Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lively's cut was the winner, for a reason, and studio execs gushed to her about the success of the film. Do you think any of this helps Baldoni, who has zero projects now in the works per imdb? Studio execs wanted to muzzle him from doing press promo, not because of Lively but because of his tendency to say inappropriate and off-putting things. They had to cut the tape of one of his interviews.

From People:
Justin Baldoni was labeled a "moron" by a studio executive over remarks he allegedly made in an interview promoting It Ends With Us.

An alleged email sent by Danni Maggin, a senior marketing executive at Sony Pictures Entertainment, on Aug. 5, 2024, shows the marketing team took issue with Baldoni's remarks in one interview.

"... Justin is basically alluding to 'raping' Atlas out of Lily when talking to the Dallas Morning News. We cut the tape but he is a moron," Maggin wrote in the email, recently unsealed as part of Blake Lively's ongoing legal battle with Baldoni.

Maggin then appeared to refer to Josh Greenstein, then-president of Sony Pictures‘ Motion Group, alleging Greenstein said that director-star Baldoni, 42, "shouldn't do any more press but he has a lot left so maybe we can talk asap."

Perfect example of weird bot behavior.

Her cut was the low scoring one, bozo!

Her cut was the one execs selected, largely because Colleen felt it captured her vision, and the one that earned hundreds of millions of dollars, bozo! From a business perspective, Baldoni was a pathetic failure. In addition to being cut out of the social network and promotion because no one wanted to hear any more of his inappropriate remarks. He's the one who'll never work again.

Meh, Sony likely caused themselves to lose tens of millions of dollars because they ignored normal business practices and went with the cut markedly less popular with audiences. Then they lost more potential profit when Blake did stupid things like make the “bring your florals” comment. That’s what you get when you give in to a celebrity pressure campaign.

But somehow not an issue when Baldoni, who played the abuser, was appearing at fun and sexy pop up flower shops...

There are a lot of things to argue but I have never understood this one - Baldoni was also out in his floral shirts going to flower shops and making bouquets and focusing on the florals - same as Blake. We have it in writing that this was the intended marketing strategy so they were both doing it. I don't get why it is held against Blake. All the cast were told to market it this way and to stay away from the DV and focus on the florals and they did.

This came up in multiple other depositions with other women involved with the movie, as a reason they refused to do press with Baldoni. Colleen and Isabella definitely mentioned it, I can't remember if Jenny did. They say that when Blake started getting attacked for making light of the DV themes in the movie with the whole "grab your friends, wear your florals" campaign, they were angry that neither Justin nor Wayfarer made any effort to defend Blake or the movie, especially when he had also been part of the exact same marketing campaign and had appeared in the "pop up" floral shop with Colleen and been wearing florals to press appearances like everyone else. Then when Justin started explicitly discussing DV in his interviews, when everyone else involved had been told by Sony NOT to emphasize the DV aspect of the film or make it sound like it was a "DV movie", they felt he was trying to show them ALL up. Not just Blake. Both Colleen and Isabella mentioned this was a major factor in them refusing to appear with Baldoni and Wayfarer at the premiere. The felt personally harmed by Justin's actions.

This is some immature bullshit and obviously not true.

Which part is not true? Most of this is documented and the opinions of Colleen and Isabella are in their depos (obviously subjective). Justin did deviate from the prescribed marketing plan by talking about DV -- every document from Sony about marketing explicitly says not to focus on domestic violence in interviews, to instead emphasize that the movie is about female empowerment and friendship. That's what everyone else in the cast, plus Colleen Hoover, focused on in their interviews. They were doing what they were told and resented Justin for going off-script and making it seem like they didn't care about DV survivors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So it's been established Justin/Wayfarer paid Jed $90,000 summer 2024, to do what exactly?

Wow, a whole 90k? That is totally a smoking gun. 90k to get the whole internet to hate Blake Lively and her obnoxious zesty ass husband.

I’m quite sure that Blake is paying her ex CIA social media guru at least $90,000 a month and has been doing so for well over a year.

Probably, but not legally relevant. Justin is accused of using Jed to retaliate against an employee for making SH claims. Lively is not. She could be spending a million dollars a month on her PR and it wouldn't matter to the case.

[Anonymous]

It’s funny that Hoover says she wanted a female director. 2 of the next 3 films she did after IEWU are directed by men.

The script for verity is also written by a man. Seems like she really doesn’t care all that much especially since she probably had much more leverage after she hit peak popularity around 2021.

[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:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jenny’s behavior and texts are pretty abhorrent but she thought she was just buttering up to Blake for a few weeks of filming. She had no ideas that it was going to turn into this PR disaster.

It’s easy to see how this happened with the cast and Colleen. The problem is Blake supporters will take any little thing and run with it just b/c Blake managed to get the cast to shit talk Justin. But then when you ask what he did to justify the vitriol you get:

Jenny: laughed at my jokes and gave me $15k

Isabella: told me to lick a spoon

Brandon: nothing, I’m just thirsty, um I mean supporting women.

Colleen: he didn’t like Blake so I never talked to him again.

But you're cherry picking. That's not what any of those people testified to (I don't then Brandon is relevant at all, was he even deposed?).

Jenny: testified to two occasions of Justin calling a woman "sexy" in a way that Jenny interpreted to be about their personal physical appearance, not their character. Testified to expressing her unhappiness with these comments on both occasions, and telling Justin that people don't say stuff like that anymore, that it's not appropriate. Also testified to Justin becoming "huffy" or unhappy when she objected to these comments, walking away or becoming harder to work with. Also testified to Justin recording an early rehearsal with Jenny and Blake without telling them beforehand, and finding this weird and inappropriate.

Isabella: testified two three incidents where Justin made her feel uncomfortable. The most significant was during the sex scene she filmed with young Atlas, Justin coming over afterwards to tell them that it had been "hot" which she found inappropriate because the scene was meant to be an "innocent" experience between two teenagers. The second thing was suggesting she lick the spoon during a different scene and look suggestively into her acting partner's eyes, which Isabella thought was inappropriate for the scene and character. The third thing was second-hand - Isabella's co-star told her that Justin had suggested Isabella and young Atlas "get to know each other" in a way that Isabella felt was inappropriately suggestive.

Intimacy Coordinator: testified to Justin adding kissing and other intimate contact to scenes even when not called for in the script. Testified to Justin suggesting added elements to sex scenes, like oral sex and Blake climaxing on screen, even though the IC knew from consultations with Blake that these items violated Blakes nudity/intimacy rider. Also testified that Jamey Heath had provided the IC with a list of all scenes that had ANY level of intimacy (even just kissing) or nudity, but it did not include the dancing scene or the birth scene. Confirmed that the level of undress in the birth scene as filmed constituted onscreen nudity that would require a nudity rider. Also testified that the call sheet as published for the birth scene did not indicate a closed set.

Colleen: testified to issues with Justin starting before casting had even begun, including being told he wanted her feedback on the script and then struggling to find opportunities to provide it. Testified to exchanging emails with Justin about the level of onscreen sex/intimacy in the film and explaining that the goal should not be represent all the sex in the book on screen, as women feel differently about reading a sex scene in a book that they are reading alone at home, versus watching sex on a screen in a theater full of people, and that implied sex is much more appropriate. Testified that she had never had a conversation with Blake when, in May 2024, Justin and Jamey invited Colleen to dinner with what Colleen felt was the intent to poison her against Blake. Testified to Justin blaming Blake for an issue with Lily's tattoo that had to be fixed in post, even though Justin later admitted that the error was with their own designer, who had failed to include the essential element in the first renderings. Testified to being worried Justin would not convey Colleen's feedback on the film to Blake for Blake's edit, which is what led Colleen to reach out to Blake in the first place.

Alex: testified to multiple negative interactions with Justin of her own, including him losing his temper with her on more than one occasions, and apologize by saying he'd been having trouble with interrupting and talking over women lately. Testified to informing Justin and Jamey of both Jenny's and Blake's complaints about behavior on set, and suggesting that Wayfarer open an investigation in order to clear the air and make sure things ran smoothly moving forward. Testified that Jamey told her they decided not to investigate because he felt it would be better if the details of the complaints not be written down or otherwise memorialized.

I mean, sure, if you cherry pick ONLY the stuff that you feel exonerates Justin and Jamey, it makes their accusers look petty and lame. Or like they were conspiring against these men. But when you look at the evidence in its totality, it's a lot more complicated than that.

And they no one has joined the lawsuit. You have the opportunity to join 2 powerful celebs with their Rolodex of powerful friends and no one wants a thing to do with this. That speaks volumes.

And none of their “friends” are standing by them, voicing support, or are even willing to be seen with them.

Your understanding of what this lawsuit entails is laughable.

No it’s not. No one wants to revisit this or support her. They are distancing themselves. If you think this isn’t hurting Blake you are not paying attention.

On a separate note, I just saw the transcript of an interview panel Isabel and Alex (young lily and young atlas) had early on, before official promo but after their scenes were shot. They both GUSHED over Justin and his role as a director, going much further than not trying to rock the boat. They genuinely had a good experience with him.

Then all of a sudden Blake meets Isabel. Hosts sleepovers, makes promises.

We can all see it.

Of course Isabella would gush about Justin in official promotional material for the movie. Duh. In what universe would an actress on her very first film every, while filming a promo for the movie that she is contractually required to appear in and will be used to sell the movie, will the actress provide an unvarnished and totally honest assessment of her director? No one would. Actors always gush about the director and the experience in those things, even more than you'd expect them to in regular press interviews. The person who "interviewed" Isabella for that promo was hired by the movie to make the movie look good. I wouldn't be surprised if her response was at least partially scripted. It's evidence of nothing.

Oh please. Read the transcript. She absolutely didn’t have to say that about Justin. She could have been much more diplomat.

Isabel had a fine experience - even a pleasant experience with Justin. I’ve seen video footage of her, trying to hug him and him, turning it into a high five. she did not have a problem with Justin until the sleepovers, the free clothes from Blake, and Blake promising her she would get an introducing credit on the film as detailed in Blake’s PGA letter.

You’re free to keep trying, but we can also see through this nonsense. The evidence is out.

Further, there is a huge file we are waiting for that was too big to be downloaded -and apparently is all Blakes text. I look forward to reading those in the coming days.

+1 if you read her deposition she says her text to Justin thanking him for creating a safe space accurately reflected how she felt at the time. Given that, there’s no reason to think otherwise about the promo. She said she didn’t have a problem with the hot comment, and the lick spoon instructions until she reflected back on them later (i.e. after meeting Blake).

Blake dragged Isabela into this case for PR, which is a shame b/c her career has been harmed. The judge likely won’t consider her testimony at all b/c she and Blake were not on set together. The judge made a comment that if Blake wasn’t aware of the “harassment” it can’t go to hostile work environment.

This is what makes Blake so unusual as a "victim." One can scream at the top of there lungs that there is no such thing as a perfect victim, but you usually don't seem them selfishly ruining their colleagues' careers in the process. Can anyone point to a time that that's happened? It doesn't because they don't have the power to rally everyone.

Or... Isabella is an adult and was telling the truth about how she was creeped out by Baldoni because he really did and said those things. Just like Saks, Slate, Lively, Talbot, Hoover, etc.

Exactly. Complaints by TEN different women on the record.

I think it's clear he can be a creep and unpleasant to work with, but I'm not sure if there is enough meat to the sexual harassment claims (to be clear, I'd never want to work with a man like that--eww). The retaliation piece does seem clear. I don't pay much attention to celebrity stories, but even I noticed the "drip drip drip" of anti-Blake news stories and video clips at exactly the time stated. And it seems the culprits are pretty clearly on the record stating their negative PR plan.

Thanks for checking in about 2 years in with your up to date views, ewww. Good work counselor!

Key parts of Blake's case will move forward, so the joke's on you!

+1

Most of if not all of Blake’s case is getting kicked. Hate to be the one to break it to you. The judge is going to likely rule she was an independent contractor and that California law does not apply, gutting her SH claims. Her retaliation claims have too many other intervening factors, including her own behavior, for her to show but for causation. If the judge lets it go to trial, the jury instructions will be clear that if Blake’s bad press can be attributed to any other reason besides wayfarer, they can’t find in favor of retaliation. She’s cooked to use Sony’s words. And if she and Taylor thought this whole campaign would reverse her cancellation, boy did they miscalculate.

The best part of this was the unsealing of material by Sony and WME. They are relatively cautious people at that level, and they cannot stand Lively and THEY do not think she was retaliated against. “She did this to herself” - how she can walk around and not be mortified 24/7 is a testament to what a clueless, psychotic loser she is.

Had the same reaction to Sony reaction. Very measured but there's no doubt they find her insufferable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Blake and Ryan are box office poison at this point. And Swifties have turned on phony ass Taylor too. The grift is up for these evil frauds.

Yes we know you believe that, dear. Run along and let the grownups talk.

Can a bot be a grownup? Just asking, dear.

Now that basically every allegation of Blake’s has been debunked, they are back to the great “untraceable smear campaign.” Have to be bots or just extremely stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s funny that Hoover says she wanted a female director. 2 of the next 3 films she did after IEWU are directed by men.

The script for verity is also written by a man. Seems like she really doesn’t care all that much especially since she probably had much more leverage after she hit peak popularity around 2021.

Hoover can give two shits, she just wants money. She thought she could get rights back for sequel and sell them at a huge markup to Blake and Ryan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think Ryan will be as fine as everyone thinks. Paramount recently canceled three films that they were going to work on with him. They also had the option to re-up a five-year contract to partner with him on future projects and instead they’re letting that expire at the end of this year.

Deadpool four is not in the works. I highly doubt another one will be made. Everyone made a stink of the 1.2 billion box office the last one made, but then it came out that with all of the extra budgeting the film cost 660 million to make. because studios have to split box office revenue with theaters, 50-50, it means that they made a little bit of money off of Deadpool, but it was hardly a huge hit for them. It’s unlikely they’re going to risk that kind of money again for so little reward.

This has hurt his image. He has a lot in the works and I’m sure financially he will be fine but you know that this bugs him. He’s done a lot to curate an image of a laid-back family man and now he’s coming off as a scheming egomaniac who insults people and goes on absurd power trips.

I agree.

I could also see that he'll try redemption interviews and image rehab; try to present himself as more humble and that he has "learned." I suspect Blake is already hated behind the scenes by those who work with her and this just makes it official.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think Ryan will be as fine as everyone thinks. Paramount recently canceled three films that they were going to work on with him. They also had the option to re-up a five-year contract to partner with him on future projects and instead they’re letting that expire at the end of this year.

Deadpool four is not in the works. I highly doubt another one will be made. Everyone made a stink of the 1.2 billion box office the last one made, but then it came out that with all of the extra budgeting the film cost 660 million to make. because studios have to split box office revenue with theaters, 50-50, it means that they made a little bit of money off of Deadpool, but it was hardly a huge hit for them. It’s unlikely they’re going to risk that kind of money again for so little reward.

This has hurt his image. He has a lot in the works and I’m sure financially he will be fine but you know that this bugs him. He’s done a lot to curate an image of a laid-back family man and now he’s coming off as a scheming egomaniac who insults people and goes on absurd power trips.

I agree.

I could also see that he'll try redemption interviews and image rehab; try to present himself as more humble and that he has "learned." I suspect Blake is already hated behind the scenes by those who work with her and this just makes it official.

DP

Also, when it first came out that Ryan had berated Justin at their penthouse, sometime early last year, his team was going to People to say he actually did not do that. If he really believed his wife was sexually harassed, why would he care? Wouldn't it be a good thing that he stood up for her? Just very weird.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The best part of this was the unsealing of material by Sony and WME. They are relatively cautious people at that level, and they cannot stand Lively and THEY do not think she was retaliated against. “She did this to herself” - how she can walk around and not be mortified 24/7 is a testament to what a clueless, psychotic loser she is.

+1. Although the best part, to me, is Taylor Swift getting exposed. Such an immature psychotic phony scammer. She and Blake are thick as thieves for a reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think Ryan will be as fine as everyone thinks. Paramount recently canceled three films that they were going to work on with him. They also had the option to re-up a five-year contract to partner with him on future projects and instead they’re letting that expire at the end of this year.

Deadpool four is not in the works. I highly doubt another one will be made. Everyone made a stink of the 1.2 billion box office the last one made, but then it came out that with all of the extra budgeting the film cost 660 million to make. because studios have to split box office revenue with theaters, 50-50, it means that they made a little bit of money off of Deadpool, but it was hardly a huge hit for them. It’s unlikely they’re going to risk that kind of money again for so little reward.

This has hurt his image. He has a lot in the works and I’m sure financially he will be fine but you know that this bugs him. He’s done a lot to curate an image of a laid-back family man and now he’s coming off as a scheming egomaniac who insults people and goes on absurd power trips.

I agree.

I could also see that he'll try redemption interviews and image rehab; try to present himself as more humble and that he has "learned." I suspect Blake is already hated behind the scenes by those who work with her and this just makes it official.

DP

Also, when it first came out that Ryan had berated Justin at their penthouse, sometime early last year, his team was going to People to say he actually did not do that. If he really believed his wife was sexually harassed, why would he care? Wouldn't it be a good thing that he stood up for her? Just very weird.

Don't forget Ryan and Blake forcing themselves onto the SNL special to "joke" about his wife being "sexually harassed." These people are fake af scammers with zero shame.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think Ryan will be as fine as everyone thinks. Paramount recently canceled three films that they were going to work on with him. They also had the option to re-up a five-year contract to partner with him on future projects and instead they’re letting that expire at the end of this year.

Deadpool four is not in the works. I highly doubt another one will be made. Everyone made a stink of the 1.2 billion box office the last one made, but then it came out that with all of the extra budgeting the film cost 660 million to make. because studios have to split box office revenue with theaters, 50-50, it means that they made a little bit of money off of Deadpool, but it was hardly a huge hit for them. It’s unlikely they’re going to risk that kind of money again for so little reward.

This has hurt his image. He has a lot in the works and I’m sure financially he will be fine but you know that this bugs him. He’s done a lot to curate an image of a laid-back family man and now he’s coming off as a scheming egomaniac who insults people and goes on absurd power trips.

Ryan's toxic, box office poison. And he's old. And his catty gay/bisexual guy gimmick is painfully unfunny at this point. It's over. Young funny heart throbs are a dime a dozen, why would a studio risk a nine figure budget on 53 year old Ryan Reynolds?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think Ryan will be as fine as everyone thinks. Paramount recently canceled three films that they were going to work on with him. They also had the option to re-up a five-year contract to partner with him on future projects and instead they’re letting that expire at the end of this year.

Deadpool four is not in the works. I highly doubt another one will be made. Everyone made a stink of the 1.2 billion box office the last one made, but then it came out that with all of the extra budgeting the film cost 660 million to make. because studios have to split box office revenue with theaters, 50-50, it means that they made a little bit of money off of Deadpool, but it was hardly a huge hit for them. It’s unlikely they’re going to risk that kind of money again for so little reward.

This has hurt his image. He has a lot in the works and I’m sure financially he will be fine but you know that this bugs him. He’s done a lot to curate an image of a laid-back family man and now he’s coming off as a scheming egomaniac who insults people and goes on absurd power trips.

Ryan's toxic, box office poison. And he's old. And his catty gay/bisexual guy gimmick is painfully unfunny at this point. It's over. Young funny heart throbs are a dime a dozen, why would a studio risk a nine figure budget on 53 year old Ryan Reynolds?

Unfortunately, for them, their age matters. Sydney Sweeney was temporarily canceled at age 28. And then had a terrible box office failure. But then Housemaid went on to make over $300 million. People are all of a sudden interested in Sydney again and she has a lingerie company she’s unveiling and she will absolutely get more movie roles. If she were 10 years older, who knows what would have happened.

Blake wrapped it ends with us in 2024 when she was 36 years old. she’s 38 now with no sign of another movie. if it takes a couple years of image rehab, she’ll be at an age where there are simply fewer roles.

Men probably have a little more time, but Ryan at almost 50 is also passed his prime. He’s too old to make the kind of movies that he’s known for in the past.

I thought he was at his best back in the Just Friends and Proposal days but there’s a whole other generation of actors that can take on those roles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lively's cut was the winner, for a reason, and studio execs gushed to her about the success of the film. Do you think any of this helps Baldoni, who has zero projects now in the works per imdb? Studio execs wanted to muzzle him from doing press promo, not because of Lively but because of his tendency to say inappropriate and off-putting things. They had to cut the tape of one of his interviews.

From People:
Justin Baldoni was labeled a "moron" by a studio executive over remarks he allegedly made in an interview promoting It Ends With Us.

An alleged email sent by Danni Maggin, a senior marketing executive at Sony Pictures Entertainment, on Aug. 5, 2024, shows the marketing team took issue with Baldoni's remarks in one interview.

"... Justin is basically alluding to 'raping' Atlas out of Lily when talking to the Dallas Morning News. We cut the tape but he is a moron," Maggin wrote in the email, recently unsealed as part of Blake Lively's ongoing legal battle with Baldoni.

Maggin then appeared to refer to Josh Greenstein, then-president of Sony Pictures‘ Motion Group, alleging Greenstein said that director-star Baldoni, 42, "shouldn't do any more press but he has a lot left so maybe we can talk asap."

Perfect example of weird bot behavior.

Her cut was the low scoring one, bozo!

Her cut was the one execs selected, largely because Colleen felt it captured her vision, and the one that earned hundreds of millions of dollars, bozo! From a business perspective, Baldoni was a pathetic failure. In addition to being cut out of the social network and promotion because no one wanted to hear any more of his inappropriate remarks. He's the one who'll never work again.

Meh, Sony likely caused themselves to lose tens of millions of dollars because they ignored normal business practices and went with the cut markedly less popular with audiences. Then they lost more potential profit when Blake did stupid things like make the “bring your florals” comment. That’s what you get when you give in to a celebrity pressure campaign.

Regardless of how you feel about Blake or Justin, I think it's dubious to assert that Sony could have made more money with Justin's cut. The truth of the matter is that the actual cut of the movie is not what sold it -- it was the marketing campaign featuring a very recognizable actress (often alongside her very famous husband and friends) and a hugely popular author. That's why they went with Blake's cut. Because Blake and Colleen would sell the hell out of it, and they did. It's highly unlikely they would have gotten more money out Justin's cut, especially if releasing that one had meant that Blake phoned in promotion.

It was a short term gain though. they killed any hope for the sequel and Sony has been embarrassed and damaged by what has come out.

Considering Colleen Hoover’s next film regretting you also did about 100 million based on a less successful book and less known actors, they probably would have been okay with less box office sales plus a sequel plus their reputation intact.

Agree. For big companies like Sony, box office hits are a dime a dozen. The headache that is Blake is clearly not worth it to them, since neither they nor anyone else have offered her another role. They’re over Blake. She’s unhireable. On pause. Hathaway and Eva Mendes time. To use Sony’s own words.

The bolded is, uh, laughably false. Here's Ange Giannetti on the box office success of IEWU:

Q Was the opening of the film successful?
A Very.
Q And -- and how did it compare to other movies of the genre?
MR. FREEDMAN: Objection.
THE WITNESS: It was gigantic.
BY MS. HUDSON: Q Was it a historically successful movie?
MR. FREEDMAN: Objection.
THE WITNESS: Oh, you could say that. I think that's fair.
BY MS. HUDSON: Q And how much money has It Ends with Us made to date?
A I can't tell you to date. I can tell you to date theatrically. I think it's close to $350 million.
Q And is that a historically large success rate?
A For this size budget and this genre, incredible.

Emphasis on “for the genre”. Yes making this kind of money is a dime a dozen for Sony, just not in that genre.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lively's cut was the winner, for a reason, and studio execs gushed to her about the success of the film. Do you think any of this helps Baldoni, who has zero projects now in the works per imdb? Studio execs wanted to muzzle him from doing press promo, not because of Lively but because of his tendency to say inappropriate and off-putting things. They had to cut the tape of one of his interviews.

From People:
Justin Baldoni was labeled a "moron" by a studio executive over remarks he allegedly made in an interview promoting It Ends With Us.

An alleged email sent by Danni Maggin, a senior marketing executive at Sony Pictures Entertainment, on Aug. 5, 2024, shows the marketing team took issue with Baldoni's remarks in one interview.

"... Justin is basically alluding to 'raping' Atlas out of Lily when talking to the Dallas Morning News. We cut the tape but he is a moron," Maggin wrote in the email, recently unsealed as part of Blake Lively's ongoing legal battle with Baldoni.

Maggin then appeared to refer to Josh Greenstein, then-president of Sony Pictures‘ Motion Group, alleging Greenstein said that director-star Baldoni, 42, "shouldn't do any more press but he has a lot left so maybe we can talk asap."

Perfect example of weird bot behavior.

Her cut was the low scoring one, bozo!

Her cut was the one execs selected, largely because Colleen felt it captured her vision, and the one that earned hundreds of millions of dollars, bozo! From a business perspective, Baldoni was a pathetic failure. In addition to being cut out of the social network and promotion because no one wanted to hear any more of his inappropriate remarks. He's the one who'll never work again.

Meh, Sony likely caused themselves to lose tens of millions of dollars because they ignored normal business practices and went with the cut markedly less popular with audiences. Then they lost more potential profit when Blake did stupid things like make the “bring your florals” comment. That’s what you get when you give in to a celebrity pressure campaign.

Regardless of how you feel about Blake or Justin, I think it's dubious to assert that Sony could have made more money with Justin's cut. The truth of the matter is that the actual cut of the movie is not what sold it -- it was the marketing campaign featuring a very recognizable actress (often alongside her very famous husband and friends) and a hugely popular author. That's why they went with Blake's cut. Because Blake and Colleen would sell the hell out of it, and they did. It's highly unlikely they would have gotten more money out Justin's cut, especially if releasing that one had meant that Blake phoned in promotion.

It was a short term gain though. they killed any hope for the sequel and Sony has been embarrassed and damaged by what has come out.

Considering Colleen Hoover’s next film regretting you also did about 100 million based on a less successful book and less known actors, they probably would have been okay with less box office sales plus a sequel plus their reputation intact.

Agree. For big companies like Sony, box office hits are a dime a dozen. The headache that is Blake is clearly not worth it to them, since neither they nor anyone else have offered her another role. They’re over Blake. She’s unhireable. On pause. Hathaway and Eva Mendes time. To use Sony’s own words.

The bolded is, uh, laughably false. Here's Ange Giannetti on the box office success of IEWU:

Q Was the opening of the film successful?
A Very.
Q And -- and how did it compare to other movies of the genre?
MR. FREEDMAN: Objection.
THE WITNESS: It was gigantic.
BY MS. HUDSON: Q Was it a historically successful movie?
MR. FREEDMAN: Objection.
THE WITNESS: Oh, you could say that. I think that's fair.
BY MS. HUDSON: Q And how much money has It Ends with Us made to date?
A I can't tell you to date. I can tell you to date theatrically. I think it's close to $350 million.
Q And is that a historically large success rate?
A For this size budget and this genre, incredible.

Emphasis on “for the genre”. Yes making this kind of money is a dime a dozen for Sony, just not in that genre.

It’s hard to know. I just googled Sony’s revenue for 2024 it looks like he was 87 billion. Considering that if the movie made 350 million you have to give half of that to the theaters, that’s about 175 million left over, minus about 60 or 70 million for marketing and budget because the movie did go over budget and the 25 million does not factor in marketing. sony didn’t really didn’t make that much money off it since wayfarer got most of their return. So it was a money maker for Sony but considering they made 87 billion that is kind of a drop in the bucket.

I don’t understand the business model of a lot of these companies….I’m not sure how they’re making that much money. It’s clearly not just movies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lively's cut was the winner, for a reason, and studio execs gushed to her about the success of the film. Do you think any of this helps Baldoni, who has zero projects now in the works per imdb? Studio execs wanted to muzzle him from doing press promo, not because of Lively but because of his tendency to say inappropriate and off-putting things. They had to cut the tape of one of his interviews.

From People:
Justin Baldoni was labeled a "moron" by a studio executive over remarks he allegedly made in an interview promoting It Ends With Us.

An alleged email sent by Danni Maggin, a senior marketing executive at Sony Pictures Entertainment, on Aug. 5, 2024, shows the marketing team took issue with Baldoni's remarks in one interview.

"... Justin is basically alluding to 'raping' Atlas out of Lily when talking to the Dallas Morning News. We cut the tape but he is a moron," Maggin wrote in the email, recently unsealed as part of Blake Lively's ongoing legal battle with Baldoni.

Maggin then appeared to refer to Josh Greenstein, then-president of Sony Pictures‘ Motion Group, alleging Greenstein said that director-star Baldoni, 42, "shouldn't do any more press but he has a lot left so maybe we can talk asap."

Perfect example of weird bot behavior.

Her cut was the low scoring one, bozo!

Her cut was the one execs selected, largely because Colleen felt it captured her vision, and the one that earned hundreds of millions of dollars, bozo! From a business perspective, Baldoni was a pathetic failure. In addition to being cut out of the social network and promotion because no one wanted to hear any more of his inappropriate remarks. He's the one who'll never work again.

Meh, Sony likely caused themselves to lose tens of millions of dollars because they ignored normal business practices and went with the cut markedly less popular with audiences. Then they lost more potential profit when Blake did stupid things like make the “bring your florals” comment. That’s what you get when you give in to a celebrity pressure campaign.

Regardless of how you feel about Blake or Justin, I think it's dubious to assert that Sony could have made more money with Justin's cut. The truth of the matter is that the actual cut of the movie is not what sold it -- it was the marketing campaign featuring a very recognizable actress (often alongside her very famous husband and friends) and a hugely popular author. That's why they went with Blake's cut. Because Blake and Colleen would sell the hell out of it, and they did. It's highly unlikely they would have gotten more money out Justin's cut, especially if releasing that one had meant that Blake phoned in promotion.

It was a short term gain though. they killed any hope for the sequel and Sony has been embarrassed and damaged by what has come out.

Considering Colleen Hoover’s next film regretting you also did about 100 million based on a less successful book and less known actors, they probably would have been okay with less box office sales plus a sequel plus their reputation intact.

Agree. For big companies like Sony, box office hits are a dime a dozen. The headache that is Blake is clearly not worth it to them, since neither they nor anyone else have offered her another role. They’re over Blake. She’s unhireable. On pause. Hathaway and Eva Mendes time. To use Sony’s own words.

The bolded is, uh, laughably false. Here's Ange Giannetti on the box office success of IEWU:

Q Was the opening of the film successful?
A Very.
Q And -- and how did it compare to other movies of the genre?
MR. FREEDMAN: Objection.
THE WITNESS: It was gigantic.
BY MS. HUDSON: Q Was it a historically successful movie?
MR. FREEDMAN: Objection.
THE WITNESS: Oh, you could say that. I think that's fair.
BY MS. HUDSON: Q And how much money has It Ends with Us made to date?
A I can't tell you to date. I can tell you to date theatrically. I think it's close to $350 million.
Q And is that a historically large success rate?
A For this size budget and this genre, incredible.

Emphasis on “for the genre”. Yes making this kind of money is a dime a dozen for Sony, just not in that genre.

It’s hard to know. I just googled Sony’s revenue for 2024 it looks like he was 87 billion. Considering that if the movie made 350 million you have to give half of that to the theaters, that’s about 175 million left over, minus about 60 or 70 million for marketing and budget because the movie did go over budget and the 25 million does not factor in marketing. sony didn’t really didn’t make that much money off it since wayfarer got most of their return. So it was a money maker for Sony but considering they made 87 billion that is kind of a drop in the bucket.

I don’t understand the business model of a lot of these companies….I’m not sure how they’re making that much money. It’s clearly not just movies.

Sony is a huge and heavily diversified companies. Movies isn’t even the biggest part of the portfolio. There’s also gaming, tech, and electronics.