Why is Blake Lively so overrated?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The birth scene is a centerpiece of the film, not just a technical scene.

C’mon. In the script Lively’s character won’t sleep with him and doesn’t get naked, so we’re supposed to presume that she’s fully naked when she’s invited her abusive ex to be there, only to tell him hours later she wants a divorce. Honestly, that they wanted her naked doesn’t even align with her character or the plot.

On a practical consideration, I’ve only had c-sections, but are you even allowed to be fully naked in a hospital birth? Wouldn’t nurses feel that was sexual harassment? I mean you can’t be naked if you have bladder surgery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The main thing the Vanity Fair article showed me is that Blake’s team laid out in their complaint that she came to a meeting with a formal list of complaints.

No more….walking in on her breast-feeding.

No more…. Talking about p—-n

No more…. On the fly sex scenes

Whatever they were, her team framed it like there was a formal meeting with a list of complaints and Justin and Jamey agreed to move forward, addressing those complaints or not doing those things anymore.

Justin is saying he’s never seen that list and the teams embellishment of “no more” before each thing makes it sound like it was constantly happening and it wasn’t, in other words, maybe someone walked in on her once breast-feeding and apologized, it didn’t happen multiple times and it was an honest mistake. Something like that I guess.

Either there was a meeting or there wasn’t. I would call that a formal complaint. I can’t imagine a world in which a written document like that did not cross paths with HR or that an HR rep wasn’t in that meeting. Maybe they were, and Sony considered the matter closed and therefore does not consider that formal complaint? But Justin is saying it didn’t happen at all.

It should be easily provable: either there was a meeting and people can show it on the schedule or someone documented and took notes about what happened. Someone can produce a document with a list of “no more” things that Blake wanted in January 2024 when filming resumed after the strike.

Someone has to pony that up because right now Justin is saying it never happened and Sony is not helping Blake claim by saying no one filed anything with HR.

Lively's complaint rests very heavily on the "January 4th meeting" -- like it's how the complaint starts and the entire thing revolves around what happened before that meeting and what was discussed at that meeting and what was decided as a result of that meeting. So if there was no meeting one January 4th involving this group of people, her entire complaint falls apart.

But as a result I would be very surprised if there was no meeting because it's described in such detail and involved numerous people. Memories may differ as to what happened.

I don't put much stock in Sony saying no formal harassment complaint was filed with HR. Sony was the producer and they told Lively that they had no authority over Baldoni or Wayfarere -- they were just signed on to distribute the movie. So Sony's HR would have no authority over the set either -- none of the actors, the director, nor the producers were employees of Sony so they would not be able to process an HR complaint from anyone on the set.

Also Sony doesn't want to be implicated in any of this -- definitely better for them if Wayfarer/Baldoni are viewed as separate entities.

Welk, that looks bad for Blake because sony wants to have it both ways. They should not have come out with a statement they’d “12 more movies with bake” if they had no idea what the F was happening on set.

Now it just makes it seem like they’re in bed with Ryan Reynolds cause he’s funding the next franchise of Sonys and they are not doing well financially. They should stay out of it if they have no idea what happened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The birth scene is a centerpiece of the film, not just a technical scene.

C’mon. In the script Lively’s character won’t sleep with him and doesn’t get naked, so we’re supposed to presume that she’s fully naked when she’s invited her abusive ex to be there, only to tell him hours later she wants a divorce. Honestly, that they wanted her naked doesn’t even align with her character or the plot.

On a practical consideration, I’ve only had c-sections, but are you even allowed to be fully naked in a hospital birth? Wouldn’t nurses feel that was sexual harassment? I mean you can’t be naked if you have bladder surgery.

The movie had a lot of plot holes so this doesn’t stand out even in the top 20.

And I actually enjoyed the movie, but I knew what I was getting into. It’s a book based on a romance novel by Colleen Hoover. It’s not going to be realistic in many ways. In the book, the acclaimed neurosurgeon was 27 years old. I mean, everything is just laughable about the whole plot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just reread his Complaint. He claims that Blake refused to meet with the intimacy coordinator so he had to meet with them alone, relay that discussion with Blake and then get her buy in. Very strange that Blake wouldn’t want the intimacy coordinator directly involved with her.

He is alleging that she declined to meet with the intimacy coordinator prior to filming. She said she trusted the coordinator and didn't feel they needed to meet. But that's not the same as Lively not wanting the coordinator "directly involved" with her. Lively had just had a baby and didn't want to disrupt her maternity leave with pre-production meetings. Once on the set, Lively worked directly with the intimacy coordinator.

Lively's complaints regarding the coordinator have to do with scenes that were not scripted as intimate scenes and for which the intimacy coordinator was not brought in. So meeting with the IC before production wouldn't have changed that dynamic. The IC was never charged with choreographing the birth scene or the dancing scene that Lively alleges were changed on set to become nude/intimate scenes without input from the IC. That was sprung on Lively the day of filming.

Actually her claims are also that she didn’t like the way changes were made to the intimacy scenes. She also said she wanted everything mapped out before filming started. Then she refused to meet with the intimacy coordinator before filming started. He is saying that any changes made to intimacy scenes were discussed with and approved by the intimacy coordinator.

I can't find a searchable pdf of Baldoni's complaint but just going by the article in Variety, she only refused one, unscheduled, meet and greet type meeting with the intimiacy coordinator. It was nice of him to offer that meeting and fine for her to decline if that's the only one she declined. That does not in any way mean she did not engage with the IC in the appropriate way during filming. It would be different if he established a pattern of her no showing at scheduled meetings to discuss the substance of the scenes, and then she complained about the lack of IC.

https://variety.com/2024/film/news/justin-baldoni-sues-new-york-times-blake-lively-allegations-story-1236263099/
In one text message sent by Lively before production included in the suit, she indicates that she is in no hurry to meet with the film’s intimacy coordinator. “I feel good. I can meet her when we start thank you though!”

He says she refused to meet with the intimacy coordinator generally in his complaint, and that he discussed any changes that were made with the intimacy coordinator pending Blake’s later input.

There's a disconnect on this issue that Baldoni has not addressed.

Lively's complaint mostly does not focus on scripted intimate scenes aside from two incidents: (1) the scene in which Lively felt Baldoni lingered overlong while filming a kiss and bit her lip after the scene had concluded, and (2) a sex scene where Baldoni proposed adding an oral sex sequence that was not in the original script.

Regarding #1, Lively's complaint has to do with Baldoni's behavior and the IC is beside the point. The kiss was scripted. Lively feels Baldoni crossed the line at the end of the scene by continuing to kiss her after cut had been called. Unclear if Lively said anything about this in the moment or if the IC noticed anything amiss. Presumably that will be explored.

Regarding #2, there is a clear dispute over exactly how this was handled. According to Lively, the scene was scripted and choreographed by the IC without an oral sex scene (presumably based on the shooting pages Lively was given prior to filming) and Baldoni wanted to add the oral sex in at the last minute. According to Baldoni, the oral sex scene was suggested by the IC during a meeting Lively refused to attend. I view this as an open question of disputed facts and don't know who to believe. The truth might actually be something else. The IC's potential testimony is pretty central to this specific claim.

The rest of Lively's complaints concern actions set by Baldoni and his producer partner unrelated to scripted intimate scenes. This includes making scenes not scripted as intimate (and that the IC did not choreograph and wasn't present) intimate at the last minute, as well as a host of behaviors unrelated to the actual filming of the movie (Baldoni's and Heath's behaviors in Lively's trailer and makeup trailer, comments to Lively and her staff regarding Lively's appearance, weight, and sexuality, etc.). None of the stuff in this category concerns the IC or could have been prevented by the IC. So whether Lively met with the IC or not prior to filming is irrelevant to these claims.

Why would an IC suggest adding more sex? Is that typical for them to have creative license?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just reread his Complaint. He claims that Blake refused to meet with the intimacy coordinator so he had to meet with them alone, relay that discussion with Blake and then get her buy in. Very strange that Blake wouldn’t want the intimacy coordinator directly involved with her.

He is alleging that she declined to meet with the intimacy coordinator prior to filming. She said she trusted the coordinator and didn't feel they needed to meet. But that's not the same as Lively not wanting the coordinator "directly involved" with her. Lively had just had a baby and didn't want to disrupt her maternity leave with pre-production meetings. Once on the set, Lively worked directly with the intimacy coordinator.

Lively's complaints regarding the coordinator have to do with scenes that were not scripted as intimate scenes and for which the intimacy coordinator was not brought in. So meeting with the IC before production wouldn't have changed that dynamic. The IC was never charged with choreographing the birth scene or the dancing scene that Lively alleges were changed on set to become nude/intimate scenes without input from the IC. That was sprung on Lively the day of filming.

Actually her claims are also that she didn’t like the way changes were made to the intimacy scenes. She also said she wanted everything mapped out before filming started. Then she refused to meet with the intimacy coordinator before filming started. He is saying that any changes made to intimacy scenes were discussed with and approved by the intimacy coordinator.

I can't find a searchable pdf of Baldoni's complaint but just going by the article in Variety, she only refused one, unscheduled, meet and greet type meeting with the intimiacy coordinator. It was nice of him to offer that meeting and fine for her to decline if that's the only one she declined. That does not in any way mean she did not engage with the IC in the appropriate way during filming. It would be different if he established a pattern of her no showing at scheduled meetings to discuss the substance of the scenes, and then she complained about the lack of IC.

https://variety.com/2024/film/news/justin-baldoni-sues-new-york-times-blake-lively-allegations-story-1236263099/
In one text message sent by Lively before production included in the suit, she indicates that she is in no hurry to meet with the film’s intimacy coordinator. “I feel good. I can meet her when we start thank you though!”

He says she refused to meet with the intimacy coordinator generally in his complaint, and that he discussed any changes that were made with the intimacy coordinator pending Blake’s later input.

There's a disconnect on this issue that Baldoni has not addressed.

Lively's complaint mostly does not focus on scripted intimate scenes aside from two incidents: (1) the scene in which Lively felt Baldoni lingered overlong while filming a kiss and bit her lip after the scene had concluded, and (2) a sex scene where Baldoni proposed adding an oral sex sequence that was not in the original script.

Regarding #1, Lively's complaint has to do with Baldoni's behavior and the IC is beside the point. The kiss was scripted. Lively feels Baldoni crossed the line at the end of the scene by continuing to kiss her after cut had been called. Unclear if Lively said anything about this in the moment or if the IC noticed anything amiss. Presumably that will be explored.

Regarding #2, there is a clear dispute over exactly how this was handled. According to Lively, the scene was scripted and choreographed by the IC without an oral sex scene (presumably based on the shooting pages Lively was given prior to filming) and Baldoni wanted to add the oral sex in at the last minute. According to Baldoni, the oral sex scene was suggested by the IC during a meeting Lively refused to attend. I view this as an open question of disputed facts and don't know who to believe. The truth might actually be something else. The IC's potential testimony is pretty central to this specific claim.

The rest of Lively's complaints concern actions set by Baldoni and his producer partner unrelated to scripted intimate scenes. This includes making scenes not scripted as intimate (and that the IC did not choreograph and wasn't present) intimate at the last minute, as well as a host of behaviors unrelated to the actual filming of the movie (Baldoni's and Heath's behaviors in Lively's trailer and makeup trailer, comments to Lively and her staff regarding Lively's appearance, weight, and sexuality, etc.). None of the stuff in this category concerns the IC or could have been prevented by the IC. So whether Lively met with the IC or not prior to filming is irrelevant to these claims.

Why would an IC suggest adding more sex? Is that typical for them to have creative license?

Either the director doesn't know what he's doing or the IC is being thrown under the bus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is what his complaint says about the IC:
Contrary to Lively’s assertion, it was she who refused to meet with the intimacy
coordinator to plan out scenes, putting Baldoni in the awkward position of meeting with the
intimacy coordinator alone and later relaying sex scene suggestions to Lively in the intimacy
coordinator’s absence—not only defeating the purpose but resulting in accusations by the Times that,
before shooting began, Baldoni wanted to add sex scenes that Lively considered gratuitous; in fact,
these scenes were proposed by the intimacy coordinator. This is well-documented in hand-written
notes Baldoni took during meetings with the intimacy coordinator.

But this doesn't really make sense. Baldoni was the director, it's his job to meet with the IC and map out the sex scenes and it's also his job (or the job of the production company, and he was also producing) to get the actors on board with what is mapped out.

Like literally it is his job to figure out how he wants to tell this story (it's his movie) and work that out with everyone involved. Lively wasn't contractually obligated to participate in pre-production meetings and didn't want to (presumably because she was on maternity leave) but that doesn't mean she refused to work with the IC.

Also it's such a copout for him to say "oh the IC suggested these gratuitous sex scenes." Whose movie is this? Sorry but intimacy coordinators are not hired to determine how graphic or sexual a movie is. That is 100% within the purview of the director. An IC is like a stunt coordinator -- their job is to ensure the director's vision for the intimate scenes is carried out in a safe and respectful way for the actors, following industry standards. Can you imagine if an actor complained that a stunt was too dangerous or not necessary for the movie and the director said "oh well that wasn't even my idea, the stunt coordinator suggested it and I said okay."

The director is the boss. It sounds like Baldoni was really bad at it. This is what happens when you hire a total novice to direct a feature like this. Sounds like he only go the gig because his production company has loads of money and was able to get the full rights to the movie. I don't think a studio would have hired someone this inept and if they did, I think they would have brought in someone to hold his hand when it became obvious that he didn't know what he was doing.

The intimacy coordinator is supposed to script out scenes with the actors and make sure they are comfortable. She is supposed to meet with them and get input on what is comfortable and what’s not. The director does not necessarily script those scenes, the director does not write every scene in the movie. A director is also not the screenwriter. A director is in charge of how things are shot, an intimacy coordinator’s job is to script out scenes.

On a few occasions, it seems like he had to meet with the intimacy coordinator and had to relay notes to her. That puts him in an awkward position of relaying thinks of a sexual nature to her. But he had signed and dated notes apparently.

Sorry you clearly don't have experience with this. I do.

An IC does not "script out" scenes. The IC works closely with the director to choreograph a scene based on what the director says they want. The IC will make suggestions on the content of a scene only insofar as it's relevant to protecting the actors. So like a director might say they want a sex scene to to take place on a balcony because they want the scene framed with a view behind the actors. The IC might say "ok but we need to find a way to frame it so there can be some kind of padding underneath the actors since it could be painful or injurious to film this on the cement of this particular balcony." Then the director will say "okay but I want to do these two close ups of the actors from above and I don't want to be able to see any padding underneath them." And the IC will way okay so we'll do the following shots from the interior with the padding and the view behind them, and then we'll set up these closeups separately so that we can minimize the time the actors have to be on the cement without the padding -- also since we are only doing closeups for this part of the shoot, we can have the actors clothed from the waist down which will make that less uncomfortable for them." And so on.

What an IC doesn't do is say "oh it would be really cool if at this point your character went down on the other character." That's a story element, that's not up to the IC. A professional IC would not make a suggestion like that, and if they did, a professional director would not view it as necessary to follow the IC's suggestion -- it's just not their place.

The only thing I can think of is if a director suggested filming a sex act that an IC knows would be really uncomfortable for an actor to perform, they might say "okay what if instead we make this part of the scene an oral sex scene -- does that achieve your goal of showing the characters in a more intimate position without putting the actors in a really compromised position?" But it that case the IC isn't scripting the scene. They are proposing an alternative to something they view as particularly hard to film in a way that wouldn't compromise the actors.

In any case, it is completely normal for a director to meet with an IC to choreograph a sex scene and then for the director to relay what they figured out to the actors involved. And it's normal for an actor who is uncomfortable with any of it to say "ok I'm not comfortable with XYZ" and for the director to have to go back to the IC to address that issue. That's the director's job.

Directing a movie is really, really hard. Especially a feature length film with well known actors and a fairly large budget (for this sort of movie). But that's not an excuse for sexual harassment or being unprofessional on set or creating a creepy, sexualized environment.

In one paragraph, please share the basis for your personal knowledge of how an ic works.

I have represented intimacy coordinators in contract matters with studios and have drafted the "duties of position" for these contracts. I've also reviewed production notes from ICs detailing how intimate scenes were choreographed and executed and interviewed both ICs and other members of production to discuss what the IC did and how it went.

Right, just another plain old dcum mom, who is also just happens to be an entertainment lawyer who is fighting to the bone for Blake day after day. Explains a lot.

I'm not fighting for Lively -- I don't actually care for her as an actress and while I've never worked with her or anyone who knows here, she does have a rep for being a PITA.

But I do have a lot of experience in the industry and dealing with these specific issues (though no longer practice except for very occasional part-time consulting, I'm mostly a SAHM at this point).

If you don't think what I'm telling you above about how the industry works is accurate, you are more than welcome to fact check it. You are not going to find someone who will confirm that an IC scripts scenes or decides what kinds of intimate acts the actors will be doing because they don't.

I think your description of what an IC does is probably accurate, I just don’t think you are being honest about your connection to this case. I’ve long wondered why someone who isn’t being compensated would write such lengthy, extremely one sided posts, and so many of them. We’ll never know for sure, but it sure is suspicious.

Further, I don’t think Justin’s description is inconsistent with yours. He had discussions with the IC where various scenarios were discussed and then took back what she suggested among the alternatives to Blake. I would think, given her alleged level of concern and discomfort, Blake would have availed herself to having a neutral party present for all conversations about the intimacy scenes rather than opting to discussing them one on one with the person who was allegedly harassing her, regardless of what the typical practice may be.

LOL. The irony. We know he spent $$$ on a smear campaign.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can see some clips from the birth scene in this compilation starting at about the 3:50 mark: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdEW5ddIhhg

Lively is naked below her boobs. There are multiple closeups of her belly and upper legs. Her legs are up in stirrups in a way that if she tried to pull that hospital gown over her lower half, it would ride up because her legs are up in the air.

It was a nude scene. If the actress filming that scene asked for a sheet between takes to cover up her lower body (even just for warmth, not modesty) it should have been provided. I'm sure there were points when she was able to take her legs out of the stirrups and cover up with the gown, but there were also definitely points where she had to lie there in the stirrups between takes because her legs are up for the full scene so I'm sure they were up for much of the shoot.

Those of you quibbling over "oh she could have pulled her hospital gown down" or "she wasn't really nude, she was wearing clothes" just sound dumb. She's obviously nude and the position of her body would have made it impossible to fully cover up with her gown unless she was lying there holding the gown in place the entire time with her hands (and she probably had to do other things with her hands between takes, like review notes about the scene, drink from a water bottle, etc.).

Why didn't they just give her a sheet? Like this is not explained. What possible reason would the production have for not giving her something to cover up during the scene? She shouldn't have to prove that she needs one, it should just be provided.

Do you understand Blake's not actually giving birth? Its called movie making. That's not her nude belly. It's a thick, warm prosthetic torso. Do while she looks like she's naked, she's actually not.

Still legs spread with a tiny piece of fabric covering her labia while mimicking pushing on an open set, visible camera screens posting the uncut scenesz and regardless of whether she could move to close her legs or move the gown during the shot, nobody could be bothered to give her a coverup when she asked for one.

I am one hundred percent sure that the camera was not focused on her labia — for one thing the friend of the director actor would be blocking it, for the other, she wasn’t actually pushing a baby out and aiming a camera there would make it obvious, and lastly, this was a PG 13 movie. Again, your fiction reads well though.

So his face was in her labia?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just reread his Complaint. He claims that Blake refused to meet with the intimacy coordinator so he had to meet with them alone, relay that discussion with Blake and then get her buy in. Very strange that Blake wouldn’t want the intimacy coordinator directly involved with her.

He is alleging that she declined to meet with the intimacy coordinator prior to filming. She said she trusted the coordinator and didn't feel they needed to meet. But that's not the same as Lively not wanting the coordinator "directly involved" with her. Lively had just had a baby and didn't want to disrupt her maternity leave with pre-production meetings. Once on the set, Lively worked directly with the intimacy coordinator.

Lively's complaints regarding the coordinator have to do with scenes that were not scripted as intimate scenes and for which the intimacy coordinator was not brought in. So meeting with the IC before production wouldn't have changed that dynamic. The IC was never charged with choreographing the birth scene or the dancing scene that Lively alleges were changed on set to become nude/intimate scenes without input from the IC. That was sprung on Lively the day of filming.

Actually her claims are also that she didn’t like the way changes were made to the intimacy scenes. She also said she wanted everything mapped out before filming started. Then she refused to meet with the intimacy coordinator before filming started. He is saying that any changes made to intimacy scenes were discussed with and approved by the intimacy coordinator.

I can't find a searchable pdf of Baldoni's complaint but just going by the article in Variety, she only refused one, unscheduled, meet and greet type meeting with the intimiacy coordinator. It was nice of him to offer that meeting and fine for her to decline if that's the only one she declined. That does not in any way mean she did not engage with the IC in the appropriate way during filming. It would be different if he established a pattern of her no showing at scheduled meetings to discuss the substance of the scenes, and then she complained about the lack of IC.

https://variety.com/2024/film/news/justin-baldoni-sues-new-york-times-blake-lively-allegations-story-1236263099/
In one text message sent by Lively before production included in the suit, she indicates that she is in no hurry to meet with the film’s intimacy coordinator. “I feel good. I can meet her when we start thank you though!”

He says she refused to meet with the intimacy coordinator generally in his complaint, and that he discussed any changes that were made with the intimacy coordinator pending Blake’s later input.

There's a disconnect on this issue that Baldoni has not addressed.

Lively's complaint mostly does not focus on scripted intimate scenes aside from two incidents: (1) the scene in which Lively felt Baldoni lingered overlong while filming a kiss and bit her lip after the scene had concluded, and (2) a sex scene where Baldoni proposed adding an oral sex sequence that was not in the original script.

Regarding #1, Lively's complaint has to do with Baldoni's behavior and the IC is beside the point. The kiss was scripted. Lively feels Baldoni crossed the line at the end of the scene by continuing to kiss her after cut had been called. Unclear if Lively said anything about this in the moment or if the IC noticed anything amiss. Presumably that will be explored.

Regarding #2, there is a clear dispute over exactly how this was handled. According to Lively, the scene was scripted and choreographed by the IC without an oral sex scene (presumably based on the shooting pages Lively was given prior to filming) and Baldoni wanted to add the oral sex in at the last minute. According to Baldoni, the oral sex scene was suggested by the IC during a meeting Lively refused to attend. I view this as an open question of disputed facts and don't know who to believe. The truth might actually be something else. The IC's potential testimony is pretty central to this specific claim.

The rest of Lively's complaints concern actions set by Baldoni and his producer partner unrelated to scripted intimate scenes. This includes making scenes not scripted as intimate (and that the IC did not choreograph and wasn't present) intimate at the last minute, as well as a host of behaviors unrelated to the actual filming of the movie (Baldoni's and Heath's behaviors in Lively's trailer and makeup trailer, comments to Lively and her staff regarding Lively's appearance, weight, and sexuality, etc.). None of the stuff in this category concerns the IC or could have been prevented by the IC. So whether Lively met with the IC or not prior to filming is irrelevant to these claims.

Why would an IC suggest adding more sex? Is that typical for them to have creative license?

Either the director doesn't know what he's doing or the IC is being thrown under the bus.

Surprise! It's actually both.

[Anonymous]

She is such a basic blonde. And her fashion sense the past few years has been terrible. I do t get why she still has a career.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just reread his Complaint. He claims that Blake refused to meet with the intimacy coordinator so he had to meet with them alone, relay that discussion with Blake and then get her buy in. Very strange that Blake wouldn’t want the intimacy coordinator directly involved with her.

He is alleging that she declined to meet with the intimacy coordinator prior to filming. She said she trusted the coordinator and didn't feel they needed to meet. But that's not the same as Lively not wanting the coordinator "directly involved" with her. Lively had just had a baby and didn't want to disrupt her maternity leave with pre-production meetings. Once on the set, Lively worked directly with the intimacy coordinator.

Lively's complaints regarding the coordinator have to do with scenes that were not scripted as intimate scenes and for which the intimacy coordinator was not brought in. So meeting with the IC before production wouldn't have changed that dynamic. The IC was never charged with choreographing the birth scene or the dancing scene that Lively alleges were changed on set to become nude/intimate scenes without input from the IC. That was sprung on Lively the day of filming.

Actually her claims are also that she didn’t like the way changes were made to the intimacy scenes. She also said she wanted everything mapped out before filming started. Then she refused to meet with the intimacy coordinator before filming started. He is saying that any changes made to intimacy scenes were discussed with and approved by the intimacy coordinator.

I can't find a searchable pdf of Baldoni's complaint but just going by the article in Variety, she only refused one, unscheduled, meet and greet type meeting with the intimiacy coordinator. It was nice of him to offer that meeting and fine for her to decline if that's the only one she declined. That does not in any way mean she did not engage with the IC in the appropriate way during filming. It would be different if he established a pattern of her no showing at scheduled meetings to discuss the substance of the scenes, and then she complained about the lack of IC.

https://variety.com/2024/film/news/justin-baldoni-sues-new-york-times-blake-lively-allegations-story-1236263099/
In one text message sent by Lively before production included in the suit, she indicates that she is in no hurry to meet with the film’s intimacy coordinator. “I feel good. I can meet her when we start thank you though!”

He says she refused to meet with the intimacy coordinator generally in his complaint, and that he discussed any changes that were made with the intimacy coordinator pending Blake’s later input.

There's a disconnect on this issue that Baldoni has not addressed.

Lively's complaint mostly does not focus on scripted intimate scenes aside from two incidents: (1) the scene in which Lively felt Baldoni lingered overlong while filming a kiss and bit her lip after the scene had concluded, and (2) a sex scene where Baldoni proposed adding an oral sex sequence that was not in the original script.

Regarding #1, Lively's complaint has to do with Baldoni's behavior and the IC is beside the point. The kiss was scripted. Lively feels Baldoni crossed the line at the end of the scene by continuing to kiss her after cut had been called. Unclear if Lively said anything about this in the moment or if the IC noticed anything amiss. Presumably that will be explored.

Regarding #2, there is a clear dispute over exactly how this was handled. According to Lively, the scene was scripted and choreographed by the IC without an oral sex scene (presumably based on the shooting pages Lively was given prior to filming) and Baldoni wanted to add the oral sex in at the last minute. According to Baldoni, the oral sex scene was suggested by the IC during a meeting Lively refused to attend. I view this as an open question of disputed facts and don't know who to believe. The truth might actually be something else. The IC's potential testimony is pretty central to this specific claim.

The rest of Lively's complaints concern actions set by Baldoni and his producer partner unrelated to scripted intimate scenes. This includes making scenes not scripted as intimate (and that the IC did not choreograph and wasn't present) intimate at the last minute, as well as a host of behaviors unrelated to the actual filming of the movie (Baldoni's and Heath's behaviors in Lively's trailer and makeup trailer, comments to Lively and her staff regarding Lively's appearance, weight, and sexuality, etc.). None of the stuff in this category concerns the IC or could have been prevented by the IC. So whether Lively met with the IC or not prior to filming is irrelevant to these claims.

Why would an IC suggest adding more sex? Is that typical for them to have creative license?

Either the director doesn't know what he's doing or the IC is being thrown under the bus.

Surprise! It's actually both.

I don’t understand the controversy here. First thing that comes up when you Google what is the role of an intimacy coordinator, is that the intimacy coordinator choreographs sex scenes. People are acting as if the director is the boss of everything, writes the script, and choreographed all the intimate scenes. That is not what happened here nor is that his role.

According to Justin Baldoni, he worked with the intimacy coordinator to choreograph and set up those scenes. He says that the intimacy coordinator suggested the oral sex scene, which is completely appropriate for her to do, I don’t know why people are acting like that could not be true. He is alleging a Blake missed some of those meetings and he had to relay some of this to her via handwritten notes which put him in an awkward position.

of course maybe he’s lying but he’s saying he has documentation and of course assuming the IC is a real person she could be interviewed and I suppose she will.

The other wrinkle in this is that even though he is the director, because he is an actor in some of these scenes, obviously someone else was directing those scenes! He cant be kissing his costar and yelling cut.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just reread his Complaint. He claims that Blake refused to meet with the intimacy coordinator so he had to meet with them alone, relay that discussion with Blake and then get her buy in. Very strange that Blake wouldn’t want the intimacy coordinator directly involved with her.

He is alleging that she declined to meet with the intimacy coordinator prior to filming. She said she trusted the coordinator and didn't feel they needed to meet. But that's not the same as Lively not wanting the coordinator "directly involved" with her. Lively had just had a baby and didn't want to disrupt her maternity leave with pre-production meetings. Once on the set, Lively worked directly with the intimacy coordinator.

Lively's complaints regarding the coordinator have to do with scenes that were not scripted as intimate scenes and for which the intimacy coordinator was not brought in. So meeting with the IC before production wouldn't have changed that dynamic. The IC was never charged with choreographing the birth scene or the dancing scene that Lively alleges were changed on set to become nude/intimate scenes without input from the IC. That was sprung on Lively the day of filming.

Actually her claims are also that she didn’t like the way changes were made to the intimacy scenes. She also said she wanted everything mapped out before filming started. Then she refused to meet with the intimacy coordinator before filming started. He is saying that any changes made to intimacy scenes were discussed with and approved by the intimacy coordinator.

I can't find a searchable pdf of Baldoni's complaint but just going by the article in Variety, she only refused one, unscheduled, meet and greet type meeting with the intimiacy coordinator. It was nice of him to offer that meeting and fine for her to decline if that's the only one she declined. That does not in any way mean she did not engage with the IC in the appropriate way during filming. It would be different if he established a pattern of her no showing at scheduled meetings to discuss the substance of the scenes, and then she complained about the lack of IC.

https://variety.com/2024/film/news/justin-baldoni-sues-new-york-times-blake-lively-allegations-story-1236263099/
In one text message sent by Lively before production included in the suit, she indicates that she is in no hurry to meet with the film’s intimacy coordinator. “I feel good. I can meet her when we start thank you though!”

He says she refused to meet with the intimacy coordinator generally in his complaint, and that he discussed any changes that were made with the intimacy coordinator pending Blake’s later input.

There's a disconnect on this issue that Baldoni has not addressed.

Lively's complaint mostly does not focus on scripted intimate scenes aside from two incidents: (1) the scene in which Lively felt Baldoni lingered overlong while filming a kiss and bit her lip after the scene had concluded, and (2) a sex scene where Baldoni proposed adding an oral sex sequence that was not in the original script.

Regarding #1, Lively's complaint has to do with Baldoni's behavior and the IC is beside the point. The kiss was scripted. Lively feels Baldoni crossed the line at the end of the scene by continuing to kiss her after cut had been called. Unclear if Lively said anything about this in the moment or if the IC noticed anything amiss. Presumably that will be explored.

Regarding #2, there is a clear dispute over exactly how this was handled. According to Lively, the scene was scripted and choreographed by the IC without an oral sex scene (presumably based on the shooting pages Lively was given prior to filming) and Baldoni wanted to add the oral sex in at the last minute. According to Baldoni, the oral sex scene was suggested by the IC during a meeting Lively refused to attend. I view this as an open question of disputed facts and don't know who to believe. The truth might actually be something else. The IC's potential testimony is pretty central to this specific claim.

The rest of Lively's complaints concern actions set by Baldoni and his producer partner unrelated to scripted intimate scenes. This includes making scenes not scripted as intimate (and that the IC did not choreograph and wasn't present) intimate at the last minute, as well as a host of behaviors unrelated to the actual filming of the movie (Baldoni's and Heath's behaviors in Lively's trailer and makeup trailer, comments to Lively and her staff regarding Lively's appearance, weight, and sexuality, etc.). None of the stuff in this category concerns the IC or could have been prevented by the IC. So whether Lively met with the IC or not prior to filming is irrelevant to these claims.

Why would an IC suggest adding more sex? Is that typical for them to have creative license?

Either the director doesn't know what he's doing or the IC is being thrown under the bus.

Surprise! It's actually both.

I don’t understand the controversy here. First thing that comes up when you Google what is the role of an intimacy coordinator, is that the intimacy coordinator choreographs sex scenes. People are acting as if the director is the boss of everything, writes the script, and choreographed all the intimate scenes. That is not what happened here nor is that his role.

According to Justin Baldoni, he worked with the intimacy coordinator to choreograph and set up those scenes. He says that the intimacy coordinator suggested the oral sex scene, which is completely appropriate for her to do, I don’t know why people are acting like that could not be true. He is alleging a Blake missed some of those meetings and he had to relay some of this to her via handwritten notes which put him in an awkward position.

of course maybe he’s lying but he’s saying he has documentation and of course assuming the IC is a real person she could be interviewed and I suppose she will.

The other wrinkle in this is that even though he is the director, because he is an actor in some of these scenes, obviously someone else was directing those scenes! He cant be kissing his costar and yelling cut.

Who cares if the IC suggested the oral sex scene? I don't get why this even matters. Who cares where the suggestion came from? What does this have to do with Lively's harassment complaint. I don't think her complaint hinges on who suggested an oral sex scene. As an actor she's allowed to draw boundaries around what she will or won't do on screen and she didn't want to do the oral sex scene, either because she didn't like how it was being shot or she didn't think it worked with the character.

Like let's assume the IC suggested the oral sex scene. How does this exonerate Baldoni for stuff like repeatedly discussing his porn addiction on set, pressuring Lively to do the birth scene nude and not closing the set for that scene, turning a dance scene into a more intimate/lewd scene without checking with Lively first, etc. I just don't get why this matters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She is such a basic blonde. And her fashion sense the past few years has been terrible. I do t get why she still has a career.

Trenchant. Thanks for your contributions to this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She is such a basic blonde. And her fashion sense the past few years has been terrible. I do t get why she still has a career.

Agree. I watched some clips of the movie online yesterday..It was not terrible, but it certainly is not a high quality script and the acting is not much different than Law and Order. I think Colleen Hoover is horrible and simplistic but the acting rose above the garbage script. You would never guess how many problems they had.

I feel like it vaulted to feature status because the book was popular, but it should have been a TV or Amazon movie.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is what his complaint says about the IC:
Contrary to Lively’s assertion, it was she who refused to meet with the intimacy
coordinator to plan out scenes, putting Baldoni in the awkward position of meeting with the
intimacy coordinator alone and later relaying sex scene suggestions to Lively in the intimacy
coordinator’s absence—not only defeating the purpose but resulting in accusations by the Times that,
before shooting began, Baldoni wanted to add sex scenes that Lively considered gratuitous; in fact,
these scenes were proposed by the intimacy coordinator. This is well-documented in hand-written
notes Baldoni took during meetings with the intimacy coordinator.

But this doesn't really make sense. Baldoni was the director, it's his job to meet with the IC and map out the sex scenes and it's also his job (or the job of the production company, and he was also producing) to get the actors on board with what is mapped out.

Like literally it is his job to figure out how he wants to tell this story (it's his movie) and work that out with everyone involved. Lively wasn't contractually obligated to participate in pre-production meetings and didn't want to (presumably because she was on maternity leave) but that doesn't mean she refused to work with the IC.

Also it's such a copout for him to say "oh the IC suggested these gratuitous sex scenes." Whose movie is this? Sorry but intimacy coordinators are not hired to determine how graphic or sexual a movie is. That is 100% within the purview of the director. An IC is like a stunt coordinator -- their job is to ensure the director's vision for the intimate scenes is carried out in a safe and respectful way for the actors, following industry standards. Can you imagine if an actor complained that a stunt was too dangerous or not necessary for the movie and the director said "oh well that wasn't even my idea, the stunt coordinator suggested it and I said okay."

The director is the boss. It sounds like Baldoni was really bad at it. This is what happens when you hire a total novice to direct a feature like this. Sounds like he only go the gig because his production company has loads of money and was able to get the full rights to the movie. I don't think a studio would have hired someone this inept and if they did, I think they would have brought in someone to hold his hand when it became obvious that he didn't know what he was doing.

The intimacy coordinator is supposed to script out scenes with the actors and make sure they are comfortable. She is supposed to meet with them and get input on what is comfortable and what’s not. The director does not necessarily script those scenes, the director does not write every scene in the movie. A director is also not the screenwriter. A director is in charge of how things are shot, an intimacy coordinator’s job is to script out scenes.

On a few occasions, it seems like he had to meet with the intimacy coordinator and had to relay notes to her. That puts him in an awkward position of relaying thinks of a sexual nature to her. But he had signed and dated notes apparently.

Sorry you clearly don't have experience with this. I do.

An IC does not "script out" scenes. The IC works closely with the director to choreograph a scene based on what the director says they want. The IC will make suggestions on the content of a scene only insofar as it's relevant to protecting the actors. So like a director might say they want a sex scene to to take place on a balcony because they want the scene framed with a view behind the actors. The IC might say "ok but we need to find a way to frame it so there can be some kind of padding underneath the actors since it could be painful or injurious to film this on the cement of this particular balcony." Then the director will say "okay but I want to do these two close ups of the actors from above and I don't want to be able to see any padding underneath them." And the IC will way okay so we'll do the following shots from the interior with the padding and the view behind them, and then we'll set up these closeups separately so that we can minimize the time the actors have to be on the cement without the padding -- also since we are only doing closeups for this part of the shoot, we can have the actors clothed from the waist down which will make that less uncomfortable for them." And so on.

What an IC doesn't do is say "oh it would be really cool if at this point your character went down on the other character." That's a story element, that's not up to the IC. A professional IC would not make a suggestion like that, and if they did, a professional director would not view it as necessary to follow the IC's suggestion -- it's just not their place.

The only thing I can think of is if a director suggested filming a sex act that an IC knows would be really uncomfortable for an actor to perform, they might say "okay what if instead we make this part of the scene an oral sex scene -- does that achieve your goal of showing the characters in a more intimate position without putting the actors in a really compromised position?" But it that case the IC isn't scripting the scene. They are proposing an alternative to something they view as particularly hard to film in a way that wouldn't compromise the actors.

In any case, it is completely normal for a director to meet with an IC to choreograph a sex scene and then for the director to relay what they figured out to the actors involved. And it's normal for an actor who is uncomfortable with any of it to say "ok I'm not comfortable with XYZ" and for the director to have to go back to the IC to address that issue. That's the director's job.

Directing a movie is really, really hard. Especially a feature length film with well known actors and a fairly large budget (for this sort of movie). But that's not an excuse for sexual harassment or being unprofessional on set or creating a creepy, sexualized environment.

In one paragraph, please share the basis for your personal knowledge of how an ic works.

I have represented intimacy coordinators in contract matters with studios and have drafted the "duties of position" for these contracts. I've also reviewed production notes from ICs detailing how intimate scenes were choreographed and executed and interviewed both ICs and other members of production to discuss what the IC did and how it went.

Right, just another plain old dcum mom, who is also just happens to be an entertainment lawyer who is fighting to the bone for Blake day after day. Explains a lot.

I'm not fighting for Lively -- I don't actually care for her as an actress and while I've never worked with her or anyone who knows here, she does have a rep for being a PITA.

But I do have a lot of experience in the industry and dealing with these specific issues (though no longer practice except for very occasional part-time consulting, I'm mostly a SAHM at this point).

If you don't think what I'm telling you above about how the industry works is accurate, you are more than welcome to fact check it. You are not going to find someone who will confirm that an IC scripts scenes or decides what kinds of intimate acts the actors will be doing because they don't.

New poster here. I don’t have any idea what happened on the set but Blake seems to be such a strong and controlling personality, that I have had a hard time reconciling in my mind that she wouldn’t have stood up for herself during that birthing scene. Maybe she is not this way when it comes to men but rather with women only… thus the label of her being a mean girl. Either way, it will be interesting to hear more discovery on what actually took place. Like others I believe the truth is somewhere in the middle.

As a mom, I can speak to how awfully yucky and unlike myself that I felt after birth. It took me several months to get back to myself. I don’t think that Blake felt comfortable during filming partially because she was postpartum. I find that this could have exacerbated or informed her perception of what took place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can see some clips from the birth scene in this compilation starting at about the 3:50 mark: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdEW5ddIhhg

Lively is naked below her boobs. There are multiple closeups of her belly and upper legs. Her legs are up in stirrups in a way that if she tried to pull that hospital gown over her lower half, it would ride up because her legs are up in the air.

It was a nude scene. If the actress filming that scene asked for a sheet between takes to cover up her lower body (even just for warmth, not modesty) it should have been provided. I'm sure there were points when she was able to take her legs out of the stirrups and cover up with the gown, but there were also definitely points where she had to lie there in the stirrups between takes because her legs are up for the full scene so I'm sure they were up for much of the shoot.

Those of you quibbling over "oh she could have pulled her hospital gown down" or "she wasn't really nude, she was wearing clothes" just sound dumb. She's obviously nude and the position of her body would have made it impossible to fully cover up with her gown unless she was lying there holding the gown in place the entire time with her hands (and she probably had to do other things with her hands between takes, like review notes about the scene, drink from a water bottle, etc.).

Why didn't they just give her a sheet? Like this is not explained. What possible reason would the production have for not giving her something to cover up during the scene? She shouldn't have to prove that she needs one, it should just be provided.

Do you understand Blake's not actually giving birth? Its called movie making. That's not her nude belly. It's a thick, warm prosthetic torso. Do while she looks like she's naked, she's actually not.

Still legs spread with a tiny piece of fabric covering her labia while mimicking pushing on an open set, visible camera screens posting the uncut scenesz and regardless of whether she could move to close her legs or move the gown during the shot, nobody could be bothered to give her a coverup when she asked for one.

I am one hundred percent sure that the camera was not focused on her labia — for one thing the friend of the director actor would be blocking it, for the other, she wasn’t actually pushing a baby out and aiming a camera there would make it obvious, and lastly, this was a PG 13 movie. Again, your fiction reads well though.

Of course it wasn't -- she was wearing a strip of fabric over her genitals anyway. No one has suggested they tried to film her genitals.

That does not mean it wasn't uncomfortable to film a scene with no pants on and an actor you just met sitting inches from your vag. It would also be weird to constantly be moving your legs between takes and pulling down the gown and she shouldn't have to do that.

There's also no excuse for springing the nudity on her the day of the shoot and failing to have the intimacy coordinator on set, and also for not closing the set when one of your actors is not only partially nude but has let you know she's not totally comfortable with it.

Baldoni hasn't explained any of this. Why wasn't she given a sheet? Why didn't he raise the issue of nudity earlier? If he planned for Lively to be nude, why didn't he enlist the intimacy coordinator to be there and why didn't he make it a closed set?

I think if this is true, it could be a result of him being green (inexperienced) and less about him being a predator.