A couple of thoughts on some of this:
Firstly, as I think I've mentioned to you before, I think everyone objectifies to a degree, if they are honest about it. Men and women. Personally, I see nothing wrong with some of this in film, especially in appropriate genres. For example, the femme fatale tradition in film noir. She's got to be alluring, so as to lead the PI to his (potential and sometimes actual) doom, right? It's a staple of the genre. Obviously, the genre has been tinkered with and continues to evolve (the femme fatale is no longer necessarily punished for her crimes - see the deliciously subversive The Last Seduction, for instance). And of course, sometimes someone who appears to be a femme fatale is anything but (Chinatown, for instance).
Yes, sometimes objectification is laughable. Michael Bay setting his cameras to leer mode in the Transformers films, for instance. But at the same time, it doesn't just happen with women. I remember watching one of the Twilight films (I forget which one), and the cinema audience burst out laughing at a totally gratuitous - and therefore hilarious - moment when Jacob stripped his shirt off. Any excuse, right? Obviously both of the above examples are crass, but personally, I don't find them offensive. If you'll forgive my use of an obscenity, "whatevs". As my wife always says to me, she has no problem with objectification in any of the James Bond films, because now she gets to see Daniel Craig rise up out of the sea topless in Casino Royale, just as I get to see Ursula Andress emerge from the sea in Dr No. Equal opportunities objectification! ;)
To the main thrust of your article, yes, it's an absolute no-brainer that fully defined and interesting female characters in films are great, and it's wonderful that there are more of them these days. I agree this was out of balance, and is now being addressed. However (you knew there was going to be a "however", I'll bet), sometimes a supporting character just needs to be a supporting character, or the plot loses focus. I have no problems with a "love interest" female character in appropriate films. The Boys in the Boat is a good recent example. For me, the story and context is everything.
The same applies with male love interest characters. We don't really want or need a multi-faceted Eric in The Little Mermaid, which is one of the many reasons why the recent because-we-can Disney live action remake was such a waste of celluloid. Eric (and indeed the princes in Disney princess films in general) are meant to be fairly one-dimensional. They serve a function in the story and I think it's pointless handwringing over the fact that they aren't more fully developed. They don't need to be, because it isn't their story, per se.
Here's where I do agree: For too long, women were often only relegated to these kinds of supporting parts. In fact, old Hollywood did much better with female-driven narratives with complex female characters, as it was a key part of their audience in the 1930s, 40s, and 50s (Gone with the Wind, Brief Encounter, Mildred Pierce, The Wicked Lady, All That Heaven Allows, etc, etc). Alas, that seemed to go out of the window in the 1970s, especially post-Star Wars, and only recently is the ground being regained. This is good news, and personally I'm thrilled to see good stories with women being the primary focus. See below for an example concerning horror protagonists and female film directors, for instance. :)
https://fanfare.pub/the-future-is-female-in-horror-cinema-f5a25a456961