Why is Blake Lively so overrated?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's interesting that Blake is being defended here but totally slammed on TikTok after Baldoni published his texts with her. I wonder what's a better gauge of public discourse on her right now. Obviously that's her (and Baldoni's) top concern.

TikTok is far more genuine. Reddit and this forum are botted shills.

TikTok loves to push misogynistic content. So, this tracks, which is why TT is evil. Why anyone uses it is a mystery.

Orrrrrr outside of her carefully choreographed smear campaign, the public simply doesn’t like Blake all that much. She and apparently a handful of her fans like you are in serious denial.

It doesn't matter if people love her or not. It's not ok to sexually harass people at work. Even gross ones you sneer at because you don't like them. It's as simple as that. It's not a popularity contest and I'm glad the courts will sort it out and not internet mobs easily persuaded and influenced.

How do we know she was for sure sexually harassed? Serious question.

It's an excellent question. I think Ryan read her texts to Baldoni and did not like the idea of Baldoni rehearsing alone with Blake since Baldoni is younger and hotter. So, Ryan summoned Baldoni to accuse Baldoni of harrassment and tell him how things were going to be. It is not Baldoni's fault that Ryan looks like a 50 year old lesbian.

I think there is something to this. There is no way if the persistent, decades old rumors about how controlling Ryan is, is even remotely true, that he was okay with this relationship or these texts.

It was so strange to me why he was so heavily involved. And that whole schtick he did with the other costar, pretending to be jealous, looks super ick now they we know have glimpsed behind the curtain of what went on.

Justin is likely an obnoxious, insufferable guy, but Hollywood is full of them and the more that comes out makes it seem like there was a lot of unprofessional stuff happening with Blake and Ryan as well and it seems like a power move to get him totally thrown out of the industry while they continue to pay their social media team 100k a month to convince us all how relatable and down to earth they are.

Maybe they want rights to the sequel. That was mentioned in previous speculation, but I haven’t heard it recently.

[Anonymous]

Is anyone following Perez Hilton on instagram? He has done several short deep dive videos on this.

His latest goes on to say that the suing of the New York Times was not actually to win, but to be able to do discovery. What that allowed them to do was bring several notes and texts and other proof that Justin hired an intimacy coordinator before filming began and set up a meeting. Blake did not want to attend the meeting and said she’d like to start meeting when production began. Texts prove this.

Justin emailed other producers that this would delay workflows but they’d work around it. The intimacy coordinator is there to help them coordinate and choreograph scenes so not really something that’s done on set, it’s done before -it’s part of the scripting. What sex scenes will there be, what will they look like, etc. It’s not supposed to be done on the fly on set.

Justin met with the intimacy coordinator SEVERAL TIMES and Blake didn’t want to attend those meetings - he was then tasked with sharing his handwritten and dated notes with Blake – that is what she said in the times article was her being uncomfortable with him talking about sexual experiences! If she been at the damn meetings that would have been a lot more professional. the intimacy coordinator suggested a few sex scenes and since Blake wasn’t at the meeting, Justin had to relay them . but the intimacy coordinator would’ve helped them work through any awkwardness -that is why she is there! She was trying to choreograph scenes that would make them both comfortable.

The NYT really dropped the ball with leaving out that critical context. It made it look like Blake all of a sudden had to demand an intimacy coordinator when there was one all along that she wouldn’t meet with.

That was one of the strangest things I thought about this whole suit, that in a big budget production like this, with such demanding physical scenes given the domestic violence theme, that there wouldn’t be an intimacy coordinator which is at this point an industry standard. Well, this shows there very much was one from the beginning that Justin was forced to work with alone - which her lawsuit and the times article deliberately obscures.

[Anonymous]

Does anyone have links for any good legal analysis on the NYT lawsuit?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is anyone following Perez Hilton on instagram? He has done several short deep dive videos on this.

His latest goes on to say that the suing of the New York Times was not actually to win, but to be able to do discovery. What that allowed them to do was bring several notes and texts and other proof that Justin hired an intimacy coordinator before filming began and set up a meeting. Blake did not want to attend the meeting and said she’d like to start meeting when production began. Texts prove this.

Justin emailed other producers that this would delay workflows but they’d work around it. The intimacy coordinator is there to help them coordinate and choreograph scenes so not really something that’s done on set, it’s done before -it’s part of the scripting. What sex scenes will there be, what will they look like, etc. It’s not supposed to be done on the fly on set.

Justin met with the intimacy coordinator SEVERAL TIMES and Blake didn’t want to attend those meetings - he was then tasked with sharing his handwritten and dated notes with Blake – that is what she said in the times article was her being uncomfortable with him talking about sexual experiences! If she been at the damn meetings that would have been a lot more professional. the intimacy coordinator suggested a few sex scenes and since Blake wasn’t at the meeting, Justin had to relay them . but the intimacy coordinator would’ve helped them work through any awkwardness -that is why she is there! She was trying to choreograph scenes that would make them both comfortable.

The NYT really dropped the ball with leaving out that critical context. It made it look like Blake all of a sudden had to demand an intimacy coordinator when there was one all along that she wouldn’t meet with.

That was one of the strangest things I thought about this whole suit, that in a big budget production like this, with such demanding physical scenes given the domestic violence theme, that there wouldn’t be an intimacy coordinator which is at this point an industry standard. Well, this shows there very much was one from the beginning that Justin was forced to work with alone - which her lawsuit and the times article deliberately obscures.

Before filming began? So filming began in May 2023. She had a baby in February 2023. Maybe that had something to do with it and why she wanted to wait until filming began. Just a hunch that she had other things going on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is anyone following Perez Hilton on instagram? He has done several short deep dive videos on this.

His latest goes on to say that the suing of the New York Times was not actually to win, but to be able to do discovery. What that allowed them to do was bring several notes and texts and other proof that Justin hired an intimacy coordinator before filming began and set up a meeting. Blake did not want to attend the meeting and said she’d like to start meeting when production began. Texts prove this.

Justin emailed other producers that this would delay workflows but they’d work around it. The intimacy coordinator is there to help them coordinate and choreograph scenes so not really something that’s done on set, it’s done before -it’s part of the scripting. What sex scenes will there be, what will they look like, etc. It’s not supposed to be done on the fly on set.

Justin met with the intimacy coordinator SEVERAL TIMES and Blake didn’t want to attend those meetings - he was then tasked with sharing his handwritten and dated notes with Blake – that is what she said in the times article was her being uncomfortable with him talking about sexual experiences! If she been at the damn meetings that would have been a lot more professional. the intimacy coordinator suggested a few sex scenes and since Blake wasn’t at the meeting, Justin had to relay them . but the intimacy coordinator would’ve helped them work through any awkwardness -that is why she is there! She was trying to choreograph scenes that would make them both comfortable.

The NYT really dropped the ball with leaving out that critical context. It made it look like Blake all of a sudden had to demand an intimacy coordinator when there was one all along that she wouldn’t meet with.

That was one of the strangest things I thought about this whole suit, that in a big budget production like this, with such demanding physical scenes given the domestic violence theme, that there wouldn’t be an intimacy coordinator which is at this point an industry standard. Well, this shows there very much was one from the beginning that Justin was forced to work with alone - which her lawsuit and the times article deliberately obscures.

Before filming began? So filming began in May 2023. She had a baby in February 2023. Maybe that had something to do with it and why she wanted to wait until filming began. Just a hunch that she had other things going on.

Agree with you, but he offered a FaceTime or Zoom meeting, so she could’ve literally done that with her baby at home. Either way, the lawsuit makes it seem as if she was not given the option of an intimacy coordinator, and she clearly was.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is anyone following Perez Hilton on instagram? He has done several short deep dive videos on this.

His latest goes on to say that the suing of the New York Times was not actually to win, but to be able to do discovery. What that allowed them to do was bring several notes and texts and other proof that Justin hired an intimacy coordinator before filming began and set up a meeting. Blake did not want to attend the meeting and said she’d like to start meeting when production began. Texts prove this.

Justin emailed other producers that this would delay workflows but they’d work around it. The intimacy coordinator is there to help them coordinate and choreograph scenes so not really something that’s done on set, it’s done before -it’s part of the scripting. What sex scenes will there be, what will they look like, etc. It’s not supposed to be done on the fly on set.

Justin met with the intimacy coordinator SEVERAL TIMES and Blake didn’t want to attend those meetings - he was then tasked with sharing his handwritten and dated notes with Blake – that is what she said in the times article was her being uncomfortable with him talking about sexual experiences! If she been at the damn meetings that would have been a lot more professional. the intimacy coordinator suggested a few sex scenes and since Blake wasn’t at the meeting, Justin had to relay them . but the intimacy coordinator would’ve helped them work through any awkwardness -that is why she is there! She was trying to choreograph scenes that would make them both comfortable.

The NYT really dropped the ball with leaving out that critical context. It made it look like Blake all of a sudden had to demand an intimacy coordinator when there was one all along that she wouldn’t meet with.

That was one of the strangest things I thought about this whole suit, that in a big budget production like this, with such demanding physical scenes given the domestic violence theme, that there wouldn’t be an intimacy coordinator which is at this point an industry standard. Well, this shows there very much was one from the beginning that Justin was forced to work with alone - which her lawsuit and the times article deliberately obscures.

Before filming began? So filming began in May 2023. She had a baby in February 2023. Maybe that had something to do with it and why she wanted to wait until filming began. Just a hunch that she had other things going on.

Not the PP you’re responding to. I just watched the Perez Hilton video, and it wasn’t just about waiting. PP described it well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is anyone following Perez Hilton on instagram? He has done several short deep dive videos on this.

His latest goes on to say that the suing of the New York Times was not actually to win, but to be able to do discovery. What that allowed them to do was bring several notes and texts and other proof that Justin hired an intimacy coordinator before filming began and set up a meeting. Blake did not want to attend the meeting and said she’d like to start meeting when production began. Texts prove this.

Justin emailed other producers that this would delay workflows but they’d work around it. The intimacy coordinator is there to help them coordinate and choreograph scenes so not really something that’s done on set, it’s done before -it’s part of the scripting. What sex scenes will there be, what will they look like, etc. It’s not supposed to be done on the fly on set.

Justin met with the intimacy coordinator SEVERAL TIMES and Blake didn’t want to attend those meetings - he was then tasked with sharing his handwritten and dated notes with Blake – that is what she said in the times article was her being uncomfortable with him talking about sexual experiences! If she been at the damn meetings that would have been a lot more professional. the intimacy coordinator suggested a few sex scenes and since Blake wasn’t at the meeting, Justin had to relay them . but the intimacy coordinator would’ve helped them work through any awkwardness -that is why she is there! She was trying to choreograph scenes that would make them both comfortable.

The NYT really dropped the ball with leaving out that critical context. It made it look like Blake all of a sudden had to demand an intimacy coordinator when there was one all along that she wouldn’t meet with.

That was one of the strangest things I thought about this whole suit, that in a big budget production like this, with such demanding physical scenes given the domestic violence theme, that there wouldn’t be an intimacy coordinator which is at this point an industry standard. Well, this shows there very much was one from the beginning that Justin was forced to work with alone - which her lawsuit and the times article deliberately obscures.

Before filming began? So filming began in May 2023. She had a baby in February 2023. Maybe that had something to do with it and why she wanted to wait until filming began. Just a hunch that she had other things going on.

Give me a break. They had the baby at the end of January, they only made it public at the Super Bowl in early February but the baby was born in January. She had least 12 to 14 weeks before filming began, which is a time when many moms go back to work And most moms don’t go back to work with a $10 million salary which she probably made for this movie. Not to mention she was able to take her baby to set and pump whenever she needed in her own luxurious trailer. This was a big budget film. She was the star, she was given every accommodation. I don’t feel really bad that she wasn’t able to squeeze in a Zoom meeting with the intimacy coordinator then turn around and lie and say that she wasn’t given the opportunity to meet with an intimacy coordinator. if she wasn’t able to do what the film required, she should have turned down the film. She certainly doesn’t need the money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is anyone following Perez Hilton on instagram? He has done several short deep dive videos on this.

His latest goes on to say that the suing of the New York Times was not actually to win, but to be able to do discovery. What that allowed them to do was bring several notes and texts and other proof that Justin hired an intimacy coordinator before filming began and set up a meeting. Blake did not want to attend the meeting and said she’d like to start meeting when production began. Texts prove this.

Justin emailed other producers that this would delay workflows but they’d work around it. The intimacy coordinator is there to help them coordinate and choreograph scenes so not really something that’s done on set, it’s done before -it’s part of the scripting. What sex scenes will there be, what will they look like, etc. It’s not supposed to be done on the fly on set.

Justin met with the intimacy coordinator SEVERAL TIMES and Blake didn’t want to attend those meetings - he was then tasked with sharing his handwritten and dated notes with Blake – that is what she said in the times article was her being uncomfortable with him talking about sexual experiences! If she been at the damn meetings that would have been a lot more professional. the intimacy coordinator suggested a few sex scenes and since Blake wasn’t at the meeting, Justin had to relay them . but the intimacy coordinator would’ve helped them work through any awkwardness -that is why she is there! She was trying to choreograph scenes that would make them both comfortable.

The NYT really dropped the ball with leaving out that critical context. It made it look like Blake all of a sudden had to demand an intimacy coordinator when there was one all along that she wouldn’t meet with.

That was one of the strangest things I thought about this whole suit, that in a big budget production like this, with such demanding physical scenes given the domestic violence theme, that there wouldn’t be an intimacy coordinator which is at this point an industry standard. Well, this shows there very much was one from the beginning that Justin was forced to work with alone - which her lawsuit and the times article deliberately obscures.

Before filming began? So filming began in May 2023. She had a baby in February 2023. Maybe that had something to do with it and why she wanted to wait until filming began. Just a hunch that she had other things going on.

Give me a break. They had the baby at the end of January, they only made it public at the Super Bowl in early February but the baby was born in January. She had least 12 to 14 weeks before filming began, which is a time when many moms go back to work And most moms don’t go back to work with a $10 million salary which she probably made for this movie. Not to mention she was able to take her baby to set and pump whenever she needed in her own luxurious trailer. This was a big budget film. She was the star, she was given every accommodation. I don’t feel really bad that she wasn’t able to squeeze in a Zoom meeting with the intimacy coordinator then turn around and lie and say that she wasn’t given the opportunity to meet with an intimacy coordinator. if she wasn’t able to do what the film required, she should have turned down the film. She certainly doesn’t need the money.

Meh. I'm not going to take one side or the other's word for it or Perez Hilton. Will wait for actual facts. It was a low budget film ($25M) that made $350M using "Blake's version". Doesn't sound like she ruined anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is anyone following Perez Hilton on instagram? He has done several short deep dive videos on this.

His latest goes on to say that the suing of the New York Times was not actually to win, but to be able to do discovery. What that allowed them to do was bring several notes and texts and other proof that Justin hired an intimacy coordinator before filming began and set up a meeting. Blake did not want to attend the meeting and said she’d like to start meeting when production began. Texts prove this.

Justin emailed other producers that this would delay workflows but they’d work around it. The intimacy coordinator is there to help them coordinate and choreograph scenes so not really something that’s done on set, it’s done before -it’s part of the scripting. What sex scenes will there be, what will they look like, etc. It’s not supposed to be done on the fly on set.

Justin met with the intimacy coordinator SEVERAL TIMES and Blake didn’t want to attend those meetings - he was then tasked with sharing his handwritten and dated notes with Blake – that is what she said in the times article was her being uncomfortable with him talking about sexual experiences! If she been at the damn meetings that would have been a lot more professional. the intimacy coordinator suggested a few sex scenes and since Blake wasn’t at the meeting, Justin had to relay them . but the intimacy coordinator would’ve helped them work through any awkwardness -that is why she is there! She was trying to choreograph scenes that would make them both comfortable.

The NYT really dropped the ball with leaving out that critical context. It made it look like Blake all of a sudden had to demand an intimacy coordinator when there was one all along that she wouldn’t meet with.

That was one of the strangest things I thought about this whole suit, that in a big budget production like this, with such demanding physical scenes given the domestic violence theme, that there wouldn’t be an intimacy coordinator which is at this point an industry standard. Well, this shows there very much was one from the beginning that Justin was forced to work with alone - which her lawsuit and the times article deliberately obscures.

Before filming began? So filming began in May 2023. She had a baby in February 2023. Maybe that had something to do with it and why she wanted to wait until filming began. Just a hunch that she had other things going on.

Give me a break. They had the baby at the end of January, they only made it public at the Super Bowl in early February but the baby was born in January. She had least 12 to 14 weeks before filming began, which is a time when many moms go back to work And most moms don’t go back to work with a $10 million salary which she probably made for this movie. Not to mention she was able to take her baby to set and pump whenever she needed in her own luxurious trailer. This was a big budget film. She was the star, she was given every accommodation. I don’t feel really bad that she wasn’t able to squeeze in a Zoom meeting with the intimacy coordinator then turn around and lie and say that she wasn’t given the opportunity to meet with an intimacy coordinator. if she wasn’t able to do what the film required, she should have turned down the film. She certainly doesn’t need the money.

Meh. I'm not going to take one side or the other's word for it or Perez Hilton. Will wait for actual facts. It was a low budget film ($25M) that made $350M using "Blake's version". Doesn't sound like she ruined anything.

No one is saying she ruined anything. She didn’t want to do a meeting with the intimacy coordinator. Fine. It’s not required. But then don’t turn around and demand an intimacy coordinator and make it look like 1) you weren’t offered one and 2) you forced the director to relay notes from his meetings and then accuse him of talking inappropriately about sexual situations.

That was ridiculously disingenuous. Agree that there are other facts in this case but this set of issues looks bad for Blake.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is anyone following Perez Hilton on instagram? He has done several short deep dive videos on this.

His latest goes on to say that the suing of the New York Times was not actually to win, but to be able to do discovery. What that allowed them to do was bring several notes and texts and other proof that Justin hired an intimacy coordinator before filming began and set up a meeting. Blake did not want to attend the meeting and said she’d like to start meeting when production began. Texts prove this.

Justin emailed other producers that this would delay workflows but they’d work around it. The intimacy coordinator is there to help them coordinate and choreograph scenes so not really something that’s done on set, it’s done before -it’s part of the scripting. What sex scenes will there be, what will they look like, etc. It’s not supposed to be done on the fly on set.

Justin met with the intimacy coordinator SEVERAL TIMES and Blake didn’t want to attend those meetings - he was then tasked with sharing his handwritten and dated notes with Blake – that is what she said in the times article was her being uncomfortable with him talking about sexual experiences! If she been at the damn meetings that would have been a lot more professional. the intimacy coordinator suggested a few sex scenes and since Blake wasn’t at the meeting, Justin had to relay them . but the intimacy coordinator would’ve helped them work through any awkwardness -that is why she is there! She was trying to choreograph scenes that would make them both comfortable.

The NYT really dropped the ball with leaving out that critical context. It made it look like Blake all of a sudden had to demand an intimacy coordinator when there was one all along that she wouldn’t meet with.

That was one of the strangest things I thought about this whole suit, that in a big budget production like this, with such demanding physical scenes given the domestic violence theme, that there wouldn’t be an intimacy coordinator which is at this point an industry standard. Well, this shows there very much was one from the beginning that Justin was forced to work with alone - which her lawsuit and the times article deliberately obscures.

Before filming began? So filming began in May 2023. She had a baby in February 2023. Maybe that had something to do with it and why she wanted to wait until filming began. Just a hunch that she had other things going on.

Give me a break. They had the baby at the end of January, they only made it public at the Super Bowl in early February but the baby was born in January. She had least 12 to 14 weeks before filming began, which is a time when many moms go back to work And most moms don’t go back to work with a $10 million salary which she probably made for this movie. Not to mention she was able to take her baby to set and pump whenever she needed in her own luxurious trailer. This was a big budget film. She was the star, she was given every accommodation. I don’t feel really bad that she wasn’t able to squeeze in a Zoom meeting with the intimacy coordinator then turn around and lie and say that she wasn’t given the opportunity to meet with an intimacy coordinator. if she wasn’t able to do what the film required, she should have turned down the film. She certainly doesn’t need the money.

Meh. I'm not going to take one side or the other's word for it or Perez Hilton. Will wait for actual facts. It was a low budget film ($25M) that made $350M using "Blake's version". Doesn't sound like she ruined anything.

No one is saying she ruined anything. She didn’t want to do a meeting with the intimacy coordinator. Fine. It’s not required. But then don’t turn around and demand an intimacy coordinator and make it look like 1) you weren’t offered one and 2) you forced the director to relay notes from his meetings and then accuse him of talking inappropriately about sexual situations.

That was ridiculously disingenuous. Agree that there are other facts in this case but this set of issues looks bad for Blake.

She wanted one on set. Should be easy to prove if one was there or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She needs to find a way to make this all go away. I think she and her husband thought they could get him cancelled and that would be that.

They are skipping the Golden Globes this weekend, I guess they decided to lay low rather than expose themselves to lots of questions on the red carpet.

[Anonymous]

She is a scammer. Hubby too. Hubby has always been a social climbing grifter.

[Anonymous]

I think the issue with the intimacy coordinator is still an open question and we don't know the full truth yet.

Yes they hired an intimacy coordinator (this is standard in the industry now) and yes it looks like Baldoni did his due diligence in meeting with her and choreographing sex scenes before shooting began. I would also assume the coordinator was on set for the scenes she choreographed.

It looks like from the texts Baldoni has released that Lively didn't meet with the intimacy coordinator prior to filming. I agree that raises questions and would like more context there. Lively has done plenty of sex scenes before so maybe she just didn't think it was necessary to have extra meetings, I don't know.

But none of this is what Lively raises in her complaint.

She is not saying the production failed to hire an intimacy coordinator at all, she's saying that Baldoni and Wayfarer turned scenes that were not scripted as intimate scenes into intimate scenes, failed to work with the intimacy coordinator on those scenes (which the coordinator didn't choreograph because they were not written to have intimacy or nudity in them), and that the filming of these scenes was unprofessional and compromised Lively and other actors.

Two examples: (1) a scene in which Lively's and Baldoni's character were filmed dancing, without audio It was scripted as them just slow dancing with no dialogue and no other touching. Lively alleges that Baldoni started kissing her on her mouth and neck during the scene (not scripted, not run by the IC) and that he was speaking to her in a sexual way out of character. (2) The birth scene, which was not choreographed with the IC, was made into a nude scene on the fly without it being scripted that way, and that Lively wound up partially nude in the scene and working in very close proximity with the actor playing the OB in the scene (she describes him as being position very close to her crotch which was covered only by a thin strip of fabric), but this scene was not written as a nude scene, Lively didn't have a nudity rider in place, the IC didn't choreograph it, and the IC was not on set.

Lively's version implies that it would not have mattered if she'd met with the IC prior to filming because these scenes were never scripted as intimate/nude scenes. Baldoni seems to be implying that if Lively had issues she could have raised them with the IC prior to filming.

Also Lively's complaint mentions Baldoni trying to add things like Lively's character climaxing or the characters engaging in oral sex that, according to Lively, were not in the script and not choreographed by the IC. This is the part that needs a lot more clarification because the IC absolutely should have been imon set for those scenes so it would be good to hear from her because she'd be able to clarify what was scripted and what was not, but also if Baldoni was adding unscripted elements, it's the IC's job to intervene on behalf of the actors and say "hey, this is not what was agreed to." This is the part where Lively not meeting with the IC becomes an issue, though we'd also need to know what is described in the shooting script, which should detail the shots they wanted to get and which Lively would have received copies of in advance (though if Baldoni made last minute changes after shooting had begun, that's another issue).

I don't think it's possible to take a side based on what we know now. The facts are in dispute.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the issue with the intimacy coordinator is still an open question and we don't know the full truth yet.

Yes they hired an intimacy coordinator (this is standard in the industry now) and yes it looks like Baldoni did his due diligence in meeting with her and choreographing sex scenes before shooting began. I would also assume the coordinator was on set for the scenes she choreographed.

It looks like from the texts Baldoni has released that Lively didn't meet with the intimacy coordinator prior to filming. I agree that raises questions and would like more context there. Lively has done plenty of sex scenes before so maybe she just didn't think it was necessary to have extra meetings, I don't know.

But none of this is what Lively raises in her complaint.

She is not saying the production failed to hire an intimacy coordinator at all, she's saying that Baldoni and Wayfarer turned scenes that were not scripted as intimate scenes into intimate scenes, failed to work with the intimacy coordinator on those scenes (which the coordinator didn't choreograph because they were not written to have intimacy or nudity in them), and that the filming of these scenes was unprofessional and compromised Lively and other actors.

Two examples: (1) a scene in which Lively's and Baldoni's character were filmed dancing, without audio It was scripted as them just slow dancing with no dialogue and no other touching. Lively alleges that Baldoni started kissing her on her mouth and neck during the scene (not scripted, not run by the IC) and that he was speaking to her in a sexual way out of character. (2) The birth scene, which was not choreographed with the IC, was made into a nude scene on the fly without it being scripted that way, and that Lively wound up partially nude in the scene and working in very close proximity with the actor playing the OB in the scene (she describes him as being position very close to her crotch which was covered only by a thin strip of fabric), but this scene was not written as a nude scene, Lively didn't have a nudity rider in place, the IC didn't choreograph it, and the IC was not on set.

Lively's version implies that it would not have mattered if she'd met with the IC prior to filming because these scenes were never scripted as intimate/nude scenes. Baldoni seems to be implying that if Lively had issues she could have raised them with the IC prior to filming.

Also Lively's complaint mentions Baldoni trying to add things like Lively's character climaxing or the characters engaging in oral sex that, according to Lively, were not in the script and not choreographed by the IC. This is the part that needs a lot more clarification because the IC absolutely should have been imon set for those scenes so it would be good to hear from her because she'd be able to clarify what was scripted and what was not, but also if Baldoni was adding unscripted elements, it's the IC's job to intervene on behalf of the actors and say "hey, this is not what was agreed to." This is the part where Lively not meeting with the IC becomes an issue, though we'd also need to know what is described in the shooting script, which should detail the shots they wanted to get and which Lively would have received copies of in advance (though if Baldoni made last minute changes after shooting had begun, that's another issue).

I don't think it's possible to take a side based on what we know now. The facts are in dispute.

All good points. The Perez Hilton videos specifically mentioned the oral sex scene. Apparently, according to Justin‘s notes, the intimacy coordinator had suggested that scene. So he had the awkwardness of having to explain that to her without the intimacy coordinator present, which again was not supposed to happen… A key point of having an intimacy coordinator is to have conversations in a safe space where she is present.

Blake didn’t want to do that scene in part because she volunteered information, something along the lines of if I climax (from oral) and then he didn’t I would be mortified. Justin explained that those were some of the most intimate moments with his wife.

It seems conversations like that was what she objected to later in the lawsuit. But it’s a little unfair because again he was tasked with relaying those types of information to her without the intimacy coordinator present, and also because she volunteered information about her own personal life or preferences, prompting him to say something personal about him and his wife.

I’m not saying he was in the right here. I’m just saying there’s just a little bit more context than what the New York Times presents.

I said it earlier in this thread, I think both of them were playing fast and loose with the standards and were both, because of their initial friendly personal relationship, crossing too many boundaries. I don’t think Blake probably should’ve signed texts with x, and I don’t think she should’ve invited him to run lines while she was pumping. I’m not saying she did anything wrong, or that those things would be inappropriate if the relationship had stayed steady, but it just seems like they both got too comfortable with each other and then when things started going bad, she was the first one to initially use that against him.

Of course more facts could come out. It was presented in her pre Christmas lawsuit made him sound like a downright psychopath and now with more context, I’m less sure what actually went down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is anyone following Perez Hilton on instagram? He has done several short deep dive videos on this.

His latest goes on to say that the suing of the New York Times was not actually to win, but to be able to do discovery. What that allowed them to do was bring several notes and texts and other proof that Justin hired an intimacy coordinator before filming began and set up a meeting. Blake did not want to attend the meeting and said she’d like to start meeting when production began. Texts prove this.

Justin emailed other producers that this would delay workflows but they’d work around it. The intimacy coordinator is there to help them coordinate and choreograph scenes so not really something that’s done on set, it’s done before -it’s part of the scripting. What sex scenes will there be, what will they look like, etc. It’s not supposed to be done on the fly on set.

Justin met with the intimacy coordinator SEVERAL TIMES and Blake didn’t want to attend those meetings - he was then tasked with sharing his handwritten and dated notes with Blake – that is what she said in the times article was her being uncomfortable with him talking about sexual experiences! If she been at the damn meetings that would have been a lot more professional. the intimacy coordinator suggested a few sex scenes and since Blake wasn’t at the meeting, Justin had to relay them . but the intimacy coordinator would’ve helped them work through any awkwardness -that is why she is there! She was trying to choreograph scenes that would make them both comfortable.

The NYT really dropped the ball with leaving out that critical context. It made it look like Blake all of a sudden had to demand an intimacy coordinator when there was one all along that she wouldn’t meet with.

That was one of the strangest things I thought about this whole suit, that in a big budget production like this, with such demanding physical scenes given the domestic violence theme, that there wouldn’t be an intimacy coordinator which is at this point an industry standard. Well, this shows there very much was one from the beginning that Justin was forced to work with alone - which her lawsuit and the times article deliberately obscures.

Before filming began? So filming began in May 2023. She had a baby in February 2023. Maybe that had something to do with it and why she wanted to wait until filming began. Just a hunch that she had other things going on.

Lol, like attending Taylor swifts eras tour in Madrid? Please.