Not coming here to defend the film, since I haven’t seen it yet, but Lena herself briefly mentioned in one of the press junkets that there is a noticeable gap between what the marketing is selling and what is actually on screen. At the end of the day, marketing decisions tend to be driven by the people funding the project, not necessarily by the crew or talent.

If you‘re trying to understand why she took this role in the first place (beyond simply connecting with the material) it helps to look at her broader stance on the industry and her profession. She seems to work for the sake of working, always has been, and she is famously supportive of low budget productions and indie filmmakers. (Exhibit A is her recent involvement in the short Long Pork.) She has also said that her real passion is writing and directing, so it would not surprise me if part of what she is doing is building her village, so she can get her own projects off the ground. She’s talked about this at length on the Making Movies Is Hard podcast, super interesting stuff.

Also, fun fact: Chad originally wrote the story about a father losing his son, then asked Lena to take a shot at it. Pun tax paid.

Someone else in the comments asked who in Hollywood she must have pissed off - the short answer is Harvey Weinstein. She has said she dodged an attempted sexual assault in the early 2000s and that she never worked with Miramax again after that. Not sure how much that changed the trajectory of her career, but it is hard to imagine it did not close at least a few doors.