When promoting the film, he changed his IG bio to direct followers to resources for survivors of domestic violence, hosted open conversations with professionals in the field, and gave CTAs on how to get help and advocate for victims/survivors. And, because Baldoni had intentionally built a community of supporters, his words were met with open, eager ears—and hearts.
Authenticity remains king
This also lends Baldoni some authenticity in the eyes of the viewer that doesn’t exactly match Lively’s journey to becoming one-half of America’s shiny sweethearts.
Lively and Reynolds have served as Hollywood’s proverbial Homecoming King and Queen for over a decade. We watched their fairytale romance (nevermind the plantation wedding) and their family grow to four kids. But the standard to which we hold our stars has changed.
We are fine-tuned to recognize authenticity, and the tools we have to track that have been upgraded massively in the past decade. Social commentary is judge, jury, and executioner.
In this case, Lively’s authenticity was opaque, at best.
Stay flexible
Planning a rollout of a new project takes months of preparation—sleepless nights building narratives, approving artwork, lining up the ideal press coverage—all of which can be upended by an unexpected kink.
When this happens, it’s more important than ever to embrace flexibility and adapt your messaging to the story going on around you instead of becoming the story yourself.
Competing visions
Several of my staff members called out the clear disconnect between the film content and what Lively wanted for herself, goal-wise. It feels like she was attempting to make it a big cultural moment, especially involving her husband and attempting to tie it to Deadpool 3 a al Barbenheimer, as well as keeping the tone of the tour bubbly and lighthearted when the film and book content are anything but. This left audiences feeling blindsided by what can be an incredibly triggering experience for some.
The ethics behind dramatizing trauma
How responsible is the studio, filmmaker, cast, marketing team, etc. for the portrayal of abuse on screen? Where is the invisible line that tells us to stop and make a clear statement about what is true, what is dangerous, and what the viewer should take away? And how do we do it without completely co-opting any other narrative around the film?
The issue here starts in the source material. Hoover’s books are marketed as romance novels, something that doesn’t sit well with a lot of folks. In It Ends With Us, Lily’s relationship is seen as acceptable. The character excuses red flags and the audience could even perceive some of the book and film as romanticizing the “passionate” gestures her abuser is moved to.
