Forum Index
»
Entertainment and Pop Culture
Unlikely. This was a PG-13 movie. Yes, I know there can be some very minor exceptions here, but generally speaking he wasn't going to be making some full frontal nudity birth. |
It can be. Sexual harassment is definitely unprofessional. |
DP and I totally agree. And actually the way the scene is ultimately shot, even with the gown, was still weird to me because of the way the gown is pulled up so it's just covering her breasts -- in the scene the character is nude except for the gown over her boobs. Her full belly is exposed and her legs are completely exposed and there are even lots of close up shots of Lively's midsection/hips and it's clearly all intended to be fully exposed. It's way more nudity than I was expecting based on how Baldoni's countersuit described the scene and I agree that even though she was wearing a fake belly and had some kind of covering over her privates, that looks like "partial nudity" by any sensible definition. I almost feel weird posting this because it's so intimate but you can see clips from the birth scene in this video, starting around the 3:50 mark: https://youtu.be/BdEW5ddIhhg?si=gEsdFs109r0yVHs7 |
How weird then that Baldoni was trying to insist on shooting such absolutely unnecessary nudity, and insisting on shooting Lively climaxing on camera, if none of these things would have made it into a movie that was slotted to be PG-13 as you say. |
Technically bare breasts will still get a PG-13 rating as long as they are not shown in a sexual way. Since this wasn't a sex scene, they might have gotten away with it, especially if they argued it was "artistic" or "showing birth in a natural way." But the also could have edited it in a way where it would be very clear Lively was nude but you never actually see her nipples or full breasts. This is essentially what they do with her lower body -- the scene shows a lot of her body, her upper thighs, her hips, but of course you don't actually see between her legs. But she looks nude. Presumably Lively objected to it either way, whether they actually filmed her bare breasts and showed them on screen, or filmed them in a way where they were partially obscured or out of focus. It should be up to her since none of this was in the script. |
| This is a pretty modest birth scene. Nothing odd about it at all. |
Trying to coerce an actor into doing nudity they didn't sign on for is kind of textbook harassment on a film set though, isn't it? Even if the actor fights back and winds up wearing more clothes. The whole reason they started using ICs and requiring nudity riders was because directors and producers used to abuse their positions to get actresses to do things they weren't comfortable with. It's a major red flag to me that they suggested the nudity all of a sudden not the day they filmed the scene, and that they didn't involve the IC. They had an IC on the movie, why wouldn't they flag this scene and involve her? The fact that they didn't is a sign that either (1) they are stupid or (2) they were trying to get away with something. |
It’s not her midsection, it’s a pregnancy prosthetic. |
What it isn’t is sexual harassment. |
Her issues are with the requests for nudity that were made of her, the lack of following protocol, the pressure on her to do things not in the script that she wasn’t comfortable with in this specific context, the sharing of personal experiences by Baldoni and Heath to pressure her, and Baldoni’s friend being in between her legs. She has done far less clothed scenes in her life…with her consent and within the proper protocols. |
How does the PP mix up Heath and Baldoni? Baldoni is the one who said it was "not normal" for women to remain in their hospital gowns during childbirth, according to Lively's complaint. |
+1. We can rehash this birth scene a million times over, but she'll never work again in anything she and her husband don't fully fund and produce. It's done. Even a victory in court (unlikely) is not going to change that. As a super high maintenance, mind-bogglingly entitled, combative, and difficult person with limited talent, she had a decent run, but no one will hire her. The men will be afraid of frivolous lawsuits and the older actresses/producers/directors producing their own content will blame her for weaponizing MeToo. She's putting herself in the bucket with the 2% of rapes that are found to be false accusations. This is a wildly, wildly unpopular group to join. Unless she has something mind-blowing that somehow never entered into her complaint, she's toast. This isn't a story of SH, this is a David and Goliath powerplay by her and her husband. It's ludicrous they're not settling. |
Asking someone to be topless at work when that isn’t required (in the script) and that isn’t done following protocol is definitely sexual harassment. |
Lively's complaint states that such parts are generally filmed using a local actor. This implies a small time, but professional, actor. A professional actor with an MFA in acting who does regular theater roles and has one onscreen credit seems to fit that paradigm just fine. He might be Baldoni's friend too. Lots of nepotism in Hollywood. But he is not just a random friend who is not in the business of acting, as I originally assumed reading her complaint. I also understand now that she had some power on the set due to the leverage of not having signed her contract, so it is harder for me to belive that she had no ability to object to this casting. |
On this specific point, I would also like to mention that during this time, Blake's responses about Weinstein were basically, "Well, he didn't rape ME!!!" so there's not a lot of existing goodwill there. |