Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could the Deadpool character be grounds for a false light suit?

Satire/parody is protected speech.

https://www.loc.gov/exhibitions/drawing-justice-courtroom-illustrations/about-this-exhibition/significant-and-landmark-cases/satire-is-protected-free-speech/

Thanks PP.

But Reynolds was going around (allegedly) calling him a sexual predator.

It's not clear to me that Reynolds ever called Baldoni a sexual predator. This is a good example of where Baldoni's docs don't always support what he is alleging. There's an allegation that Reynold's called Baldoni's agent and called Baldoni a "deranged predator" but it's not clear where this quote comes from. Is that literally what Reynolds said or is that what Baldoni's agent told Baldoni he said? Or is it how Baldoni interpreted what his agent said? Or how Abel and Nathan interpreted with the agent said? A lot of people involved have a tendency to use very strong language (Abel and Nathan's texts to each other are just constant over-the-top foul language).

And then later in Baldoni's docs it uses this language regarding what Reynolds said to a WME exec at the Deadpool premiere party: "Reynolds approached a senior executive at WME and expressed his deep disdain for Baldoni, going as far as to suggest that the agency is working with a 'sexual predator.'" Did Reynolds actually say "sexual predator"? Or did he imply it when he expressed his disdain for Baldoni? Those are two very different accusations and the choice to put the words sexual predator in quotes without attributing that quote to anyone is... interesting.

I know people will yell at me and say I'm shilling for Lively but I'm really not. I think Lively also plays fast and loose with some facts, such as the way her complaint sneakily implies that she was wearing nothing but a modesty shield int he birth scene when it appears she was wearing briefs (though even here I also think Baldoni gets cute by claiming a woman wearing briefs in a birth scene is "fully clothed" -- I don't consider myself fully clothed in my underwear, especially not if I'm lying on a hospital bed with my legs in stirrups, but I digress).

The point is that both complaints have been a bit questionable in terms of presenting "facts" and I would be careful about marrying myself to either narrative. I think both sides have trumped up allegations quite a bit and it's hard to say what is going to be left to believe once answers have been filed and some discovery has been undertaken.

DP, but this part of the Baldoni complaint also really bothered me. I thought it was unfair to call Lively “fully clothed” because she had on briefs or panties or whatever — one layer of protection between her genitals and the obstetrician actors hands etc. With lots of skin showing is not really “fully clothed.” It was clear from Lively’s complaint that she was talking about what covering was on her genetalia, and not so much the rest of her body. Then Baldoni cited to her gown and the pregnancy belly as though that were a second and third layer of covering of her genitalia, which is nonsense. But as you say, Lively’s own complaint shadily talked about a thin strip covering just her genitalia instead of saying she was wearing panties/briefs, which also seemed deceptive if she was, so I didn’t post my complaint.

I will say that, watching the scene, they either edited out the black briefs or the black briefs are a lie, because you can basically see all of Lively’s leg from torso through lower leg, and there are no black briefs there. At one point I thought I saw something that might be a white cloth or tubing. But you definitely don’t get black brief.

Can we get another 800 paragraphs about this please? Do you and Tweedledum think one of you can explain how he lies or misleads? Is it in any responsive material that the fake belly and hospital gown cover her vulva?

Okay, here is the excerpt from his complaint:

Lively’s current complaint states she was “alarmed” when
Baldoni introduced him as his friend, and allowed him to play this “intimate role, in which the
actor’s face and hands were in close proximity to her nearly nude genitalia” [emphasis added],
categorizing the experience as invasive and humiliating. It is Lively’s suggestion that a highly
trained and experienced actor would have an unseemly interest in being in “close proximity to her
nearly nude genitalia” (which, as previously established, was not nude or exposed), that is
inappropriate, invasive, and humiliating to the actor.

120. To reiterate, Lively knowingly made a false statement that “only a small piece of
fabric cover[ed] her genitalia” during the birth scene. In fact, Lively was wearing briefs during the
scene and was covered by a hospital gown, and was wearing a pregnancy suit covering her
midsection; this was not in any way a nude or partially nude scene.

The section of her complaint that they quote here doesn't say she was fully nude, she says her genitalia was "nearly nude" -- and that's actually totally correct! Even Baldoni admits Lively only had one layer of covering on her genitalia, i.e., her reproductive area (he says black briefs). While I can understand that Baldoni might have wanted to correct a false impression given in Lively's complaint (if in fact it was false and Lively was actually wearing briefs) that she was wearing more than a thin strip covering only her genitalia, going on in paragraph 120 here to say she "was covered by a hospital gown" and that the scene "was not in any way a nude or partially nude scene" is not truthful. The hospital gown covering Lively's breasts didn't have anything to do with her "nearly nude genitalia" because that was covering her breasts and those are not her genitalia. Same with the pregnancy belly. If you have a hospital gown covering only your breasts, a pregnancy suit on your midriff, and just "briefs" covering your genitalia (which are not covering enough to be visible from the side), while an actor is hovering over your fully open legs at the catcher's plate, you are doing a partially nude scene and it is absolutely fair of Lively to have said dude was in "close proximity to her nearly nude genitalia."

So for the dozenth time in this thread, you have mischaracterized what JB asserted. He has handled this well and gave a convincing full response to her tedious nonsense.

I fully quoted and explained two paragraphs from Baldoni's amended complaint, but go off.

Sassy finger snaps all around etc etc.

You did not “explain.” You mischaracterized what his team submitted.

Paragraph 120 of Baldoni's amended complaint lists the other things she was wearing as though they were covering her genitalia or as though they made this somehow not a partially nude scene. But the hospital gown and the pregnancy belly weren't covering her "nearly nude genitalia" which is the part of Lively's complaint they've quoted to dispute. She only had briefs or something -- just one layer -- over her genitalia, and her naked legs were fully visible from the side. That makes her claim that Baldoni's friend/actor the obstetrician was "in close proximity to her nearly nude genitalia" (which Baldoni is disputing in paragraph 119) absolutely true and correct, and Baldoni's later claim in paragraph 120 that Lively was not "partially nude" for this scene is also absolutely false under Hollywood standards. (I agree she wasn't nude.)

This is not a mischaracterization. This is simply a careful parsing of the complaint and fwiw I'm a lawyer. Lively's footnote language about the thin strip of fabric was also misleading if she was actually wearing a pair of briefs (though again, those "briefs" are certainly not visible from the side, in the camera shots) -- but this is nowhere near as misleading as these paragraphs of Boldoni's amended complaint. And if you don't agree, feel free to post your actual explanation instead of some easy and sneery insult, but whatever.

[Anonymous]

It sounds like Lively was feeling deeply insecure about her age and postpartum body after those early pap shots of her in costume came out, and she was desperate to prove to herself that she “still got it” hence her sexual innuendo laden texts to Baldoni and her apparent need to convince herself that every man connected with this movie was nefariously finagling ways to look at her crotch and breasts.

[Anonymous]

Were the “briefs” sheer or crotchless or something? Assuming a normal opaque proof underpants (yes, I know it’s an assumption) how many layers of fabric you need?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like Lively was feeling deeply insecure about her age and postpartum body after those early pap shots of her in costume came out, and she was desperate to prove to herself that she “still got it” hence her sexual innuendo laden texts to Baldoni and her apparent need to convince herself that every man connected with this movie was nefariously finagling ways to look at her crotch and breasts.

100%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like Lively was feeling deeply insecure about her age and postpartum body after those early pap shots of her in costume came out, and she was desperate to prove to herself that she “still got it” hence her sexual innuendo laden texts to Baldoni and her apparent need to convince herself that every man connected with this movie was nefariously finagling ways to look at her crotch and breasts.

Do not underestimate the role that her husband ( rumored to be controlling and not nice as his public persona suggests ) might have played in this debacle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like Lively was feeling deeply insecure about her age and postpartum body after those early pap shots of her in costume came out, and she was desperate to prove to herself that she “still got it” hence her sexual innuendo laden texts to Baldoni and her apparent need to convince herself that every man connected with this movie was nefariously finagling ways to look at her crotch and breasts.

Do not underestimate the role that her husband ( rumored to be controlling and not nice as his public persona suggests ) might have played in this debacle.

Oh RR is absolutely heavily involved in this. I can’t wait for the Nicepool communications to come out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like Lively was feeling deeply insecure about her age and postpartum body after those early pap shots of her in costume came out, and she was desperate to prove to herself that she “still got it” hence her sexual innuendo laden texts to Baldoni and her apparent need to convince herself that every man connected with this movie was nefariously finagling ways to look at her crotch and breasts.

Do not underestimate the role that her husband ( rumored to be controlling and not nice as his public persona suggests ) might have played in this debacle.

.

Oh I’m sure he and his perineum and its many nerve endings are plenty involved… a shame because while I don’t BL sounds like a nice person, I do think she is quite pretty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could the Deadpool character be grounds for a false light suit?

Satire/parody is protected speech.

https://www.loc.gov/exhibitions/drawing-justice-courtroom-illustrations/about-this-exhibition/significant-and-landmark-cases/satire-is-protected-free-speech/

Thanks PP.

But Reynolds was going around (allegedly) calling him a sexual predator.

It's not clear to me that Reynolds ever called Baldoni a sexual predator. This is a good example of where Baldoni's docs don't always support what he is alleging. There's an allegation that Reynold's called Baldoni's agent and called Baldoni a "deranged predator" but it's not clear where this quote comes from. Is that literally what Reynolds said or is that what Baldoni's agent told Baldoni he said? Or is it how Baldoni interpreted what his agent said? Or how Abel and Nathan interpreted with the agent said? A lot of people involved have a tendency to use very strong language (Abel and Nathan's texts to each other are just constant over-the-top foul language).

And then later in Baldoni's docs it uses this language regarding what Reynolds said to a WME exec at the Deadpool premiere party: "Reynolds approached a senior executive at WME and expressed his deep disdain for Baldoni, going as far as to suggest that the agency is working with a 'sexual predator.'" Did Reynolds actually say "sexual predator"? Or did he imply it when he expressed his disdain for Baldoni? Those are two very different accusations and the choice to put the words sexual predator in quotes without attributing that quote to anyone is... interesting.

I know people will yell at me and say I'm shilling for Lively but I'm really not. I think Lively also plays fast and loose with some facts, such as the way her complaint sneakily implies that she was wearing nothing but a modesty shield int he birth scene when it appears she was wearing briefs (though even here I also think Baldoni gets cute by claiming a woman wearing briefs in a birth scene is "fully clothed" -- I don't consider myself fully clothed in my underwear, especially not if I'm lying on a hospital bed with my legs in stirrups, but I digress).

The point is that both complaints have been a bit questionable in terms of presenting "facts" and I would be careful about marrying myself to either narrative. I think both sides have trumped up allegations quite a bit and it's hard to say what is going to be left to believe once answers have been filed and some discovery has been undertaken.

DP, but this part of the Baldoni complaint also really bothered me. I thought it was unfair to call Lively “fully clothed” because she had on briefs or panties or whatever — one layer of protection between her genitals and the obstetrician actors hands etc. With lots of skin showing is not really “fully clothed.” It was clear from Lively’s complaint that she was talking about what covering was on her genetalia, and not so much the rest of her body. Then Baldoni cited to her gown and the pregnancy belly as though that were a second and third layer of covering of her genitalia, which is nonsense. But as you say, Lively’s own complaint shadily talked about a thin strip covering just her genitalia instead of saying she was wearing panties/briefs, which also seemed deceptive if she was, so I didn’t post my complaint.

I will say that, watching the scene, they either edited out the black briefs or the black briefs are a lie, because you can basically see all of Lively’s leg from torso through lower leg, and there are no black briefs there. At one point I thought I saw something that might be a white cloth or tubing. But you definitely don’t get black brief.

Can we get another 800 paragraphs about this please? Do you and Tweedledum think one of you can explain how he lies or misleads? Is it in any responsive material that the fake belly and hospital gown cover her vulva?

Okay, here is the excerpt from his complaint:

Lively’s current complaint states she was “alarmed” when
Baldoni introduced him as his friend, and allowed him to play this “intimate role, in which the
actor’s face and hands were in close proximity to her nearly nude genitalia” [emphasis added],
categorizing the experience as invasive and humiliating. It is Lively’s suggestion that a highly
trained and experienced actor would have an unseemly interest in being in “close proximity to her
nearly nude genitalia” (which, as previously established, was not nude or exposed), that is
inappropriate, invasive, and humiliating to the actor.

120. To reiterate, Lively knowingly made a false statement that “only a small piece of
fabric cover[ed] her genitalia” during the birth scene. In fact, Lively was wearing briefs during the
scene and was covered by a hospital gown, and was wearing a pregnancy suit covering her
midsection; this was not in any way a nude or partially nude scene.

The section of her complaint that they quote here doesn't say she was fully nude, she says her genitalia was "nearly nude" -- and that's actually totally correct! Even Baldoni admits Lively only had one layer of covering on her genitalia, i.e., her reproductive area (he says black briefs). While I can understand that Baldoni might have wanted to correct a false impression given in Lively's complaint (if in fact it was false and Lively was actually wearing briefs) that she was wearing more than a thin strip covering only her genitalia, going on in paragraph 120 here to say she "was covered by a hospital gown" and that the scene "was not in any way a nude or partially nude scene" is not truthful. The hospital gown covering Lively's breasts didn't have anything to do with her "nearly nude genitalia" because that was covering her breasts and those are not her genitalia. Same with the pregnancy belly. If you have a hospital gown covering only your breasts, a pregnancy suit on your midriff, and just "briefs" covering your genitalia (which are not covering enough to be visible from the side), while an actor is hovering over your fully open legs at the catcher's plate, you are doing a partially nude scene and it is absolutely fair of Lively to have said dude was in "close proximity to her nearly nude genitalia."

So for the dozenth time in this thread, you have mischaracterized what JB asserted. He has handled this well and gave a convincing full response to her tedious nonsense.

I fully quoted and explained two paragraphs from Baldoni's amended complaint, but go off.

Sassy finger snaps all around etc etc.

You did not “explain.” You mischaracterized what his team submitted.

Paragraph 120 of Baldoni's amended complaint lists the other things she was wearing as though they were covering her genitalia or as though they made this somehow not a partially nude scene. But the hospital gown and the pregnancy belly weren't covering her "nearly nude genitalia" which is the part of Lively's complaint they've quoted to dispute. She only had briefs or something -- just one layer -- over her genitalia, and her naked legs were fully visible from the side. That makes her claim that Baldoni's friend/actor the obstetrician was "in close proximity to her nearly nude genitalia" (which Baldoni is disputing in paragraph 119) absolutely true and correct, and Baldoni's later claim in paragraph 120 that Lively was not "partially nude" for this scene is also absolutely false under Hollywood standards. (I agree she wasn't nude.)

This is not a mischaracterization. This is simply a careful parsing of the complaint and fwiw I'm a lawyer. Lively's footnote language about the thin strip of fabric was also misleading if she was actually wearing a pair of briefs (though again, those "briefs" are certainly not visible from the side, in the camera shots) -- but this is nowhere near as misleading as these paragraphs of Boldoni's amended complaint. And if you don't agree, feel free to post your actual explanation instead of some easy and sneery insult, but whatever.

Sneer sneer.

How are you characterizing the Baldoni materials as “misleading” if his counsel do not put in writing, in smoke signals, or in some kind of mind meld, any contradicting description of Lively wearing underpants? How is adding detail about what she was wearing in full in the scene (prosthesis, gown, undies) rise to deception on his part, or become tantamount to mischaracterization?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like Lively was feeling deeply insecure about her age and postpartum body after those early pap shots of her in costume came out, and she was desperate to prove to herself that she “still got it” hence her sexual innuendo laden texts to Baldoni and her apparent need to convince herself that every man connected with this movie was nefariously finagling ways to look at her crotch and breasts.

Do not underestimate the role that her husband ( rumored to be controlling and not nice as his public persona suggests ) might have played in this debacle.

.

Oh I’m sure he and his perineum and its many nerve endings are plenty involved… a shame because while I don’t BL sounds like a nice person, I do think she is quite pretty.

She is a pretty little liar.

[Anonymous]

The whole discussion of the birth scene is so stupid. They didn’t want the camera anywhere near Livelys crotch because we all knew she wasn’t pregnant, there was no crowning, there was no baby coming out. And yet people acted like they were trying to get shots of genitalia or something… I don’t get it.

Further, when you look at the scene, you can see the actor playing the doctor‘s full face. He was nowhere near and I mean nowhere near her crotch. You do realize again she was not actually giving birth and he wasn’t actually doing an exam on her and helping her birth a baby right?

The poor man was probably on set for half an hour, and he probably couldn’t get out of there fast enough given how difficult lively is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I appreciate PP taking the time to go over how extensive the bad press has been on Lively for years. The part about a hair stylist talking about how this has been a long time coming was new to me. Not surprising. Lively’s hair care line seemed like a bad tie-in to a DV film where she had really bad color and styling. Another own goal.

I do too. TY PP.

Her hair did look so bad in this movie.

The orange color was SO bad for her skin tone!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I appreciate PP taking the time to go over how extensive the bad press has been on Lively for years. The part about a hair stylist talking about how this has been a long time coming was new to me. Not surprising. Lively’s hair care line seemed like a bad tie-in to a DV film where she had really bad color and styling. Another own goal.

I do too. TY PP.

Her hair did look so bad in this movie.

The orange color was SO bad for her skin tone!

It was Ronald McDonald rather than Young Julianne Moore. Unforced error again to shill her hair line somewhat contemporaneously with the film’s run. It just looked bad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The whole discussion of the birth scene is so stupid. They didn’t want the camera anywhere near Livelys crotch because we all knew she wasn’t pregnant, there was no crowning, there was no baby coming out. And yet people acted like they were trying to get shots of genitalia or something… I don’t get it.

Further, when you look at the scene, you can see the actor playing the doctor‘s full face. He was nowhere near and I mean nowhere near her crotch. You do realize again she was not actually giving birth and he wasn’t actually doing an exam on her and helping her birth a baby right?

The poor man was probably on set for half an hour, and he probably couldn’t get out of there fast enough given how difficult lively is.

+1 and if she was in fact wearing briefs he didn’t SEE anything either… yes she was in stirrups so he saw her thighs, but her private parts were covered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole discussion of the birth scene is so stupid. They didn’t want the camera anywhere near Livelys crotch because we all knew she wasn’t pregnant, there was no crowning, there was no baby coming out. And yet people acted like they were trying to get shots of genitalia or something… I don’t get it.

Further, when you look at the scene, you can see the actor playing the doctor‘s full face. He was nowhere near and I mean nowhere near her crotch. You do realize again she was not actually giving birth and he wasn’t actually doing an exam on her and helping her birth a baby right?

The poor man was probably on set for half an hour, and he probably couldn’t get out of there fast enough given how difficult lively is.

+1 and if she was in fact wearing briefs he didn’t SEE anything either… yes she was in stirrups so he saw her thighs, but her private parts were covered.

This isn’t the first birthing scene ever in a film, why were they trying to reinvent the wheel here?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I appreciate PP taking the time to go over how extensive the bad press has been on Lively for years. The part about a hair stylist talking about how this has been a long time coming was new to me. Not surprising. Lively’s hair care line seemed like a bad tie-in to a DV film where she had really bad color and styling. Another own goal.

I do too. TY PP.

Her hair did look so bad in this movie.

The orange color was SO bad for her skin tone!

It was Ronald McDonald rather than Young Julianne Moore. Unforced error again to shill her hair line somewhat contemporaneously with the film’s run. It just looked bad.

Why was her hair orange? Was it supposed to look horrible for the movie?