@Cas: That it’s a broad-brush response is exactly what my objection was – it’s a little too broad, and even my (minor) revision makes a huge difference to that, removing (frankly silly) false positives like WALL-E and March Of The Penguins, without causing any false negatives that I’ve been able to think of: that’s a refinement, and I can’t understand why it’d be objectionable.

I’ve no problem with known-imperfect models, but some of the holes in the original Bechdel test (which, of course, was never designed to be used this way) are laughable.

Perhaps I’m just biased because to me it’s obvious that women are underrepresented in film, and I have difficulty getting into the mindset of the folks that the use of the test attempts to persuade.