Later movie heroes, such as Dirty Harry, Die Hard or Beverly Hills Cops took the approach of the good guys breaking procedures in order to get around incompetent authorities, and every movie since that time features corrupt or incompetent police department or government that the hero must over rule in order to make justice prevail. These people worry little about social justice or libertarianism. They just want get the villain.
Superhero movies have exploited the incompetent or helpless authorities theme almost uniformly and many such as Robocop have also featured the corrupt influences of big business, and are thus more antiestablishment than the movies that merely portray authorities as incompetent. Still, I have never seen Bat Man, Superman or the Phantom out helping organize labor unions or demonstrating for civil rights in their off hours. Most superheroes live in mansions or work at regular boring jobs when not saving the citizenry. Maybe I haven’t been to the movies enough lately, but maybe you can name a few superhero flicks that do promote a libertarian or anti-establishment point of view?

A fictitious superhero in a cape “demonstrates that private efforts to combat crime and corruption can do a better job than government”? I guess David Friedman and John Hasnas have just been wasting their time, then.

I suppose I base that on what seemed to me the somewhat trivial distinction that he made in his “I will fight crime, but I’m not an executioner” speech, exemplified by his later declaration: “I won’t kill you, but that doesn’t mean I have to save you!” I mean, sure he doesn’t want to be executing criminals himself, but it’s hard to picture him opposing the government if it decided to do so. Yes, I don’t doubt that there is semi-libertarian subtext intended, my only point is that it seems to me to be a fairly superficial one. Unless you agree with all the laws and one’s opposition to police bullying is merely procedural, what does it matter if the law is being enforced by cops or a superhero in a cape? How does Batman fulfill a role any different than that which would be filled by an additional 50 officers? As I suggested, if Batman were truly independent one would think he would have a different standard of justice and ethics which would put him in opposition to the police semi-frequently, which doesn’t seem to be the case when they are shining the bat-beacon every time they need a crime solved. I’ll put it this way: think of the difference between Batman and Robin Hood. Well, I’m probably reading too much into this, but it seems semi-relevant if only because many children are introduced to it, as I was, at a very young and impressionable age.