Why is Blake Lively so overrated?

[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.

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

In late May?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also Blake is flat out a liar! Where does this go from here?

Yeah, she totally wanted to bang Baldoni. I've only seen his Ted talk but he is very sexy. It would be hard to resist him.

Imagining falling for the male feminist meme.

Yes imagine. I have no idea what the male feminist meme is and I don't GAF to learn. I do not need a man to claim to be a feminist in order to like him. I think he is sexy independent of any "meme" that you are advancing.

You don't seem to need much to like a man. How hard up are you? This is just sad.

You think I am not allowed to have a personal opinion based on the entertainment I have consumed? It's not like I am going to ever meet these people. I just think Baldoni has more sex appeal than Ryan Reynolds.

100%. Reynolds has very little sex appeal. He is not very masculine.

[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.

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

In late May?

Yes. May 29th, 2023. Blake lively does not do life or maternity the same way us peasants do.

[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.

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

In addition, she was getting ready to launch a hair care line and she had two other businesses with her mock tail and cocktail lines. Maybe she just took on too much. I firmly believe women can have it all, but maybe not all at one time.

If she was not prepared to do a big movie so soon after having her child, she simply should not have signed the contract for the film. I’m sorry, but this makes all women look bad if you just say well she just had a baby she couldn’t possibly be expected to uphold the standards of the industry!

Prrez Hilton just published another video which completely gives another depiction of what happened in the early days of production with her getting feedback about her appearance. Apparently sony the distributor was very upset that paparazzi had gotten photos of Blake out in New York on set in some of her characters outfits. If you recall the photos got a lot of backlash on Instagram that Blake was too old to play Lily. Lily was 23 in the book, but Colleen Hoover explained for the movie they had to make the characters older because an acclaimed neurosurgeon could not have been 27 years old like in the book. So they aged up all the characters so that Ryle could be an actual experienced neurosurgeon, and then it made sense that Lily was older too.

But it generated a lot of backlash from fans. It was Sony who had concerns about this that they bought to Justin the director. He says he was conveying notes from Sony in her trailer along the lines of changing some of the wardrobe choices, so he claims. He said he didn’t tear up about Blake looking old, but toward the end of the conversation, she complimented him on what a great job he was doing, and what a great director he was and he teared up. It sounds like she completely distorted that conversation? But who knows, it does sound like a lot of he said she said, but. if Justin’s team can show that Sony gave those notes that would probably help his case and hurt hers.

[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.

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

In late May?

Yes. May 29th, 2023. Blake lively does not do life or maternity the same way us peasants do.

That's after filming began, she took issue with having the unperson meetings before then apparently, prior to May.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

PP. Right, I don't disagree -- both sides have presented information that indicates the other person did not behave 100% professionally and may have contributed to issues on set. My bigger point is that they are talking past each other on some of these issues. Baldoni's complaint contextualizes some of what Lively alleges and adds some accusations against Lively that make her look bad. But the complaint does not address everything Lively alleges, and in particular the dispute over the intimate scenes and intimacy coordinator seem to be addressing different things.

So far, if I assume that everything in Lively's complaint that is not addressed by Baldoni is true, he still looks pretty bad to me. However, Baldoni's complaint indicates that Lively may have set herself up to be in an awkward negotiating position by not participating fully in the pre-production discussions of the intimate scenes -- if she had, she may have been alerted to Baldoni's style and his preferences for these scenes sooner, and the IC might have been able to head off issues in advance. Lively also would have had a relationship with the IC that might have made it easier for her to turn to the IC for help during shooting when she was feeling pressured to do things in scenes that were not written as intimate but seem to have become that.

However on a professionally run set where people are behaving themselves, an actor should not actually need that level of involvement from the IC, outside of the scripted sex scenes. Lively has filmed plenty of intimate scenes before, perhaps they were more professionally run than this film and she was surprised by the issues that came up during the shoot.

I'm an attorney and I just would caution people to think Baldoni has somehow totally exonerated himself here. One major sticking point is that no matter what Lively did or didn't do with regards to meeting pre-production, this was Baldoni's set. He was the director and his production company was bankrolling it. So if it was an unprofessional set where industry rules were being flouted and where many cast and crew felt uncomfortable or harassed, that falls to him, even if Lively engaged in problematic behavior too. His burden is higher because he has more liability exposure. He needs to prove that he and Wayfarer did everything by the book and that any problems were 100% caused by Lively or other actors not following clear procedures. What he's alleged in his complaint isn't that. He has contextualized some of her allegations. Since his complaint is actually a separate lawsuit, he wasn't required to respond directly to all her allegations. I will be interested to see how he answers Lively complaint and how her complaint (which is broader in scope than his, which is focused on the allegations in the NYTs) proceeds. He is far from out of the woods here.

[Anonymous]

More texts being released by Justin when he files his counterclaim in the suit brought by Blake. His side claims they will be releasing all his texts with her.

[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.

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

In addition, she was getting ready to launch a hair care line and she had two other businesses with her mock tail and cocktail lines. Maybe she just took on too much. I firmly believe women can have it all, but maybe not all at one time.

If she was not prepared to do a big movie so soon after having her child, she simply should not have signed the contract for the film. I’m sorry, but this makes all women look bad if you just say well she just had a baby she couldn’t possibly be expected to uphold the standards of the industry!

Prrez Hilton just published another video which completely gives another depiction of what happened in the early days of production with her getting feedback about her appearance. Apparently sony the distributor was very upset that paparazzi had gotten photos of Blake out in New York on set in some of her characters outfits. If you recall the photos got a lot of backlash on Instagram that Blake was too old to play Lily. Lily was 23 in the book, but Colleen Hoover explained for the movie they had to make the characters older because an acclaimed neurosurgeon could not have been 27 years old like in the book. So they aged up all the characters so that Ryle could be an actual experienced neurosurgeon, and then it made sense that Lily was older too.

But it generated a lot of backlash from fans. It was Sony who had concerns about this that they bought to Justin the director. He says he was conveying notes from Sony in her trailer along the lines of changing some of the wardrobe choices, so he claims. He said he didn’t tear up about Blake looking old, but toward the end of the conversation, she complimented him on what a great job he was doing, and what a great director he was and he teared up. It sounds like she completely distorted that conversation? But who knows, it does sound like a lot of he said she said, but. if Justin’s team can show that Sony gave those notes that would probably help his case and hurt hers.

I don't view that as exonerating. The issue with the paparazzi photos, the online complaining about Lively's age, and Sony's unhappiness are all things that Baldoni was in charge of dealing with and Lively... was not. He was the director and his company was producing. Dealing with unhappiness from the studio is part of that job. Going to Lively and saying "everyone is saying you're too old for this role and your outfits are bad" is totally unproductive and unprofessional. What is Lively going to do? Be younger? Recast herself? If Baldoni wanted to change up her costuming that was within his control even though Lively had played a big role in selecting Lily's clothes. He was the director, he could have overruled her if he wanted to.

So no I don't think it helps his case that Sony gave those notes, at least not on this issue. Lively wasn't directing or producing the movie. Baldoni was her boss. What would you do if your boss came into your office, started complaining about some conflict with higher ups that impacts you but over which you have zero control, and then started crying? I would view that as very unprofessional and burdening me with stuff way beyond my actual job.

Baldoni was the director, that was his problem to figure out. He should have worked with the film's PR team to combat the negative press, sought to do a better job securing the set, and perhaps worked with the costume department if he was worried about Lily's look for the film. I don't see what going to Lively and complaining about it did except make his star actress feel self conscious about her age, something she has no control. It comes off as immature and unprofessional.

[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.

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

In addition, she was getting ready to launch a hair care line and she had two other businesses with her mock tail and cocktail lines. Maybe she just took on too much. I firmly believe women can have it all, but maybe not all at one time.

If she was not prepared to do a big movie so soon after having her child, she simply should not have signed the contract for the film. I’m sorry, but this makes all women look bad if you just say well she just had a baby she couldn’t possibly be expected to uphold the standards of the industry!

Prrez Hilton just published another video which completely gives another depiction of what happened in the early days of production with her getting feedback about her appearance. Apparently sony the distributor was very upset that paparazzi had gotten photos of Blake out in New York on set in some of her characters outfits. If you recall the photos got a lot of backlash on Instagram that Blake was too old to play Lily. Lily was 23 in the book, but Colleen Hoover explained for the movie they had to make the characters older because an acclaimed neurosurgeon could not have been 27 years old like in the book. So they aged up all the characters so that Ryle could be an actual experienced neurosurgeon, and then it made sense that Lily was older too.

But it generated a lot of backlash from fans. It was Sony who had concerns about this that they bought to Justin the director. He says he was conveying notes from Sony in her trailer along the lines of changing some of the wardrobe choices, so he claims. He said he didn’t tear up about Blake looking old, but toward the end of the conversation, she complimented him on what a great job he was doing, and what a great director he was and he teared up. It sounds like she completely distorted that conversation? But who knows, it does sound like a lot of he said she said, but. if Justin’s team can show that Sony gave those notes that would probably help his case and hurt hers.

I don't view that as exonerating. The issue with the paparazzi photos, the online complaining about Lively's age, and Sony's unhappiness are all things that Baldoni was in charge of dealing with and Lively... was not. He was the director and his company was producing. Dealing with unhappiness from the studio is part of that job. Going to Lively and saying "everyone is saying you're too old for this role and your outfits are bad" is totally unproductive and unprofessional. What is Lively going to do? Be younger? Recast herself? If Baldoni wanted to change up her costuming that was within his control even though Lively had played a big role in selecting Lily's clothes. He was the director, he could have overruled her if he wanted to.

So no I don't think it helps his case that Sony gave those notes, at least not on this issue. Lively wasn't directing or producing the movie. Baldoni was her boss. What would you do if your boss came into your office, started complaining about some conflict with higher ups that impacts you but over which you have zero control, and then started crying? I would view that as very unprofessional and burdening me with stuff way beyond my actual job.

Baldoni was the director, that was his problem to figure out. He should have worked with the film's PR team to combat the negative press, sought to do a better job securing the set, and perhaps worked with the costume department if he was worried about Lily's look for the film. I don't see what going to Lively and complaining about it did except make his star actress feel self conscious about her age, something she has no control. It comes off as immature and unprofessional.

He even says he did have that conversation with her, upset over online reactions to her age. She said he cried about it to her, he says he merely "teared up" either way WTF? How is any of that appropriate?

[Anonymous]

Why would an intimacy coordinator suggest an oral sex scene? It’s not their role to suggest new scenes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

PP. Right, I don't disagree -- both sides have presented information that indicates the other person did not behave 100% professionally and may have contributed to issues on set. My bigger point is that they are talking past each other on some of these issues. Baldoni's complaint contextualizes some of what Lively alleges and adds some accusations against Lively that make her look bad. But the complaint does not address everything Lively alleges, and in particular the dispute over the intimate scenes and intimacy coordinator seem to be addressing different things.

So far, if I assume that everything in Lively's complaint that is not addressed by Baldoni is true, he still looks pretty bad to me. However, Baldoni's complaint indicates that Lively may have set herself up to be in an awkward negotiating position by not participating fully in the pre-production discussions of the intimate scenes -- if she had, she may have been alerted to Baldoni's style and his preferences for these scenes sooner, and the IC might have been able to head off issues in advance. Lively also would have had a relationship with the IC that might have made it easier for her to turn to the IC for help during shooting when she was feeling pressured to do things in scenes that were not written as intimate but seem to have become that.

However on a professionally run set where people are behaving themselves, an actor should not actually need that level of involvement from the IC, outside of the scripted sex scenes. Lively has filmed plenty of intimate scenes before, perhaps they were more professionally run than this film and she was surprised by the issues that came up during the shoot.

I'm an attorney and I just would caution people to think Baldoni has somehow totally exonerated himself here. One major sticking point is that no matter what Lively did or didn't do with regards to meeting pre-production, this was Baldoni's set. He was the director and his production company was bankrolling it. So if it was an unprofessional set where industry rules were being flouted and where many cast and crew felt uncomfortable or harassed, that falls to him, even if Lively engaged in problematic behavior too. His burden is higher because he has more liability exposure. He needs to prove that he and Wayfarer did everything by the book and that any problems were 100% caused by Lively or other actors not following clear procedures. What he's alleged in his complaint isn't that. He has contextualized some of her allegations. Since his complaint is actually a separate lawsuit, he wasn't required to respond directly to all her allegations. I will be interested to see how he answers Lively complaint and how her complaint (which is broader in scope than his, which is focused on the allegations in the NYTs) proceeds. He is far from out of the woods here.

It was his set but lively wielded a tremendous amount of power on it. She got to pick all of her costuming, which is from what I understand kind of unheard of. she got to select the music, in addition to getting Taylor songs, she’s also done an interviewer saying she was responsible for picking Lana Del ray songs. She also hired the Deadpool editor for the final edit. She also chose the final cut of the picture which essentially means she had full control. Justin‘s cut tested better, but Sony let her proceed with her cut. Why? Was it Ryan Reynolds? And at what point did he berate Justin in his apartment? Because that should be looked at too and he should not be off the hook for harassment.

You keep saying Justin was the director and had full control, but given everything that I just listed, someone took control away from him, and I want to know when and why. If it was because he was sexually harassing people why wasn’t he fired? There was just a lot of conflicting timelines and stories here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why would an intimacy coordinator suggest an oral sex scene? It’s not their role to suggest new scenes?

Yes, that is actually exactly her role. She works with the cast members and the Director to choreograph scenes and make suggestions based on the script. It is absolutely in her role to suggest what should be shot. Obviously the Director and producers has final say but she is supposed to be making these suggestions and script these scenes.

[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.

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

In addition, she was getting ready to launch a hair care line and she had two other businesses with her mock tail and cocktail lines. Maybe she just took on too much. I firmly believe women can have it all, but maybe not all at one time.

If she was not prepared to do a big movie so soon after having her child, she simply should not have signed the contract for the film. I’m sorry, but this makes all women look bad if you just say well she just had a baby she couldn’t possibly be expected to uphold the standards of the industry!

Prrez Hilton just published another video which completely gives another depiction of what happened in the early days of production with her getting feedback about her appearance. Apparently sony the distributor was very upset that paparazzi had gotten photos of Blake out in New York on set in some of her characters outfits. If you recall the photos got a lot of backlash on Instagram that Blake was too old to play Lily. Lily was 23 in the book, but Colleen Hoover explained for the movie they had to make the characters older because an acclaimed neurosurgeon could not have been 27 years old like in the book. So they aged up all the characters so that Ryle could be an actual experienced neurosurgeon, and then it made sense that Lily was older too.

But it generated a lot of backlash from fans. It was Sony who had concerns about this that they bought to Justin the director. He says he was conveying notes from Sony in her trailer along the lines of changing some of the wardrobe choices, so he claims. He said he didn’t tear up about Blake looking old, but toward the end of the conversation, she complimented him on what a great job he was doing, and what a great director he was and he teared up. It sounds like she completely distorted that conversation? But who knows, it does sound like a lot of he said she said, but. if Justin’s team can show that Sony gave those notes that would probably help his case and hurt hers.

I don't view that as exonerating. The issue with the paparazzi photos, the online complaining about Lively's age, and Sony's unhappiness are all things that Baldoni was in charge of dealing with and Lively... was not. He was the director and his company was producing. Dealing with unhappiness from the studio is part of that job. Going to Lively and saying "everyone is saying you're too old for this role and your outfits are bad" is totally unproductive and unprofessional. What is Lively going to do? Be younger? Recast herself? If Baldoni wanted to change up her costuming that was within his control even though Lively had played a big role in selecting Lily's clothes. He was the director, he could have overruled her if he wanted to.

So no I don't think it helps his case that Sony gave those notes, at least not on this issue. Lively wasn't directing or producing the movie. Baldoni was her boss. What would you do if your boss came into your office, started complaining about some conflict with higher ups that impacts you but over which you have zero control, and then started crying? I would view that as very unprofessional and burdening me with stuff way beyond my actual job.

Baldoni was the director, that was his problem to figure out. He should have worked with the film's PR team to combat the negative press, sought to do a better job securing the set, and perhaps worked with the costume department if he was worried about Lily's look for the film. I don't see what going to Lively and complaining about it did except make his star actress feel self conscious about her age, something she has no control. It comes off as immature and unprofessional.

It was my understanding his suggestions were about costuming, which Blake took charge of. I don’t think it was ever alleged he told her to be younger. He simply was saying she should get help with some of the costume which she disagreed with.

Industry standards are that a costume department would make those decisions, there was also a set department that laid out the vision for Lily’s floral shop, which she completely disagreed with. I’ve read accounts that she was responsible for the costume and for the changing set, but that was also not her role, but she was allowed to do that.

You kinda can’t have it both ways and say that’s not her role when she clearly took on those roles. Was Justin in the wrong for giving her that kind of control? Maybe. But it certainly seems like he was letting her have her way when everyone was getting along and friendsand then when things went south at some point, they completely twisted that on him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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

In addition, she was getting ready to launch a hair care line and she had two other businesses with her mock tail and cocktail lines. Maybe she just took on too much. I firmly believe women can have it all, but maybe not all at one time.

If she was not prepared to do a big movie so soon after having her child, she simply should not have signed the contract for the film. I’m sorry, but this makes all women look bad if you just say well she just had a baby she couldn’t possibly be expected to uphold the standards of the industry!

Prrez Hilton just published another video which completely gives another depiction of what happened in the early days of production with her getting feedback about her appearance. Apparently sony the distributor was very upset that paparazzi had gotten photos of Blake out in New York on set in some of her characters outfits. If you recall the photos got a lot of backlash on Instagram that Blake was too old to play Lily. Lily was 23 in the book, but Colleen Hoover explained for the movie they had to make the characters older because an acclaimed neurosurgeon could not have been 27 years old like in the book. So they aged up all the characters so that Ryle could be an actual experienced neurosurgeon, and then it made sense that Lily was older too.

But it generated a lot of backlash from fans. It was Sony who had concerns about this that they bought to Justin the director. He says he was conveying notes from Sony in her trailer along the lines of changing some of the wardrobe choices, so he claims. He said he didn’t tear up about Blake looking old, but toward the end of the conversation, she complimented him on what a great job he was doing, and what a great director he was and he teared up. It sounds like she completely distorted that conversation? But who knows, it does sound like a lot of he said she said, but. if Justin’s team can show that Sony gave those notes that would probably help his case and hurt hers.

I don't view that as exonerating. The issue with the paparazzi photos, the online complaining about Lively's age, and Sony's unhappiness are all things that Baldoni was in charge of dealing with and Lively... was not. He was the director and his company was producing. Dealing with unhappiness from the studio is part of that job. Going to Lively and saying "everyone is saying you're too old for this role and your outfits are bad" is totally unproductive and unprofessional. What is Lively going to do? Be younger? Recast herself? If Baldoni wanted to change up her costuming that was within his control even though Lively had played a big role in selecting Lily's clothes. He was the director, he could have overruled her if he wanted to.

So no I don't think it helps his case that Sony gave those notes, at least not on this issue. Lively wasn't directing or producing the movie. Baldoni was her boss. What would you do if your boss came into your office, started complaining about some conflict with higher ups that impacts you but over which you have zero control, and then started crying? I would view that as very unprofessional and burdening me with stuff way beyond my actual job.

Baldoni was the director, that was his problem to figure out. He should have worked with the film's PR team to combat the negative press, sought to do a better job securing the set, and perhaps worked with the costume department if he was worried about Lily's look for the film. I don't see what going to Lively and complaining about it did except make his star actress feel self conscious about her age, something she has no control. It comes off as immature and unprofessional.

He even says he did have that conversation with her, upset over online reactions to her age. She said he cried about it to her, he says he merely "teared up" either way WTF? How is any of that appropriate?

She was saying that they had a very personal conversation at the end where she complimented him and he teared up.

I’ve said it before - it seems like Justin and Blake got very close on the set and lines were crossed by both of them. It probably would be fine if they had stayed friends, but somewhere along the way though it seems like Ryan Reynolds or somebody was trying to take control from Justin, and in doing so, using all of these personal bounty crossings to their advantage.

It seems like both of them should’ve acted a hell of a lot more professionally on this set.

[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.

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

In late May?

Yes. May 29th, 2023. Blake lively does not do life or maternity the same way us peasants do.

May 29, 2023 was one of the three NYC shows (at MetLife stadium in NJ). I know because I attended that day. That date was smack in the middle of the US leg of the tour. I assure you neither Blake nor Taylor was in Madrid.