Historically, in superhero movies, the only way for an actress to get a piece of the action is to be a piece of action. While all these female characters will certainly be smart, capable women, their primary function will still be as the hero's love interest. These perilous roles virtually guarantee that no amount of brains or pluck will be enough for a damsel to save herself from distress; her endangerment serves to ratchet up the tension of the film, which is always nicely resolved with the tender coda of her rescue. ... What does it take to get some superequal rights up in here?

The author does cite the presence of Selma Blair as the "pyrokinetic" romantic interest in Guillermo del Toro's upcoming Hellboy II — essentially the exception that proves the Hollywood rule. Meanwhile, Film Experience proprietor Nathaniel Rogers spent the weekend at New York's Comic-Con, recoiling from the near-second-class citizenry afforded icons like Supergirl and Batgirl while a new Jenna Jameson comic book sold like mad elsewhere in the building. Yes, we know that Elektra and Catwoman tanked, but Halle Berry's folly is no good reason for the long-awaited Wonder Woman movie to eternally inhabit Development Hell — at least not when Marvel will spend $300 million making The Incredible Hulk twice before throwing a quarter of that into spinning off Ellen Page's Kitty Pryde character from X-Men. We're just saying, boys.

• Where Are the Roles for Superwomen? [Vulture]
• Super Women or Cheap Whores? [Film Experience Blog]

In the case of "Hulk," after another writer's treatment was declined in early 2006, Marvel hired Penn, who wrote three drafts over a year. By spring 2007, Penn was about to go off to promote his movie "The Grand," but the studio and the director, Louis Leterrier ("The Transporter"), still felt that the screenplay needed work.

When Norton came in to meet about starring as Banner in April, the film had already been greenlighted and there were just three months before shooting was scheduled to begin, just after Independence Day. But Norton had well-established (if underground) writing experience and strong ideas about how to separate the film from any confusion over its connection to the 2003 Ang Lee version by casting it in a more distinct, starting-over vein like "Batman Begins" or "Casino Royale."

So Norton's initial deal included payment not just for his acting services but for his writing talents too, with his draft contractually stipulated to be turned around in less than a month. As it turned out, Norton delayed work on another screenplay job to do "Hulk," and he continues to tweak the script as principal photography hits its halfway point outside Toronto.

We trust that this explanation clears up any confusion over the Hulk credits. And with Norton's role as writer now so publicly recognized, hopefully he can avoid the eye-rolls of reporters who think he's just another egomaniacal actor bragging about how he came up with all of his own good lines when he claims that "HULK SMASH!" was just something he thought of between takes.

• Norton shows muscle on 'Hulk' (second item) [LAT]