: There are already two women who play important roles in the story, Eowyn and Galadriel. Why does Arwen's role need to enlarged? Is it to attract more young men and women to the movie,or is it sign of our socio-political times? Probably both.

The benefit is (I think) immediately obvious. Frodo is going to be a somewhat less important character then Aragorn, and a general audience, unfamiliar with the novels as we (in the words of Master Gandalf) "learned lore masters" will simply love the fact that not only does he win the day on Pellenor Feilds, and regains his kingship, but he does it with the love of his life by his side, who just happens to be a fearless, super-women who can weild a sword and ride a horse to match the man of her dreams.

Having Arwen meet up with Aragorn and Frodo is actually a great introduction for the character, and within only a few moments, the audience can understand that there is more to these two then the simple comeraderie among warriors. It gives her a depth (she is part of the search for Frodo) and a justification for being present in following scenes. Plus, since star-power will be part of the draw, you've got to get her in early, and use her as much as possible, or you lose that portion in this first movie (I don't think she's going to join the Fellowship, which the first movie will encompass).

Also, PJ is staying true to the story by keeping Eowyn with Faramir (a nice touch from Tolkien as well), and Aragorn with Arwen. He is also staying true to the story by not putting Aragorn and Galadrial together (and, oh how we would rail against that!!!). So, all in all, (and while I would prefer Mr. Martinez's mini-series) this is not a bad choice, as it is the least Cinderella-esque, while still having Aragorn and Arwen together.

I don't agree with it, but from a box-office draw perspective, and staying as true to the story as possible, it does make sense.

-Rob