Et Tu, Harry?

I read some sad, sad news on Monday. It seems the director of the latest Harry Potter movie has decided to push the limits of the "13" in the PG-13 rating for Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 1.

If you recall, in the book Harry, Ron and Hermione set off on their own to find the remaining horcruxes and destroy Voldemort once and for all. While they are camping in the woods, Ron comes under some kind of hallucinatory spell in which he sees Harry and Hermione kissing. This throws Ron into a fit of jealousy and he leaves.

Here is how the director saw that scene according to this article:

"Though they were partly clothed, the scene leaves the impression that Radcliffe and Watson are stripped naked. Both wore jeans, while Radcliffe went shirtless and Watson had the front of her torso covered, leaving her back and shoulders bare.

"'I didn't want to put them through complete nudity,' said director David Yates. 'I didn't think it was necessary, because we were going to put some smoke around them' for the scene, which Ron witnesses through a hallucinatory fog.

I wonder if director David Yates knows who will be seeing Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part 1. Or should I say, who will NOT be seeing this movie now that they know about this scene.

Honestly! This is a kids book. I realize the plot has warped into Young Adult territory over Harry's seven years at Hogwarts, and that's absolutely fine. The Harry Potter series is an anomaly in that it appeals to readers from 5 to 105. But Harry Potter is first and foremost a kids book and the movie should be appropriate for kids to see. There are plenty of readers and fans who do not need to see Harry and Hermione in a naked kissing scene.

I'm a 41 year old married mom and I'm one of them. And my 12 year old son is definitely another. He's been looking forward to this movie since he finished reading the book and now I don't know how I can possibly take him to see it.

I might be in the minority with my position. And I haven't actually seen the scene, so perhaps I'm not the best judge. But the director's intentions seem clear according to the article: he wanted the viewers to believe both characters were naked. How is this not pornography?

And don't give me that business that it's a short 15 seconds out of a 120 minute movie. If there's a fly in your soup, you don't eat around it. You send it back!