jeśli twoje dziecko najbardziej na świecie kocha filmy, a ty najbardziej na świecie kochasz swoje dziecko, to kup mu cinema speculation - w świątyni, rozdział 03:

If Dirty Harry were a boxer it would be Mike Tyson in his knockout prime.
I challenge you to program a double feature of practically any of the great films from the seventies and put them against a double feature with Siegel’s picture.
Dirty Harry will wipe them off the screen and knock them the fak out!
Boom!
But as opposed to all the Dirty Harry wannabes (and that includes all the Dirty Harry sequels) there remains a disturbing quality to Siegel’s creation. Both the film and the character of Callahan.
While Dirty Harry isn’t a racist film, or quite the fascist film its critics at the time claimed, it is reactionary.
Aggressively reactionary.
And it promotes a reactionary view, sometimes as subtext and sometimes as text. Because the audience the film sought to excite held a view of the rapidly changing society around them that was bordering on future shock.
Dirty Harry gave voice to their fears, told them they were right to feel that way, and gave them a .44 caliber hero who would fight for them. This element would disappear from the Harry sequels. Because while this element was why it connected so well with its audience, it’s also what put the film in the crosshairs of social commentators.