Today I'm going to talk about the conflicts, the film itself, and why I think this book/film seemed destined to create friction.
Listen at the podcast providers of your choice.
The ease of access to "insider information" in the entertainment industry is both a boon for publications eager for drama-related clicks and a minefield when it comes to putting together a solid picture of what did or didn't happen during a movie's production. And this year's crown champion of production drama was It Ends With Us, the highly anticipated film adaptation of Colleen Hoover's best seller of the same name starring and produced by Blake Lively and co-starring the film's director and production company Wafarer Studios Justin Baldoni.
In a deeply ironic turn, considering the story, Lively and Baldoni reportedly had multiple disagreements throughout the film's production including new/added dialogue that may have been written by Lively's husband Ryan Reynolds in the midst of the writer's strike and Lively getting the film re-edited to fit her vision of the movie vs. Baldoni's.
This was exacerbated by Lively and some of the film's other stars not interacting with Baldoni during the press tour and definitive missteps by Lively who promoted her personal brands and loving imagery in a movie that's more about domestic violence.
This was exacerbated by Lively and some of the film's other stars not interacting with Baldoni during the press tour and definitive missteps by Lively who promoted her personal brands and loving imagery in a movie that's more about domestic violence.
Which in turn led to a lot of the novel's fans taking Baldoni's "side" because they presumed his edit was more focused on the impact of domestic abuse since Lively's promotion had been so tone deaf.
The movie itself got mixed reviews but was an immediate box office success, making over $300 million worldwide on a $25 million budget so most of that drama didn't evaporate, but certainly got mixed in the film's overall success.
And I wanted to let the dust settle before I weighed in on any of this considering the subject matter. So today I'm going to talk about the conflicts, the film itself, and why I think this book/film seemed destined to create friction.
The movie itself got mixed reviews but was an immediate box office success, making over $300 million worldwide on a $25 million budget so most of that drama didn't evaporate, but certainly got mixed in the film's overall success.
And I wanted to let the dust settle before I weighed in on any of this considering the subject matter. So today I'm going to talk about the conflicts, the film itself, and why I think this book/film seemed destined to create friction.
The Conflicts
I don't know Blake Lively or Justin Baldoni. I've enjoyed both of their work separately and don't have enough information about them as people to comment on what they're like to work with. What I do know is that movies are a naturally tense place to work if people have competing creative visions about sensitive subject matter, especially when two of them are co-stars with producer/director power.
Something to note is that this was a "prove-it" project for both of them. Baldoni has starred in, directed, and produced films before, but this as front and center as he's been with a project since Jane the Virgin. And while Lively has certainly been the star of far more movies, this was her first movie as producer.
Again more reasons why they would clash.
I'll even highlight why the rumor of Ryan Reynolds written dialogue gives both camps ammunition. I'll start off by saying that if true, this sucks. It's shitty to strike break in any way and a relatively new director like Baldoni would be well within his rights to be furious additions were made without his knowledge. It doesn't speak well on him, his control of his own set and the movie in general.
Buuuut, the biggest critique about this movie was dialogue and without more information it's hard to know what/when/how Reynolds got involved to change things up. It doesn't speak well to Baldoni if the script was deemed sacred and left in clunky dialogue. It looks really bad for Lively if her husband wrote for the movie when he wasn't supposed to.
The most obvious misstep in this whole affair was Lively's approach to promotion, which did highlight her personal brands and even the film's trailers avoided the domestic abuse themes and leaned on the idea of a love triangle instead.
Something to note is that this was a "prove-it" project for both of them. Baldoni has starred in, directed, and produced films before, but this as front and center as he's been with a project since Jane the Virgin. And while Lively has certainly been the star of far more movies, this was her first movie as producer.
Again more reasons why they would clash.
I'll even highlight why the rumor of Ryan Reynolds written dialogue gives both camps ammunition. I'll start off by saying that if true, this sucks. It's shitty to strike break in any way and a relatively new director like Baldoni would be well within his rights to be furious additions were made without his knowledge. It doesn't speak well on him, his control of his own set and the movie in general.
Buuuut, the biggest critique about this movie was dialogue and without more information it's hard to know what/when/how Reynolds got involved to change things up. It doesn't speak well to Baldoni if the script was deemed sacred and left in clunky dialogue. It looks really bad for Lively if her husband wrote for the movie when he wasn't supposed to.
The most obvious misstep in this whole affair was Lively's approach to promotion, which did highlight her personal brands and even the film's trailers avoided the domestic abuse themes and leaned on the idea of a love triangle instead.
That unequivocally sucks and Lively herself pivoted as a result from the backlash.
That in turn gave credence to the idea that Baldoni's edit focused more on the domestic abuse themes and that this was all about Lively's ego. Which is...impossible to determine. It could be true. It could just as easily not be true. But the biggest thing no one has really said is that unless either one of them had "final cut" designation over the film, the real entity that chose which edit made it to theaters was Sony.
This is a long-winded way of saying that while it's certain mistakes were made, speculating about the quality of a different edit of a film that went through multiple cuts and reshoots is just that speculation.
My read was that if you liked the movie you got, you'd be either neutral or go team Lively. If you didn't, and especially if you really liked the book, and didn't like the movie, you'd be on team Baldoni.
That in turn gave credence to the idea that Baldoni's edit focused more on the domestic abuse themes and that this was all about Lively's ego. Which is...impossible to determine. It could be true. It could just as easily not be true. But the biggest thing no one has really said is that unless either one of them had "final cut" designation over the film, the real entity that chose which edit made it to theaters was Sony.
This is a long-winded way of saying that while it's certain mistakes were made, speculating about the quality of a different edit of a film that went through multiple cuts and reshoots is just that speculation.
My read was that if you liked the movie you got, you'd be either neutral or go team Lively. If you didn't, and especially if you really liked the book, and didn't like the movie, you'd be on team Baldoni.
It's a bit of Rorschach test. So how is the movie? Well before that we should talk about the source material.
The Book
One of my favorite quotes about movie-making is from online critic and video essayist Bob Chipman who says that "You can make a good movie out of anything," with the caveat that "sometimes you have to rip its f***ing guts out."
And, in my opinion, the movie adaptation needed to rip the source material apart and re-assemble it. Because I've read the lion's share of It Ends With Us and while I understand its success, I don't think very highly of it.
I want to tread carefully here, not just because the fans of this book, series and author are clearly passionate, but because we're dealing with sensitive subject matter and I also don't want to be yet another male critic who hates on things women like because there are elements that are cheesy or don't make sense. I love nonsense action movies and it would hypocritical of me to hate on a romantic drama/thriller for similar faults.
As such, I'll address what I believe the material's appeal is. The appeal of It Ends With Us is the hybrid between a steamy romance novel with an added element of female empowerment. The reader/audience gets to indulge in the fantasy of a romance with a dangerous and handsome man. And when said man proves himself to be actually dangerous to our lead character's well-being, she gets to reclaim her life as her own. And to be more specific this is about our hero Lily looking to end the cycle of abuse that has enveloped her, her mother and even one of her romantic partners. Hence the title "It Ends With Us."
So if you're someone who thought someone was rough but appealing who ended up in a bad situation this film can capture your feeling of attraction, the darkness you feel as you realize your partner is bad to you and for you, and the pride and feeling of resiliency for coming out the other side.
It means that the elements of obvious foreshadowing, the bad man in this movie is literally introduced kicking a chair in frustration, a very clear red flag, make sense. This is a melodrama. Let's not be subtle.
And if you felt empowered watching this or thought it mirrored an experience you had with a bad partner, I'm glad. I'm not trying to take that away from anyone.
And, in my opinion, the movie adaptation needed to rip the source material apart and re-assemble it. Because I've read the lion's share of It Ends With Us and while I understand its success, I don't think very highly of it.
I want to tread carefully here, not just because the fans of this book, series and author are clearly passionate, but because we're dealing with sensitive subject matter and I also don't want to be yet another male critic who hates on things women like because there are elements that are cheesy or don't make sense. I love nonsense action movies and it would hypocritical of me to hate on a romantic drama/thriller for similar faults.
As such, I'll address what I believe the material's appeal is. The appeal of It Ends With Us is the hybrid between a steamy romance novel with an added element of female empowerment. The reader/audience gets to indulge in the fantasy of a romance with a dangerous and handsome man. And when said man proves himself to be actually dangerous to our lead character's well-being, she gets to reclaim her life as her own. And to be more specific this is about our hero Lily looking to end the cycle of abuse that has enveloped her, her mother and even one of her romantic partners. Hence the title "It Ends With Us."
So if you're someone who thought someone was rough but appealing who ended up in a bad situation this film can capture your feeling of attraction, the darkness you feel as you realize your partner is bad to you and for you, and the pride and feeling of resiliency for coming out the other side.
It means that the elements of obvious foreshadowing, the bad man in this movie is literally introduced kicking a chair in frustration, a very clear red flag, make sense. This is a melodrama. Let's not be subtle.
And if you felt empowered watching this or thought it mirrored an experience you had with a bad partner, I'm glad. I'm not trying to take that away from anyone.
The reason I slide off both the book and the movie comes down to delivery.
The Tone
Before the film came out, a lot of people were critical of the movie for apparently avoiding the domestic violence angle or for failing to put out a warning before the movie. Which is completely fair. This is a rough topic and it should be handled with care.
That said, that movie and the book don't look and feel like a grounded romantic thriller. Part of this is the dialogue which in both the movie and book has the vibe of being stereotypical movie dialogue from the jump. It's a feature of a lot pop literature and melodrama, and would generally be easier to accept if the movie was just about Ryle being a bad boyfriend/husband vs. an outright abusive one (often in very recognizable and melodramatic ways).
The vibe coming off of the book is that Ryle is troubled, but well-meaning. Not a monster in any way. Versus Lily's father who was an out and out monster. Again, this is a feature of romance novels, where the romantic lead can be as problematic as possible, but still sympathetic. To a point.
The difficult I have with Ryle as a character isn't that he's a perfect romance novel man. It's that the book and movie have an unfathomable well of sympathy for him and belief in him. I get him being sexy. I don't get the movie and book deciding to look at his childhood as the only reason he's like this and somehow all of his negative tendencies breaking down at crucial, plot necessary moments.
That said, that movie and the book don't look and feel like a grounded romantic thriller. Part of this is the dialogue which in both the movie and book has the vibe of being stereotypical movie dialogue from the jump. It's a feature of a lot pop literature and melodrama, and would generally be easier to accept if the movie was just about Ryle being a bad boyfriend/husband vs. an outright abusive one (often in very recognizable and melodramatic ways).
The vibe coming off of the book is that Ryle is troubled, but well-meaning. Not a monster in any way. Versus Lily's father who was an out and out monster. Again, this is a feature of romance novels, where the romantic lead can be as problematic as possible, but still sympathetic. To a point.
The difficult I have with Ryle as a character isn't that he's a perfect romance novel man. It's that the book and movie have an unfathomable well of sympathy for him and belief in him. I get him being sexy. I don't get the movie and book deciding to look at his childhood as the only reason he's like this and somehow all of his negative tendencies breaking down at crucial, plot necessary moments.
As self-loathing as many abusers are, telling a man who has abused you through a pregnancy that you want a divorce in the hospital feels wild and sounds like the start of something very very ugly (custody battle, divorce proceedings). Instead Ryle just accepts and moves on? Leaving Lily and their daughter on their own? Even for a romance novel this is awfully clean and is also a perfect demonstration as to why combining genres like this is so messy.
The other issue in the film, that mirrors the descriptive tone in the book, is a lack of visual consistency. The majority of It Ends With Us is shot in warm lighting which looks and feels cozy and romantic. And is not ideal for portraying scenes of horrifying violence.
I will credit the film for emphasizing Lily's terror in these moments and some careful use of slow motion to put the audience in Lily's shoes. And if that was the only visual palette used, I think it would be a solid visual demonstration of how intimate places can be ugly.
But...there are a number of scenes where Lily is dealing with the aftermath of a violent encounter that use desaturated and often medical lighting that feel like they're from another movie and infinitely more impactful. Before we cut to another warmly lit scene that may be romantic or could be horrifying. Who knows. The same visual language is used for sexy scenes, traumatic scenes, and emotionally gripping scenes.
To summarize, I think there's the bones of a great movie here. But I think the movie needed to distance itself from the source material's foibles to be effective as a romantic thriller. Because as it is, this movie only looks and feels like a romance movie. And that feels off.
A lot of the best romantic thrillers emphasize an undercurrent of danger in a multitude of ways. Through the score. The lighting. The shot selection. Everything feels fun and dangerous so you're not surprised at all when everything goes to hell. Many through a feminine lens. It Ends With Us has bits and pieces, but not enough to hammer home the danger.
The other issue in the film, that mirrors the descriptive tone in the book, is a lack of visual consistency. The majority of It Ends With Us is shot in warm lighting which looks and feels cozy and romantic. And is not ideal for portraying scenes of horrifying violence.
I will credit the film for emphasizing Lily's terror in these moments and some careful use of slow motion to put the audience in Lily's shoes. And if that was the only visual palette used, I think it would be a solid visual demonstration of how intimate places can be ugly.
But...there are a number of scenes where Lily is dealing with the aftermath of a violent encounter that use desaturated and often medical lighting that feel like they're from another movie and infinitely more impactful. Before we cut to another warmly lit scene that may be romantic or could be horrifying. Who knows. The same visual language is used for sexy scenes, traumatic scenes, and emotionally gripping scenes.
To summarize, I think there's the bones of a great movie here. But I think the movie needed to distance itself from the source material's foibles to be effective as a romantic thriller. Because as it is, this movie only looks and feels like a romance movie. And that feels off.
A lot of the best romantic thrillers emphasize an undercurrent of danger in a multitude of ways. Through the score. The lighting. The shot selection. Everything feels fun and dangerous so you're not surprised at all when everything goes to hell. Many through a feminine lens. It Ends With Us has bits and pieces, but not enough to hammer home the danger.
Conclusion: I Can See Why This Was A Mess
As I said earlier, I can identify the appeal of this story and even see how it could make a good movie. What it really needed was a unified and solid artistic vision. And that didn't happen. It appears that everyone from the stars to the director to the writer and even the studio had a different idea for what this movie should've been and the end result is a movie that's about as messy about its subject matter as the source material. But also, would they have been able to do that without abandoning the core audience of people who read the book? Hard to say.
And without having been there on set or in post-production, it's really hard to blame a single party. The direction could've been better. The script could've been better. The tertiary elements we often ignore in movies like score and lighting could've been better. Everyone could've done better.
Oddly enough, the easiest way to determine what went wrong might be...seeing how a sequel turns out.
And without having been there on set or in post-production, it's really hard to blame a single party. The direction could've been better. The script could've been better. The tertiary elements we often ignore in movies like score and lighting could've been better. Everyone could've done better.
Oddly enough, the easiest way to determine what went wrong might be...seeing how a sequel turns out.
No comments:
Post a Comment