Prescribed Lions - No More Hippocrites by Eversana Intouch

Eversana Intouch is turning heads with its "No More Hippocrites" campaign, a groundbreaking initiative that masterfully demonstrates the power of integrated storytelling to drive meaningful change. This isn't just another ad blitz; it's a meticulously crafted effort that has successfully engaged, educated, and mobilized audiences across a diverse array of platforms.

At the heart of the campaign lies a compelling 6-minute docudrama, which serves as the narrative anchor. This central piece is significantly amplified by an immersive website and innovative interactive film and art installations, drawing participants deeper into its message.

We caught up with Ivan Blotta, Head of Art & Creative Excellence at Eversana Intouch for an in depth look at the campaign.

CF: What was the initial spark that led you to develop “No More Hippocrites”?

IB: I believe there were two sparks: first, reading (and becoming enraged) at how women’s access to reproductive care worsened after the Dobbs ruling, which overturned Roe v. Wade and removed the right to abortion.

Second, as a healthcare marketing agency that also creates communication for doctors, we noticed the media often shares the stories and struggles of women—but not of their doctors.

After many conversations, we realized the urgency of this issue: doctors are torn between their duty to provide care and laws that criminalize it. This contributes to a major OB/GYN crisis nationwide, with about 2.2 million U.S. women living in what are called “OB/GYN deserts.”

The No More Hippocrites campaign aims to expose both sides: how legal changes make doctors violate their Hippocratic Oath, becoming hypocrites—or “hippocrites"—against their will, and how patients' health and well-being are at risk.

CF: Tell us about the director of the film. How did their vision impact the script and final product?

IB: The director is actually a directing duo: the incredibly talented Julieta Casalia and Lucía Valdemoros (SWAN). As female directors, the initial film script resonated with them on a personal level. Their vision played a crucial role in shaping the narrative, which was to contrast the solemnity of the Hippocratic Oath with the moral dilemma faced by the doctor, alongside the harsh reality confronting the young woman, Rosie. We were impressed by the emotional depth and thoughtful pacing they achieved for both stories.

CF: When writing the script, did you consult any doctors / medical students?

IB: Absolutely. Many doctors expressed frustration, fear, and confusion over the current situation, which causes delays in care and, in some cases, leaves them with no option but to turn patients away. We also heard from AMSA students, especially those in OB/GYN, who criticized the bans for limiting their ability to complete their residency training, leading them to leave for states with fewer restrictions — and also contributing to the OB/GYN shortage in the country.

A few testimonials led us to add details like Dr. Warner greeting Rosie and her speaking before he closes the door. We see someone overhearing and the doctor shushing Rosie, hinting they can't discuss abortion at the clinic.

Another scene influenced by our convos with doctors is when Dr. Warner hesitates to fill out his notes from the appointment, worried about disclosing that the patient was seeking an abortion after learning that texts and web searches have been used as prosecutorial evidence. 

CF: The short film itself has been entered into film festivals outside of the traditional advertising award shows. Was this an intentional goal (and if so please elaborate)?

IB: Absolutely, this was a deliberate goal. As healthcare creatives, we didn't want to raise awareness for such an important issue through a traditional format. Choosing a cinematic film seemed like the best way to grab people’s attention and make them care.

I also believe that gaining recognition at film festivals outside of advertising demonstrates that we're creating content for all audiences, beyond our advertising circle or award juries.

CF: Any interesting details about the film?

IB: Plenty. For example, every news headline, along with the anti-abortion billboards and stickers we see in the film, are not fictional—they are taken from real headlines and ads, reflecting the challenges we face today.

We intentionally kept the film silent of any audible dialogue to symbolize their silenced voices under restrictive laws, while the spoken oath reminds us of promises made and broken.

The main character is named after Rosie Jimenez, the first woman to die from an unsafe abortion in the U.S. in 1977, after Medicaid funding was cut. She was 27, a student, a single mother of a four-year-old, and couldn't afford a safe abortion.

In the graduation scene, “McCorvey School of Medicine” honors Norma McCorvey, known as "Roe" in Roe v. Wade. This Easter Egg celebrates her and the 1973 Supreme Court case that established abortion as a constitutional right. 

CF: What motivated the interactive structure of the online film?

IB: Right from the start, we decided the campaign would focus on two main goals: exposing the impossible situation doctors and patients are facing—and offering a way forward.

We really didn’t want to provide just a passive viewing experience. So, when watching the film online on the campaign’s website, we created an interactive modal that allowed users to access vital information on commonly searched topics in reproductive healthcare.

Each of the 12 ‘chapters’ created includes tabs for both patients and providers. For patients, it provides access to local clinics, funding options, and medically reviewed information. For doctors, it provides legal guidance and privacy resources to help them uphold their oath while staying protected.

The goal: to turn outrage into informed action and ensure no one faces this broken system alone.

CF: Were there specific lenses, color palettes, or framing techniques that defined your visual language?

IB: Definitely. Besides the directors, we were also very lucky to have two incredible DoPs: Nathaly Pinheiro and Vicente Mayo. The visual language was crafted to support the emotional arc and the shifts in time throughout the story. I'll do my best to highlight their outstanding work by sharing a few highlights.

For Rosie’s personal, intimate experience, they followed her with a soft, handheld camera, staying close to her movements and expressions to create a warm, sensory atmosphere that helps us connect emotionally with her inner world.

In contrast, the oath scenes were filmed with stabilized tracking shots and symmetrical framing, conveying a sense of structure and detachment. Interactions with the doctor and the policewoman were shot with static, composed shots to desensitize the imagery and highlight the hypocrisy during those moments.

Another challenge was depicting the doctor across two timelines separated by 30 years. For the graduation scene, they used very soft lighting and a diffusion filter on the lens to give his skin a gentle, youthful appearance. Later, in the consultation room, the makeup team aged the character, so they changed the lighting to be less soft and more side-lit, emphasizing his expression lines and making the passage of time more evident.

Finally, I want to highlight the key directorial choice of casting actors such as Rosie (Isidora Castro, who won Best Actress at the Montreal Women’s Film Festival) and Dr. Warner (Santiago Caranza). This helped us portray these characters with authenticity and subtlety, emphasizing emotional truth and encouraging the audience to connect with their experiences and reflect on a deeper level.

CF: Beyond view counts, how do you personally evaluate whether the film succeeded creatively?

IB: I believe that hearing numerous emotional testimonials from doctors about the film was also a strong indication that we had succeeded creatively. Hearing them confirm that, just as the film showed, most have felt the tension between the law and what is best for their patients. There is also a real fear that if they break the law, they don’t know who might come after them.

CF: If there is one thing you could change about the final film, what would it be? (elaborate)

IB: Due to budget constraints, we had to remove some scenes that could have shown a broader perspective on the issue. Still, overall, everyone was very happy with the final result!

You can view the full film here.