Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Teflon Billy" data-source="post: 1286680" data-attributes="member: 264">..and that makes absolutely zero difference to what I said, or the point I was making when I said it. I was talking about the way things are, not the root causes of the situation..I have nothing but love for the Eowyn character. Her killing of the Witch King was the only point in the movie where the women attending the showing I was at audibly cheered. Which (again, anecdotally) reinforces my suspicions that women won't cheer for male heroism (at least not in the numbers they will for female heroism, or in the numbers which men will cheer for male heroism).Which is why, thanks to the miracle of test marketing and demographic-driven rewrites, we get...Yup. But none of that involves her being as physically combative/active as a man...which is what tests well with the modern female demographic.Tending to the wounded and being "inspirational" does not get women into a theatre, so we get a rewrite with Arwen as the new Glorfindel.Yes...and? I thought Galadriel's role from Book to Film was largely unchanged.Which would probably be fine were we not watching the film adaptation of "Lord of the Rings" but rather "The Silmarillion".What do you mean "in the end"? Decisions to alter source material to appeal to demographic target-markets are made well before "The End" and the decisions made are economically sound more often than not.</blockquote>