What is it that makes this movie get high rates?

I agree with much of what you are saying. One thing I think you should keep in mind, though, is that humans are much different than other animals. we have the ability to have a kind of control that other animals are not capable of having, and the makers of this film are suggesting that we are abusing that power. I agree with them. Instinct is also suggesting that many of the times we think we have control, we really don't, and I agree with that as well.

We are different from other animals. I'm surfing the internet right now. How many other animal species do you know are doing that right now?

Because we are different, we must know we are, and instead of emploiting this dominance (poaching, destroying wildlife habitat for capitalism, etc.), we must rise above our selfishness and be sure to act as protectors. That's not to say it's always wrong to kill animals or build houses.

I disagree with your vision of the movie. It's not a question of god or bad. Civilisation is not presented as bad and nature as good (after all, the violence of Anthony Hopkins never seems pleasant). It's about the fact that we have lost something in the process.
Not human as such but westerners as a modern civilisation.
The psychiatrist played by Hopkins never says "animals are best than us" and he points to Cuba Gooding jr that he was not an ape during these years but "a human being amongst the apes." He never forgot who he was.
Civilisation is not presented as bad (the Cuba Gooding jr character is positive, open minded and, even if he understands Anthony Hopkins, he's always very civilised), and I don't think the movie tries to teach a lesson. But he induce some questions about the civisation others have build for us and the fact we don't control the nature even with our technological achievment. Why can't we decide for ourselves ? Why are our choice supposed to be only defined by selfishness, when selfishness is a product of civilisation ? (No so-called primitive group defines as westerners do the egoism as a natural way of life, or social cohesion would break by itself.)

The Ace of Spade story can't be compared with natural behaviour. The point is that the competition between patients is favorised when there is no reason to. In nature, there is no gratuitous competition. As a matter of fact, in nature, even the most ferocious predators take what they need and let others feed with what 's left. Everyone can have his turn if there's enough food for it, even the weakest. Here, there could be more space. There could be a better way, but what is driving the guardian is not a sense of equality, but just sadism and this thrill to be the one with the power.

As said in the movie, western civilisation could be a virus. Global warming produced by atmospheric pollution in no more a polemic subject for scientists but is as close as possible as a reality. Some scientists says they don't even know if a the process can be stopped.
Well, I hope they are wrong. But surely, there must be something wrong with our way of thinking.
We think people who don't fit in our society are crazy.
Strange because there are a lot of primitive civilisation, in Africa or South America, where the very concept of madness does not exist. Why ? BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE ANY CRAZY PEOPLE. So are people mad because of the civilisation ? Or is it just because there are ethnic groups who have ways to use them as "productive citizen" (shaman, etc.), so those people don't suffer of their mental condition ? Tough one.

You say : "Because there are so many of humans, people tend to make a difference, and they can do that by taking is much as possible to be rich, to have confidence in the future and especially to have sex.
I guess i'm saying is that people are not so different from animals, they are just trying to survive in a different way. "

I agree about the fact we are not so different from animals. But I disagree on crucial matters. If wanting to have enough money to live well is a way of survival, wanting to be rich and to have more money than you can spend, is purely a product of modern civilisation. Wanting to have more than you can spend during your lifetime is not a way to survive. Greed can't be justified because it's natural.