Inner life lack ( review by someone bored at the film)

[A.E.B.Bevan at open.ac.uk]

This review is on SALON online magazine by someone who thought the 
film is wretched and craven.

Edis

See:
http://www.salon.com/sex/turn_on/2001/11/29/harry/index.html

Harry Potter doesn't get "Blue Velvet"
The boy has no profound psychosexual life, which keeps the film from 
being dangerous -- and important. 
By David Thomson Nov. 29, 2001 

Text includes>>>
As I sat beside a merry child -- my own -- at "Harry Potter and the 
Sorcerer's Stone," sinking deeper into despond and boredom, I tried 
to fathom why the film was so empty, and so indifferent to the magic 
it kept blathering about. 

Now I can imagine the parents among you gasping in affront at the 
very suggestion that a Harry Potter film should be as loaded with sex 
(or psycho-sex, or mythic yearnings) as an episode from "Friends." ...
(snip... To which I would reply, in brief, that literature, movies, 
myth and the possible enlightenment of our children one day are all 
far more important than two and a half hours in which weary parents 
may reckon that all is safe and secure. 

I am not hugely impressed by J.K. Rowling's books, though they are 
immeasurably more interesting and potent than this wretched, craven 
film. And since, for this moment, few things loom larger in the 
imaginations of our children, this protest is worthy and important. 
We deserve better. Our children have to have something more 
compelling. The only true measure of greatness in Harry Potterism 
is .... whether young minds are formed, advanced and imperiled by its 
ideas. For growing up has to be dangerous. 
<<<<<end extracts.