It's one of those essays that sounds deep, but I am questioning exactly how deep it really is. Oh well, I am still questioning then.
His philosophy is a prism--like analyzing a story in terms of Jungian archetypes, or a picture in terms of phallic imagery. There isn't a falsifiable theory in there anywhere. Yes this applies to Freud too, which is why his ideas have largely been discredited and ignored in mainstream psychology for years.