Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2

[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.

Right. Justin was a newbie director who had to meet stringent metrics to get Director's Cut. Even super famous directors don't automatically get that. They sometimes negotiate releasing their own version on streaming, but the studio always determines the cut released in theaters. Sony, not Wayfarer, was in charge. The key point is that per his contract he had no rights to the theatrical cut. I'm sure it was galling for him but he signed the contract with those terms stipulated (as any novice director would).

[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.

This is correct. Justin's tested better with women under 35 in one screening. Blake's tested equal or better with women over 35 and better with men. Justin's PR released cherrypicked data, which his stans are amplifying on this thread. Look up the docs on CLD. Even if Justin's cut consistently tested better, which it didn't, Sony got to choose what they wanted per the terms of his contract.

[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.

Justin scored 94% and Blake scored 82%. They gave Blake a second chance and she only got her score up to 83%. This whole 7 point thing that’s being spread isn’t true. The scores were unsealed.

[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.

Justin scored 94% and Blake scored 82%. They gave Blake a second chance and she only got her score up to 83%. This whole 7 point thing that’s being spread isn’t true. The scores were unsealed.

That refers to ONE demographic in ONE screening. Stop cherry picking!

[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.

Justin scored 94% and Blake scored 82%. They gave Blake a second chance and she only got her score up to 83%. This whole 7 point thing that’s being spread isn’t true. The scores were unsealed.

That refers to ONE demographic in ONE screening. Stop cherry picking!

You’re cherry picking. Looking for anyway to explain away the weaker cut being released. Under 35 was the target demographic, the one they cared about. How it tested with audiences outside of the target demographic is close to irrelevant.

[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.

Justin scored 94% and Blake scored 82%. They gave Blake a second chance and she only got her score up to 83%. This whole 7 point thing that’s being spread isn’t true. The scores were unsealed.

The 7 point spread is accurate and refers to the overall score. You can't select a single demographic and claim Justin "won." That's not how testing metrics work. He didn't get director's cut becase he didn't meet that benchmark. Period.

[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.

Justin scored 94% and Blake scored 82%. They gave Blake a second chance and she only got her score up to 83%. This whole 7 point thing that’s being spread isn’t true. The scores were unsealed.

The 7 point spread is accurate and refers to the overall score. You can't select a single demographic and claim Justin "won." That's not how testing metrics work. He didn't get director's cut becase he didn't meet that benchmark. Period.

Blake fans are delusional. Men only made up 16-18% of iewu viewers. How the movie tested with men is irrelevant. More than 60% of people who ultimately went to see the movie were also under 35. Sony cared about the under 35 email audience. That lively did ok with older women and men is once again irrelevant.

[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.

Justin scored 94% and Blake scored 82%. They gave Blake a second chance and she only got her score up to 83%. This whole 7 point thing that’s being spread isn’t true. The scores were unsealed.

The 7 point spread is accurate and refers to the overall score. You can't select a single demographic and claim Justin "won." That's not how testing metrics work. He didn't get director's cut becase he didn't meet that benchmark. Period.

Blake fans are delusional. Men only made up 16-18% of iewu viewers. How the movie tested with men is irrelevant. More than 60% of people who ultimately went to see the movie were also under 35. Sony cared about the under 35 email audience. That lively did ok with older women and men is once again irrelevant.

*female not email (autocorrect error)

[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.

Justin scored 94% and Blake scored 82%. They gave Blake a second chance and she only got her score up to 83%. This whole 7 point thing that’s being spread isn’t true. The scores were unsealed.

The 7 point spread is accurate and refers to the overall score. You can't select a single demographic and claim Justin "won." That's not how testing metrics work. He didn't get director's cut becase he didn't meet that benchmark. Period.

Blake fans are delusional. Men only made up 16-18% of iewu viewers. How the movie tested with men is irrelevant. More than 60% of people who ultimately went to see the movie were also under 35. Sony cared about the under 35 email audience. That lively did ok with older women and men is once again irrelevant.

Justin lost per the terms of his contract. Obviously Sony chose correctly, and the under 35 demographic turned out just fine, given the film's huge box office. Your cherrypicking and ignoring the terms of his contract does not help his case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Justin scored 94% and Blake scored 82%. They gave Blake a second chance and she only got her score up to 83%. This whole 7 point thing that’s being spread isn’t true. The scores were unsealed.

The 7 point spread is accurate and refers to the overall score. You can't select a single demographic and claim Justin "won." That's not how testing metrics work. He didn't get director's cut becase he didn't meet that benchmark. Period.

Blake fans are delusional. Men only made up 16-18% of iewu viewers. How the movie tested with men is irrelevant. More than 60% of people who ultimately went to see the movie were also under 35. Sony cared about the under 35 email audience. That lively did ok with older women and men is once again irrelevant.

Justin lost per the terms of his contract. Obviously Sony chose correctly, and the under 35 demographic turned out just fine, given the film's huge box office. Your cherrypicking and ignoring the terms of his contract does not help his case.

Delusional

[Anonymous]

Comparing the scores don't matter.

The screening scores only mattered in one way: if Justin's cut had scored above a certain threshold, his contract dictated that Sony would release his cut. That's the only scenario in which screening scores would dictate which cut was released.

Since Justin's cut didn't meet that threshold, Sony could release any cut for any reason. Literally. They were the distributor. It sounds like Sony chose to release Blake's cut because it got a very good response at Book Bonanza and because Blake and Colleen were both very enthusiastic about it, and Sony wanted them to sell the movie very hard to their fan bases (which they did). Sony's concern was getting people to buy tickets to the movie.

I also think Sony wanted to push the women's empowerment angle in selling the movie, and it was easier to do that with a cut that had been put together by Blake and Colleen.

Again, Justin could have avoided any of this had his cut scored high enough to trigger his "final cut" rights in his contract. But it didn't, so it was out of his hands and Sony made the decision based on marketing strategy, which is a completely valid reason to choose one cut over another.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Comparing the scores don't matter.

The screening scores only mattered in one way: if Justin's cut had scored above a certain threshold, his contract dictated that Sony would release his cut. That's the only scenario in which screening scores would dictate which cut was released.

Since Justin's cut didn't meet that threshold, Sony could release any cut for any reason. Literally. They were the distributor. It sounds like Sony chose to release Blake's cut because it got a very good response at Book Bonanza and because Blake and Colleen were both very enthusiastic about it, and Sony wanted them to sell the movie very hard to their fan bases (which they did). Sony's concern was getting people to buy tickets to the movie.

I also think Sony wanted to push the women's empowerment angle in selling the movie, and it was easier to do that with a cut that had been put together by Blake and Colleen.

Again, Justin could have avoided any of this had his cut scored high enough to trigger his "final cut" rights in his contract. But it didn't, so it was out of his hands and Sony made the decision based on marketing strategy, which is a completely valid reason to choose one cut over another.

Sony released Blake’s cut b/c she threatened them. She said she did not care that her version scored lower. That the decision had been made as far as she, Colleen and Taylor were concerned. It had nothing to do with Justin’s contract. His contract also included a film by credit that she had taken away. Sony made their feelings clear about Blake on more than one occasion that they considered her an effing terrorist.

[Anonymous]

Isn’t this irrelevant to the case?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t this irrelevant to the case?

It’s relevant to the question of whether or not she was an employee. Wayfarer is arguing, and I agree, that she had far too much power to be considered an employee. If she is ruled an independent contractor she can’t even bring her title 7 claims.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Comparing the scores don't matter.

The screening scores only mattered in one way: if Justin's cut had scored above a certain threshold, his contract dictated that Sony would release his cut. That's the only scenario in which screening scores would dictate which cut was released.

Since Justin's cut didn't meet that threshold, Sony could release any cut for any reason. Literally. They were the distributor. It sounds like Sony chose to release Blake's cut because it got a very good response at Book Bonanza and because Blake and Colleen were both very enthusiastic about it, and Sony wanted them to sell the movie very hard to their fan bases (which they did). Sony's concern was getting people to buy tickets to the movie.

I also think Sony wanted to push the women's empowerment angle in selling the movie, and it was easier to do that with a cut that had been put together by Blake and Colleen.

Again, Justin could have avoided any of this had his cut scored high enough to trigger his "final cut" rights in his contract. But it didn't, so it was out of his hands and Sony made the decision based on marketing strategy, which is a completely valid reason to choose one cut over another.

Sony released Blake’s cut b/c she threatened them. She said she did not care that her version scored lower. That the decision had been made as far as she, Colleen and Taylor were concerned. It had nothing to do with Justin’s contract. His contract also included a film by credit that she had taken away. Sony made their feelings clear about Blake on more than one occasion that they considered her an effing terrorist.

But where did she threaten them? Where was the threat? Saying she's decided, and that Colleen has decided (or that Taylor has, lol, who wasn't even involved with the movie) is meaningless. That's no different than Justin telling them "I've decided my cut is the best cut." Ultimately Sony decides. They went with Blake's cut, as was their right since Justin's didn't hit the score thresholds.

I don't even understand why this matters. I think at one point Justin said that the cut they released was like 98% identical to his cut. So who cares?? Good enough, these people should move on with their lives. It all seems soooooo petty.