In the longer version of this article, I quoted your site as evidence I wasn't the only person who thought Elizabeth was terrible.

The circle is now complete.

Can't quite agree with River Tam's inclusion, since she's programmed to save herself via extreme ass-kicking in the movie and her role is generally balanced out by other ass-kickers, BUT Elizabeth Swan is awful, awful, awful. Awful. Awwwwwful. As in, filled with awful. She was just barely tolerable in the first movie, but each attempt to make her more 'feisty' made her more annoying.

That's exactly why I would include River. Almost nothing about her is her. She was abducted, tortured and - as you said - programmed to do what she does because she had the misfortune to be born highly intelligent. There's no work, art, or skill in what she does, it was all given to her. There's no feminist there there. And while she saved herself via extreme ass kicking in the movie, she does spend most of the series as the damsel in distress.

I would disagree with River's inclusion because she is balanced out by the other female characters. If she were the only woman who kicked ass, that would be different.

I also disagree with the inclusion of Eowyn because she was not actually added in by Hollywood. If they had at least compared and contrasted her role in the books I would have felt better about it. No one has to like Tolkien, but let's not pretend his characters were created by Hollywood.

I think River is just another in the Joss Whedon series of young girl characters who are 'unexpectedly' the most dangerous people around.

Buffy/Faith/River/Dolls from Dollhouse start out that way, but then we also have Willow/Fred going from cute bookish librarian types to sexy high-powered Big Bads of their series' in their corsets and weird make-up. Sometimes they are mentally delicate or broken and that fragility is supposed to make everyone protective of them even though they usually don't need protecting (Willow/Fred/River/Dolls).

None of them have agency, though. There's always either someone telling them what to or trying to rein them in lest their use of their own power/sexuality/violence backfires and bring them harm. I don't see it as subversive nor do I see it as feminist. I'm sure his heart is in the right place, but that isn't enough.

While I see your point, I don't think you are quite giving Joss a fair shake. Where does Zoe fit in to that equation? And although Buffy starts out that way, does she really finish that way?

Cool article! But not because I actually think it makes its case. I liked it for the ideas and questions it brings up. Say what you will about George Lucas, for example, he envisioned this Star Wars saga a millenia ago! Padme was cetrianly not inserted into the franchise. Heck, by then Star Wars fans were so hard core, he could rely solely on them (and looks like he will for this last movie…). Joss said he had to work hard not to make either the movie or the show not solely about River (I forget which); he loves this character a lot. I’ve read and/or seen things about Tim Burton and the writing team of POTC. So I don’t think the argument flies. The only example that could possibly pass muster is the LOTR one, not because of the movie –since it was based on a book – but more because if you can believe one of the posters below the article, it was said Tolkien inserted her only after his niece complained there were no women.
I thought she was going to use someone like Rachel, from the new Batman series, or the queen from 300, who the creators have gone on record to say exactly what she is accusing these movies of. And if we’re talking about blockbusters, Serenity can totally be ruled out, since it did pretty dismally at the box office, and the series didn’t even make it to season 2.
I would not put River Tam and Selena Kyle on that list; but I am not surprised by it either. Are they heroes proper? I don’t think anyone would say yes. But I find their actions heroic because of all the things they were up against. They are both basically wack jobs, but struggle to retain some semblance of normacy and individuality. For River, every day is a struggle. She if facing near-herculean odds to regain some sort of balance. She feels everything! I think that would drive someone else totally insance, but by the end of the movie, you can tell that she is starting to regain control. Senela does this, all in one compressed movie. She has been psychologially abused by her mom, various boyfirends, the Penguin, and to a certain extent Batman. But she succeeds. And I think that was a huge omission not to accurately depict the end of Batman Returns. She ends in victory (or else they wouldn’t have been talking about a sequel forever!).
But I bring them up because I wonder if we (generic we) have all been so bludgeoned by the gross stereotyping of the past that we can’t tolerate ever anymore a heroine who isn’t perfect. River and Selena are flawed, brutalized, women who can still find themselves and do heroic or anti-heroic things. I wonder if we have room for flawed heroines. I am happy to see Ripleys, and Laras, and Trinitys. But I still think there are room for more flawed heroines too. Many of the great male figures in movies are revered by guys but they are not heroic in the least, unless looked upon in a particular context . I don’t want to see one for the other, I want to see both – especially when they are fleshed out and well done.
Oh, I also think it’s kind of dangerous if they are not. While in real life a perfect heroine is awesome, without flaws, characters become quite stale in fiction. And some of the most memorable characters are the most flawed.

I thought the article was great. You can quibble with individual examples if you like, but as examples of things that go wrong with "strong female characters" it's a hit out of the park.

The feisty/ass-kicking woman who winds up having to be repeatedly rescued. The femme fatale. The woman whose motivation for heroism comes from her relationship to a man.

I've seen these tropes a million times, and just because a given example happens to star a great actress or be written by an author I hugely admire or appears in the middle of an otherwise fabulous movie is no reason no to call them on it.

I was particularly glad to see River Tam on the list, as I just finished watching _Firefly_, and her lack of agency and general lack of humanity--she's written as almost inhuman--drove me nuts. A heroine that flawed only works if she's the main character--and in _Firefly/Serenity_, much though I enjoy the series, she's a distant second to the flawed hero Mal, who is the start of the show.

I agree with every word in the discussed article.
It amazes me how high Firefly/Serenity is rated on feminist blogs, yet, most of episodes and the movie don't even pass Mo Movie Measure. JW didn't bother to write a conversation between two women to promote the story.
Well, yeah, it has racially diverse cast and a lot of women. But that's about it. It's stil a story of a priviledged white straight able-bodied dude. Other characters merely exist to promote that story. Zoe is supposed to be second in command but I've never heard her commanding once. Both she and her husband have surname Washburne, so why is 'Wash' his nickname?
Jayne is a worthless mysoginist waste of space who thinks it's completely appropriate to trade women for guns.
Positive portrayal of sex work is a good idea, but Inara was for the eye candy. She's supposed to be trained for her job, but as soon as she encounters a jerk client, she has to be rescued by Mal. More than once. And she's called 'whore' more times than I can take.
The question that bugged me all the time - if sex work is godly and honorable, why don't men do it? There's Kaylee, she's so emancipated, she likes sex, but never buys it. There's not one woman who has sex just because she likes it. Zoe uses sex to control her husband, Kaylee - to explore the spaceship, Inara - as a job.
The first we see River Tam, she's naked, powerless. She's always taken care of by a man, so we could see what a loving caring human being he is.
We see Mal naked in one episode, too, but it's juxtaposed completely different, he is in control of his body and of his crue.
'Our Mrs. Reynolds' was more than insulting. Oh, look at the child molestation/human traficking victim being a fraud. Cos women always lie about rape and abuse and we have never ever seen that on TV.
Kaylee is threatened with rape to motivate Simon. Hearing explicit details how exactly a rapist is going to rape is just what every rape survivor needs to hear on TV.
I liked Shepherd Book so much, but it's not like he had to do something. He was just there, token wise old man of color, to be smart, to give advice and to die so that white male lead would have something to suffer about.