Hollywood challenging traditional gender roles?

I stumbled upon an article titled "What Really Makes Katniss Stand Out? Peeta, Her Movie Girlfriend." This article talks about how the character of Peeta in the movie The Hunger Games does not fit the traditional masculine male opposite the leading female like most in Hollywood blockbusters. In fact, Katniss has the more masculine traits of being "emotionally unavailable, she fights, she kills, etc." Therefore, Katniss is defying the traditional narratives toward girls. In the Hunger Games, she is the heroine and Peeta is the damsel in distress who always needs saving. The article says the following about Peeta: "Peeta is Pepper Potts and Gwen Stacy, helping and helping and helping until the very end, when it's time for the stakes, and the stakes are: NEEDS RESCUE. Peeta is Annie in Speed, who drives that bus like a champ right up until she winds up handcuffed to a pole covered with explosives. Peeta is Holly in Die Hard, who holds down the fort against the terrorists until John McClane can come and find her (and she can give back her maiden name)." So, if Hollywood always has an inclination toward following gender roles, should we consider this a step forward? Having a strong female lead is no doubt a step forward for women, but does this have to come at a cost for the male counterpart? Is this the only way that the female lead can truly be better than the male, by having the "masculine" traits while he has the "feminine" ones?

Here is the link to the article: http://www.npr.org/blogs/monkeysee/2013/11/25/247146164/what-really-makes-katniss-stand-out-peeta-her-movie-girlfriend?utm_content=socialflow&utm_campaign=nprfacebook&utm_source=npr&utm_medium=facebook