Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I don’t have the faintest clue who the accused is but I’m taking his side because Harvey’s whore and her closeted twink husband are so freakin’ phony and insufferable. Right up there with Ashton Kutcher and his troll-looking wife.
Exhibit A -
Online misogyny at work - BL is cast as Harvey and AK’s wife is nameless but degraded on grounds of her appearance.
Sick
^^^^
One photo and she is dismissed as Harvey’s whore
This is why people should stand with Blake, these are the low life sorts who are easily manipulated or more likely paid to spew their bile, to destroy successful women.
Blake and her husband also employ numerous of these "low life sorts" who are paid to "spew their bile" and destroy people. Just like everyone else in Hollywood.
It's fascinating to see this spun as Baldoni and his PR team doing something that isn't commonplace in Hollywood. The NYT's piece exposing the texts and emails from and between his PR team even went out of it's way not to mention the PR outfit that employed those particular flaks (likely as part of an agreement with the firm not to mention it by name even though that's the company who was hired by Baldoni in the first place. They are trying to make it seem like "a few bad apples." It's the whole industry, including Blake and Ryan's team. This is how Hollywood PR works.
And it's terrible! But the idea that Lively is an innocent victim of it and not someone who has paid people for years to undertake these same tactics on her behalf is so rich.
I don't see it that way at all. I'm sure it happens all the time. There are so many things that pop up out of nowhere that suddenly "everyone" agrees on and are clearly astroturfed. This one is catching attention because there is proof. They suspected it, they got the text messages from the PR firm, and the messages were a freaking goldmine including meta-commentary from the PR morons saying "we can't put this in writing" while putting it in writing. We don't normally get to see the inside track that confirms out suspicions, so that's interesting and fun.
Sure. But you don't know what Blake's own team is saying this week about how well they've good and hosed Baldoni. If you don't think there are celebratory texts and emails right now congratulating themselves for getting the online chatter to run the other way, you are incorrect. And if you assume "well yeah but they are working for the good guys so it's okay".... well you've bought right into a narrative someone else sold you without realizing it.
Lively and Reynolds are not the good guys here. There are no good guys.
Beyond what is in her complaint what negative stories are there about Baldoni? What dirt has been dug up on him that trolls are spinning that is outside of what is happening currently? This isn't a both sides situation no matter how many times you try to compare them.
Perhaps there aren't negative stories out there about Baldoni because he doesn't have a history of doing negative stuff and people who have previously worked with him liked him?
I find it kind of surprising that this complaint has come out and there are no reports of him being questionable on prior projects. He did 5 full years of Jane the Virgin, 100 episodes, and not a peep from anyone on that show that he's a jerk or that he talks about sex all the time or is inappropriate with casemates, etc. It seems like having someone as high profile as Lively come out and say "this guy is awful" would empower other, less powerful women to step forward, if they were out there. That's what has happened in every other metoo incident.
It is the rare woman who speaks up. And those who are younger, and less powerful, usually do not.
Men count on that.
Probably the crap she described (eg, him casting his FRIEND as her gynecologist), are so embedded in the industry…that you have to be very evolved to even see the violation involved.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyhXSDeU_Oc
I’m not getting why casting his friend in a big part is some kind of evidence of something? Of course he hands out parts to his friends. The kitchen-sink nature of the allegations kind of tips me towards Baldoni.
+1, especially small roles that don't require much. It even makes some sense from a production standpoint -- as long as they are professional and can do the job, a friend will take SAG minimum and typically be easy to work with. You don't waste time and money casting someone for a small role only to discover they are difficult or don't take direction.
Also the thing about him casting his wife as the gynocologist-- she wasn't a real gynocologist. It's not like she was actually examining Lively. It's a movie.
The problem is they weren't legit employees. She asked that they be classified as actors or working actors if they were on set during nude scenes. Not cool to just have your wife hanging out between her legs during a birth scene as a friend. People are trying to downplay his actions here but it won't be successful
Why does his wife have some secret kink? I would think she would be happy it was a woman and not an unknown man. I just don't see the scandal. One way to avoid having someone between your legs during "birth scenes" is not to take a part that requires a birth scene.
What did she expect when she signed up for that?
Professionalism and respect?
Sure, but my point is for a birth scene someone had to be between her legs. SoO fail to see the scandal of having an actor placed there. Maybe you can explain. Did Justin's wife diddle her?
So your position is that on the set they should be allowed to do whatever they want, as long as there is no "diddling"? It's all or nothing?
My point is please explain what the person did that was terrible.Just sitting there in that area seems normal for a scene that portrays giving birth. You don't help your case with the vagueness of the allegation.
If you are interested in a good faith discussion, here is a list of issues with the birth scene:
https://themusicessentials.com/trending-pop-culture-news/blake-lively-nightmare-justin-baldoni-shocking-on-set-actions/
Of course, you can pick one or two of those and say "it's not that bad." Just casting his friend, if everything leading up to it had been professional, would probably not be a big deal. Sexual harassment is about a pattern of unwelcome or hostile actions. It's the totaly of the circumstances that are so damning. It's a million little boundaries being pushed on these Hollywood sets (and of course, it's not just Baldoni), and then you can claim innocence and say "what! I was just doing (minor thing)! what's the big deal?!"
Alternatively, unreliable narrators turn innocuous events into claims of harassment.
The one thing tipping me to Team Baldoni is that her litany of complaints mostly rings false/exaggerated.
What rings as false or exaggerated?
Reading the complaint, it paints a realistic picture to me and it seems to be very careful not to use exaggerating or dramatic language. It's very matter of fact. But the facts they share, taken together, indicate that she was pressured into nudity and intimacy on set that was not in the script or suggested beforehand, that the production failed to provide intimacy coordinators for these ad hoc nude/intimate scenes, that some of the improvised nudity in the production was not covered by nudity riders that allow actors to draw clear lines about how nudity is filmed, that Baldoni and his production partner were consistently inappropriate and boundary-violating on set, and that there were complaints filed about all of the above starting on the second day of production but that nothing changed until after the strike when Lively refused to come back to the set unless they agreed in writing to her stipulations.
It really sounds like Lively did everything in her power to address these issues on set in a professional, fair way and that Baldoni and his partners ignored a myriad of valid complaints and behaved horribly.
He should never direct another film.
Everything listed seemed exaggerated or fake except for the part about Baldoni’s business partner (not Baldoni) entering her trailer when she was changing.
I don't understand why though. Why does that sound true to you but other things don't? If you think the other stuff is false then why would you believe that? You've provided no reason for your thinking.
because some of the things she lists are extremely subjective and sound like they are just normal things she decided to interpret or claim as harassment. The kiss, the OB GYB actor, comments on her weight, etc.
+1. There is going to be kissing in a film with sex scenes and filming birth scenes seems like am awkward experience for everyone. I find all birth scenes cringeworthy because it is just weird pretending to have a baby while another actor pretends to deliver it. Those scenes serve no purpose.
I honestly think Lively thought a movie about severe domestic violence was going to be easy and fun to film? I think she’s a bad actress and a dim bulb and a diva.
It seems she thought that basic industry set standards and professionalism should have been in place. How silly of her.
That’s going to be what Lively will have to show - what are the standards of professionalism on a movie set in 2023-2024 that showcases sex and birth. That is not clear to those of us who are not actors.
I think the issue was not that there was nudity but that it was not planned and therefore didn't follow industry standards for shooting a scene with nudity.
If they wanted to shoot the birth scene with nudity, it needed to be written into the shooting script and they needed to have nudity riders in place and an intimacy coordinator on set. These are standard protections that actors are supposed to get if they are going to be filmed while nude. By improvising the nudity in the birth scene on the day of the shoot, Lively (1) felt coerced into agreeing to do it nude because at that point a debate over it would delay the production, and (2) made it impossible to ensure that the riders and coordinator were in place on such short notice.
This is something I didn't understand before reading the complaint. I didn't get why they didn't have an intimacy coordinator and nudity riders on set from the beginning since the film obviously includes intimate scenes and nudity. But it sounds like they did have those things... but that Baldoni repeatedly turned scenes that were written without nudity or intimacy into scenes *with* nudity and intimacy, and thus they skirted the rules when filming those scenes.
That's why in the contract they asked Baldoni to sign in order for Lively to come back to set, it specified these very normal, industry standard things. Because Baldoni and Wayfarer had been getting around doing those things but making decisions on the fly and last minute, creating situations where either Lively had to go along with it or potentially they lose a day or more of shooting in order to get everything in compliance, which would have cost the production a lot of money and also just wasted everyone's time.
So it's not that Lively was totally opposed to filming at the birth scene with nudity (maybe she was, maybe she wasn't). It's that if they wanted her to do it nude, they should have written and planned it that way, gotten her agreement ahead of time, and ensured the set was closed with all the necessary riders and an intimacy coordinator on set, like they are supposed to.
Forum Index
»
Entertainment and Pop Culture
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}