the directionntheir fellows have been taking thencountry for the last 25 years or so. Butnthey haven’t, preferring merely to deridenthese films’ massive audiences asnstupid, insecure male chauvinists.nMaybe they’re right. Maybe Americannfilm audiences are stupid, insecurenmale chauvinists. Maybe filmgoersnwould be better off watching Kiss ofnthe Spider Woman and all the othernmasterpieces that make the critics’ annualn”ten-best” lists. StiU, that doesn’tnchange anything. If a large number ofnAmericans have lost faith in their society’snability to police itself, that’s anpretty big story which we can’t affordnAPRIL 1987/47n