DirtyHarry

Spoilers ahead - A lot of Objectivist and pro-capitalist blogs and forums really seem to have a problem with this movie that I just don't get at all. This movie had no coherent central moral question I could find. Regardless of the ethical stature of the original film it did have a clearly stated moral problem - human violence technologically advanced - as well as a story which artfully developed this problem with a clear and dramatic threat from the alien community. The remake has a problem - people exist, or maybe we're violent, or we eat too much or we have broken homes or well something I guess. We might spread our problems or not or something, and Klaatu is here to warn us, or kill us, or warn us we will be killed or something? And the solution is the bratty kid calls Klaatu a him not an 'it'? What!?!? Where is the message? I didn't see one, environmentalist or otherwise. To give an example, this is actual dialog as closely as I remember - John Cleese - But Klaatu, we only advance and grow when faced with true existential threats,like the one your people have given us, surely you only advanced in a similar way. Klaatu - Yes. John: Then let this be the moment when we rise to a knew level of rationality. Klaatu: No. ?! Also, John Cleese has a Noble Prize for his work in "Biological Altruism". ?? How does anything about this movie make enough sense for anyone to disagree with it?