Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Celeb Legal Drama has a fantastic breakdown of the "bakeoff." Before Blake even signed on, this was in the Sony contract: Baldoni only got final cut if he met very specific metrics against Sony's cut. There was always going to be a bakeoff per the contract he agreed to. Sony let Blake and Colleen take the lead on their cut (Colleen was upset Justin had cut her out of the creative process, Blake invited her to join).

Much of the info on this thread is either cherrypicked or just plain wrong. CLD breaks down all the data. Justin's cut did not meet a single metric benchmark stipulated in the contract. Therefore he did not get final cut, period. This happens all the time, which is why we sometimes later see "director's cuts."

..

Sony’s cut and Blake’s cut are not the same thing, plus Blake’s version scored even lower than Justin’s.

Celeb Legal Drama is extremely biased in Blake’s favor and is on the surface aimed at talking about all celeb legal cases, but is actually a front started by a pro Blake person. People on the IEWU sub have looked into it,

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought I read Blake was paid $3 million for this movie initially, before any extra bonuses based on box office.

So it’s wild to me that she asks her boss via voice note to change the schedule so she doesn’t have to be apart from her husband for a couple of weeks. I realize celebs can make all kinds of demands but typically the trade off for making that kind money for what amounted to about four weeks on a set and maybe two weeks of promotion, is putting up with an intense shooting schedule.

Considering most actors have to travel to a location away from their family to be on set, she seems pretty lucky to be able to shoot the film in New Jersey not far from her New York home base. To make so many demands in this situation is mind boggling to me. Must be nice.

I don’t expect this to actually make it to court, but I can’t imagine how old this will go over with a jury of normal people.

I think everyone’s missing the point on the voice note. The purpose of it is to indict her testimony that the set was too loose and Justin lacked boundaries. In this note she’s saying things like “I’m speaking to you as a friend,” “I don’t talk to him like I talk to you.” Then we have other texts of her saying “you can be yourself with me,” “you’re safe with me.” This is all very early in their relationship. She set a tone of “we’re friends” then later turned around and basically said they’re all too cozy.

Similarly she improvised kissing but accused Justin of SH for doing the same. She brought up porn and circumcision and then accused Justin of SH for engaging in the conversation. She said it was fine for Jenny to joke that her apartment was bad for sex because they’re girls, but it was SH for just to agree b/c he knew Blake engaged in family sleeping (yet another intimate discussion she clearly had with Justin at some point).

It’s just not going to help her SH claims. It’s impossible to navigate that sort of ambiguity when one second someone wants to be friends and keep it real and the next minute they’re so precious you can’t say “I like your outfit”. It honestly seems like she was suffering from mental health issues due to postpartum and I say that with compassion despite thinking both she and Ryan are generally horrible people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Celeb Legal Drama has a fantastic breakdown of the "bakeoff." Before Blake even signed on, this was in the Sony contract: Baldoni only got final cut if he met very specific metrics against Sony's cut. There was always going to be a bakeoff per the contract he agreed to. Sony let Blake and Colleen take the lead on their cut (Colleen was upset Justin had cut her out of the creative process, Blake invited her to join).

Much of the info on this thread is either cherrypicked or just plain wrong. CLD breaks down all the data. Justin's cut did not meet a single metric benchmark stipulated in the contract. Therefore he did not get final cut, period. This happens all the time, which is why we sometimes later see "director's cuts."

..

Sony’s cut and Blake’s cut are not the same thing, plus Blake’s version scored even lower than Justin’s.

CLD has the actual numbers. Justin's cut did not meet any metric stipulated in the contract. Her version scored lower than his in one screening (only in one age group) but not in another. It didn't matter because the contract said Justin's score had to be 7 points higher, and it wasn't. He lost final cut per the terms of the contract, nothing else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought I read Blake was paid $3 million for this movie initially, before any extra bonuses based on box office.

So it’s wild to me that she asks her boss via voice note to change the schedule so she doesn’t have to be apart from her husband for a couple of weeks. I realize celebs can make all kinds of demands but typically the trade off for making that kind money for what amounted to about four weeks on a set and maybe two weeks of promotion, is putting up with an intense shooting schedule.

Considering most actors have to travel to a location away from their family to be on set, she seems pretty lucky to be able to shoot the film in New Jersey not far from her New York home base. To make so many demands in this situation is mind boggling to me. Must be nice.

I don’t expect this to actually make it to court, but I can’t imagine how old this will go over with a jury of normal people.

I think everyone’s missing the point on the voice note. The purpose of it is to indict her testimony that the set was too loose and Justin lacked boundaries. In this note she’s saying things like “I’m speaking to you as a friend,” “I don’t talk to him like I talk to you.” Then we have other texts of her saying “you can be yourself with me,” “you’re safe with me.” This is all very early in their relationship. She set a tone of “we’re friends” then later turned around and basically said they’re all too cozy.

Similarly she improvised kissing but accused Justin of SH for doing the same. She brought up porn and circumcision and then accused Justin of SH for engaging in the conversation. She said it was fine for Jenny to joke that her apartment was bad for sex because they’re girls, but it was SH for just to agree b/c he knew Blake engaged in family sleeping (yet another intimate discussion she clearly had with Justin at some point).

It’s just not going to help her SH claims. It’s impossible to navigate that sort of ambiguity when one second someone wants to be friends and keep it real and the next minute they’re so precious you can’t say “I like your outfit”. It honestly seems like she was suffering from mental health issues due to postpartum and I say that with compassion despite thinking both she and Ryan are generally horrible people.

This. After reading Jenny’s deposition I do agree there was inappropriate behavior on the set and Blake wasn’t just making everything up. I truly feel that Blake and Jenny felt uncomfortable. Not so much Isabel and Colleen because there’s just so much information on their relationship and interactions with him pre blake and so much quid pro quo after Blake. I’m also confused about Liz plank - she’s no better than Justin if she was willing to just put up a feminism front for years to do their joint podcast and then only quit when the jig was up. And then add on she’s partnered with reynolds in a production company and she loses credibility.

But anyway, back to the set, I think it could’ve been a much better run set and I think Justin should have acted much more appropriately, but I don’t think it’s entirely fair to accuse him of crossing boundaries when the women were doing it too. You could tell Jenny felt bad about the sex joke she made about the bed because of that very fact. The women had plenty of innuendoes in their conversations with Justin, with Blake there was a lot of let’s be vulnerable and we are friends and I feel so safe, and then to find out that from day one she thought he was a doofus clown and was shit talking is disturbing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought I read Blake was paid $3 million for this movie initially, before any extra bonuses based on box office.

So it’s wild to me that she asks her boss via voice note to change the schedule so she doesn’t have to be apart from her husband for a couple of weeks. I realize celebs can make all kinds of demands but typically the trade off for making that kind money for what amounted to about four weeks on a set and maybe two weeks of promotion, is putting up with an intense shooting schedule.

Considering most actors have to travel to a location away from their family to be on set, she seems pretty lucky to be able to shoot the film in New Jersey not far from her New York home base. To make so many demands in this situation is mind boggling to me. Must be nice.

I don’t expect this to actually make it to court, but I can’t imagine how old this will go over with a jury of normal people.

I think everyone’s missing the point on the voice note. The purpose of it is to indict her testimony that the set was too loose and Justin lacked boundaries. In this note she’s saying things like “I’m speaking to you as a friend,” “I don’t talk to him like I talk to you.” Then we have other texts of her saying “you can be yourself with me,” “you’re safe with me.” This is all very early in their relationship. She set a tone of “we’re friends” then later turned around and basically said they’re all too cozy.

Similarly she improvised kissing but accused Justin of SH for doing the same. She brought up porn and circumcision and then accused Justin of SH for engaging in the conversation. She said it was fine for Jenny to joke that her apartment was bad for sex because they’re girls, but it was SH for just to agree b/c he knew Blake engaged in family sleeping (yet another intimate discussion she clearly had with Justin at some point).

It’s just not going to help her SH claims. It’s impossible to navigate that sort of ambiguity when one second someone wants to be friends and keep it real and the next minute they’re so precious you can’t say “I like your outfit”. It honestly seems like she was suffering from mental health issues due to postpartum and I say that with compassion despite thinking both she and Ryan are generally horrible people.

This. After reading Jenny’s deposition I do agree there was inappropriate behavior on the set and Blake wasn’t just making everything up. I truly feel that Blake and Jenny felt uncomfortable. Not so much Isabel and Colleen because there’s just so much information on their relationship and interactions with him pre blake and so much quid pro quo after Blake. I’m also confused about Liz plank - she’s no better than Justin if she was willing to just put up a feminism front for years to do their joint podcast and then only quit when the jig was up. And then add on she’s partnered with reynolds in a production company and she loses credibility.

But anyway, back to the set, I think it could’ve been a much better run set and I think Justin should have acted much more appropriately, but I don’t think it’s entirely fair to accuse him of crossing boundaries when the women were doing it too. You could tell Jenny felt bad about the sex joke she made about the bed because of that very fact. The women had plenty of innuendoes in their conversations with Justin, with Blake there was a lot of let’s be vulnerable and we are friends and I feel so safe, and then to find out that from day one she thought he was a doofus clown and was shit talking is disturbing.

I’m confused as to how you could describe the hypocrisy of Lively and Slate and conclude anything other than that they are manipulative liars. Guys. I’ve been postpartum as most of us have. Lively made up claims. She was not sexually harassed or intimidated or retaliated against. The communications have buried her - maybe she ekes out a win of some kind, but she is a liar. Come on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Celeb Legal Drama has a fantastic breakdown of the "bakeoff." Before Blake even signed on, this was in the Sony contract: Baldoni only got final cut if he met very specific metrics against Sony's cut. There was always going to be a bakeoff per the contract he agreed to. Sony let Blake and Colleen take the lead on their cut (Colleen was upset Justin had cut her out of the creative process, Blake invited her to join).

Much of the info on this thread is either cherrypicked or just plain wrong. CLD breaks down all the data. Justin's cut did not meet a single metric benchmark stipulated in the contract. Therefore he did not get final cut, period. This happens all the time, which is why we sometimes later see "director's cuts."

..

Sony’s cut and Blake’s cut are not the same thing, plus Blake’s version scored even lower than Justin’s.

CLD has the actual numbers. Justin's cut did not meet any metric stipulated in the contract. Her version scored lower than his in one screening (only in one age group) but not in another. It didn't matter because the contract said Justin's score had to be 7 points higher, and it wasn't. He lost final cut per the terms of the contract, nothing else.

Helpful context, thanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Celeb Legal Drama has a fantastic breakdown of the "bakeoff." Before Blake even signed on, this was in the Sony contract: Baldoni only got final cut if he met very specific metrics against Sony's cut. There was always going to be a bakeoff per the contract he agreed to. Sony let Blake and Colleen take the lead on their cut (Colleen was upset Justin had cut her out of the creative process, Blake invited her to join).

Much of the info on this thread is either cherrypicked or just plain wrong. CLD breaks down all the data. Justin's cut did not meet a single metric benchmark stipulated in the contract. Therefore he did not get final cut, period. This happens all the time, which is why we sometimes later see "director's cuts."

..

Sony’s cut and Blake’s cut are not the same thing, plus Blake’s version scored even lower than Justin’s.

CLD has the actual numbers. Justin's cut did not meet any metric stipulated in the contract. Her version scored lower than his in one screening (only in one age group) but not in another. It didn't matter because the contract said Justin's score had to be 7 points higher, and it wasn't. He lost final cut per the terms of the contract, nothing else.

Thus is moronic argument (no surprise there)— Blake had no contractual right to even put forth a cut because she wasn’t a director. And hers scored even further below the benchmark.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought I read Blake was paid $3 million for this movie initially, before any extra bonuses based on box office.

So it’s wild to me that she asks her boss via voice note to change the schedule so she doesn’t have to be apart from her husband for a couple of weeks. I realize celebs can make all kinds of demands but typically the trade off for making that kind money for what amounted to about four weeks on a set and maybe two weeks of promotion, is putting up with an intense shooting schedule.

Considering most actors have to travel to a location away from their family to be on set, she seems pretty lucky to be able to shoot the film in New Jersey not far from her New York home base. To make so many demands in this situation is mind boggling to me. Must be nice.

I don’t expect this to actually make it to court, but I can’t imagine how old this will go over with a jury of normal people.

I think everyone’s missing the point on the voice note. The purpose of it is to indict her testimony that the set was too loose and Justin lacked boundaries. In this note she’s saying things like “I’m speaking to you as a friend,” “I don’t talk to him like I talk to you.” Then we have other texts of her saying “you can be yourself with me,” “you’re safe with me.” This is all very early in their relationship. She set a tone of “we’re friends” then later turned around and basically said they’re all too cozy.

Similarly she improvised kissing but accused Justin of SH for doing the same. She brought up porn and circumcision and then accused Justin of SH for engaging in the conversation. She said it was fine for Jenny to joke that her apartment was bad for sex because they’re girls, but it was SH for just to agree b/c he knew Blake engaged in family sleeping (yet another intimate discussion she clearly had with Justin at some point).

It’s just not going to help her SH claims. It’s impossible to navigate that sort of ambiguity when one second someone wants to be friends and keep it real and the next minute they’re so precious you can’t say “I like your outfit”. It honestly seems like she was suffering from mental health issues due to postpartum and I say that with compassion despite thinking both she and Ryan are generally horrible people.

This. After reading Jenny’s deposition I do agree there was inappropriate behavior on the set and Blake wasn’t just making everything up. I truly feel that Blake and Jenny felt uncomfortable. Not so much Isabel and Colleen because there’s just so much information on their relationship and interactions with him pre blake and so much quid pro quo after Blake. I’m also confused about Liz plank - she’s no better than Justin if she was willing to just put up a feminism front for years to do their joint podcast and then only quit when the jig was up. And then add on she’s partnered with reynolds in a production company and she loses credibility.

But anyway, back to the set, I think it could’ve been a much better run set and I think Justin should have acted much more appropriately, but I don’t think it’s entirely fair to accuse him of crossing boundaries when the women were doing it too. You could tell Jenny felt bad about the sex joke she made about the bed because of that very fact. The women had plenty of innuendoes in their conversations with Justin, with Blake there was a lot of let’s be vulnerable and we are friends and I feel so safe, and then to find out that from day one she thought he was a doofus clown and was shit talking is disturbing.

I’m confused as to how you could describe the hypocrisy of Lively and Slate and conclude anything other than that they are manipulative liars. Guys. I’ve been postpartum as most of us have. Lively made up claims. She was not sexually harassed or intimidated or retaliated against. The communications have buried her - maybe she ekes out a win of some kind, but she is a liar. Come on.

Yes, and it’s jus remarkable how her supporters here hold on tight to the lies- for instance, arguing for pages a night or two ago that she was wearing a nude modesty panel in the birthing scene when all the evidence, including Blake’s own SOF, admitted she was wearing some type of black underwear. Or how one of them continued to argue that Flaa was part of the retaliation campaign even after Blake admitted there was no such evidence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Celeb Legal Drama has a fantastic breakdown of the "bakeoff." Before Blake even signed on, this was in the Sony contract: Baldoni only got final cut if he met very specific metrics against Sony's cut. There was always going to be a bakeoff per the contract he agreed to. Sony let Blake and Colleen take the lead on their cut (Colleen was upset Justin had cut her out of the creative process, Blake invited her to join).

Much of the info on this thread is either cherrypicked or just plain wrong. CLD breaks down all the data. Justin's cut did not meet a single metric benchmark stipulated in the contract. Therefore he did not get final cut, period. This happens all the time, which is why we sometimes later see "director's cuts."

..

Sony’s cut and Blake’s cut are not the same thing, plus Blake’s version scored even lower than Justin’s.

CLD has the actual numbers. Justin's cut did not meet any metric stipulated in the contract. Her version scored lower than his in one screening (only in one age group) but not in another. It didn't matter because the contract said Justin's score had to be 7 points higher, and it wasn't. He lost final cut per the terms of the contract, nothing else.

Helpful context, thanks.

I’m so confused about this and feel like we’re missing some context. If Blake had in her contract early on that she could have the final cut then she had a ridiculous amount of power on that set from day one. There’s gotta be more context here. they said that Blake could choose the final cut over the director? That’s almost unheard of for someone who’s hired as an actor and only an executive producer, which is essentially a vanity title. I’m going to need some more information here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Celeb Legal Drama has a fantastic breakdown of the "bakeoff." Before Blake even signed on, this was in the Sony contract: Baldoni only got final cut if he met very specific metrics against Sony's cut. There was always going to be a bakeoff per the contract he agreed to. Sony let Blake and Colleen take the lead on their cut (Colleen was upset Justin had cut her out of the creative process, Blake invited her to join).

Much of the info on this thread is either cherrypicked or just plain wrong. CLD breaks down all the data. Justin's cut did not meet a single metric benchmark stipulated in the contract. Therefore he did not get final cut, period. This happens all the time, which is why we sometimes later see "director's cuts."

..

Sony’s cut and Blake’s cut are not the same thing, plus Blake’s version scored even lower than Justin’s.

CLD has the actual numbers. Justin's cut did not meet any metric stipulated in the contract. Her version scored lower than his in one screening (only in one age group) but not in another. It didn't matter because the contract said Justin's score had to be 7 points higher, and it wasn't. He lost final cut per the terms of the contract, nothing else.

Thus is moronic argument (no surprise there)— Blake had no contractual right to even put forth a cut because she wasn’t a director. And hers scored even further below the benchmark.

That PP is correct. It may help to see it not as Justin competing against Blake, but competing against himself: per contract, if he meets certain scores, he gets Director's Cut. If he doesn't, then Sony can choose any cut it wants. He didn't meet it, so Sony chose to use Blake's cut and that was for a variety of reasons: Hoover's blessing, the reaction at Book Bonanza, and maybe Blake's star power, too. There was no requirement that cut had to outscore Justin's.

[Anonymous]

Interesting text from Justin to some others at Wayfarer talking about cast unfollowing him and stuff. And then he says something like, and I have a years worth of bromance texts with Brandon and now nothing.

I wonder if we’ll see any of those text. But it seems like Brandon and him had a really good relationship preproduction and through the shoot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Celeb Legal Drama has a fantastic breakdown of the "bakeoff." Before Blake even signed on, this was in the Sony contract: Baldoni only got final cut if he met very specific metrics against Sony's cut. There was always going to be a bakeoff per the contract he agreed to. Sony let Blake and Colleen take the lead on their cut (Colleen was upset Justin had cut her out of the creative process, Blake invited her to join).

Much of the info on this thread is either cherrypicked or just plain wrong. CLD breaks down all the data. Justin's cut did not meet a single metric benchmark stipulated in the contract. Therefore he did not get final cut, period. This happens all the time, which is why we sometimes later see "director's cuts."

..

Sony’s cut and Blake’s cut are not the same thing, plus Blake’s version scored even lower than Justin’s.

CLD has the actual numbers. Justin's cut did not meet any metric stipulated in the contract. Her version scored lower than his in one screening (only in one age group) but not in another. It didn't matter because the contract said Justin's score had to be 7 points higher, and it wasn't. He lost final cut per the terms of the contract, nothing else.

Helpful context, thanks.

I’m so confused about this and feel like we’re missing some context. If Blake had in her contract early on that she could have the final cut then she had a ridiculous amount of power on that set from day one. There’s gotta be more context here. they said that Blake could choose the final cut over the director? That’s almost unheard of for someone who’s hired as an actor and only an executive producer, which is essentially a vanity title. I’m going to need some more information here.

It wasn't in her contract. Sony had the final verdict over the cut used, and agreed to let her (and Colleen) work on a cut in part because the women felt his cut was too sympathetic to the abusers. They wanted a cut that emphasized survival and empowerment more heavily. Execs viewed and tested Blake's and Justin's cuts and preferred Blake's. The fact that her promotional role was essential and she had contacts to bring in high-level creatives to contribute plus get the rights for TS music in a key scene was surely a factor.

But her cut tested very well. There are e-mails about the first test viewing stating that. It's not true that Justin's tested better across the board. It tested better with one demographic in one test viewing; Blake's performed better in others. His contract stipulated his cut had to perform 7 points better than alternative cuts in tests for him to retain director's cut rights. It did not. Contractually he has no basis to contest the decision regarding final cut and apparently only decided to go after Blake when the SH claims started to get out. That's the retaliation claim on her side.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Celeb Legal Drama has a fantastic breakdown of the "bakeoff." Before Blake even signed on, this was in the Sony contract: Baldoni only got final cut if he met very specific metrics against Sony's cut. There was always going to be a bakeoff per the contract he agreed to. Sony let Blake and Colleen take the lead on their cut (Colleen was upset Justin had cut her out of the creative process, Blake invited her to join).

Much of the info on this thread is either cherrypicked or just plain wrong. CLD breaks down all the data. Justin's cut did not meet a single metric benchmark stipulated in the contract. Therefore he did not get final cut, period. This happens all the time, which is why we sometimes later see "director's cuts."

..

Sony’s cut and Blake’s cut are not the same thing, plus Blake’s version scored even lower than Justin’s.

CLD has the actual numbers. Justin's cut did not meet any metric stipulated in the contract. Her version scored lower than his in one screening (only in one age group) but not in another. It didn't matter because the contract said Justin's score had to be 7 points higher, and it wasn't. He lost final cut per the terms of the contract, nothing else.

Helpful context, thanks.

I’m so confused about this and feel like we’re missing some context. If Blake had in her contract early on that she could have the final cut then she had a ridiculous amount of power on that set from day one. There’s gotta be more context here. they said that Blake could choose the final cut over the director? That’s almost unheard of for someone who’s hired as an actor and only an executive producer, which is essentially a vanity title. I’m going to need some more information here.

Blake had nothing on her contract about a Final Cut because she was given no directorial responsibility. According to pp, Sony was allowed to have a cut.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Celeb Legal Drama has a fantastic breakdown of the "bakeoff." Before Blake even signed on, this was in the Sony contract: Baldoni only got final cut if he met very specific metrics against Sony's cut. There was always going to be a bakeoff per the contract he agreed to. Sony let Blake and Colleen take the lead on their cut (Colleen was upset Justin had cut her out of the creative process, Blake invited her to join).

Much of the info on this thread is either cherrypicked or just plain wrong. CLD breaks down all the data. Justin's cut did not meet a single metric benchmark stipulated in the contract. Therefore he did not get final cut, period. This happens all the time, which is why we sometimes later see "director's cuts."

..

Sony’s cut and Blake’s cut are not the same thing, plus Blake’s version scored even lower than Justin’s.

CLD has the actual numbers. Justin's cut did not meet any metric stipulated in the contract. Her version scored lower than his in one screening (only in one age group) but not in another. It didn't matter because the contract said Justin's score had to be 7 points higher, and it wasn't. He lost final cut per the terms of the contract, nothing else.

Helpful context, thanks.

I’m so confused about this and feel like we’re missing some context. If Blake had in her contract early on that she could have the final cut then she had a ridiculous amount of power on that set from day one. There’s gotta be more context here. they said that Blake could choose the final cut over the director? That’s almost unheard of for someone who’s hired as an actor and only an executive producer, which is essentially a vanity title. I’m going to need some more information here.

It wasn't in her contract. Sony had the final verdict over the cut used, and agreed to let her (and Colleen) work on a cut in part because the women felt his cut was too sympathetic to the abusers. They wanted a cut that emphasized survival and empowerment more heavily. Execs viewed and tested Blake's and Justin's cuts and preferred Blake's. The fact that her promotional role was essential and she had contacts to bring in high-level creatives to contribute plus get the rights for TS music in a key scene was surely a factor.

But her cut tested very well. There are e-mails about the first test viewing stating that. It's not true that Justin's tested better across the board. It tested better with one demographic in one test viewing; Blake's performed better in others. His contract stipulated his cut had to perform 7 points better than alternative cuts in tests for him to retain director's cut rights. It did not. Contractually he has no basis to contest the decision regarding final cut and apparently only decided to go after Blake when the SH claims started to get out. That's the retaliation claim on her side.

This isn’t factually correct in any respect. The recent document release showed that Justin scored better across most metrics.

Blake wasn’t hired to be a director nor did Sony want her to be one, she just did it. Hoover is irrelevant as she had sold her book rights .

[Anonymous]

Are the Blake bots too stupid to realize the argument they are making would for sure make Blake an independent contractor and get her case tossed?