Why is Blake Lively so overrated?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In the end, the movie did really well and given the assertions in the complaint that apparently Blake controlled everything, made all the decisions, took over the set and all roles and directed, produced, and edited the movie herself...she did a pretty damn good job considering how well it did at the box office and how much money it made all the key players involved. Maybe if she hadn't stepped in and hadn't done it all herself, it would have flopped. Who knows.

This is perhaps true (though we’ll never know how his version would have done, or how much RR and his high-rolling team did), but I think JB would rather have directed a dud than be blackballed for the rest of his career and thought of as a sexual predator. So to what end.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the end, the movie did really well and given the assertions in the complaint that apparently Blake controlled everything, made all the decisions, took over the set and all roles and directed, produced, and edited the movie herself...she did a pretty damn good job considering how well it did at the box office and how much money it made all the key players involved. Maybe if she hadn't stepped in and hadn't done it all herself, it would have flopped. Who knows.

Agree, and I feel like Justin was very grateful. During the premier, his separate one by the way, since he was kicked out of the actual one, he did nothing but gush about Blake there, and throughout the marketing of the movie. He gave her all the credit. He said he had she had her hands in everything and made it a much better movie. He said she should direct the next film!

So great that she, or she and Ryan, or whatever, improved the film because of Baldoni‘s inexperience.

But it was a $25 million movie so it seemed appropriate that Justin direct, and produce. Especially since Colleen Hoover hand picked him to do that. People questioning that are definitely rewriting history. He was picked to do it, it was a $25 million movie, definitely appropriate that a director of his caliber would do this. Sorry, but Martin Scorsese is not going to direct it ends with us.

Blake seemed the one that should not have been in the role. It seems like she is used to much better accommodations, calling the shots in her companies, and wielding the power. It doesn’t seem like she was a good fit for this role. Great that she did such great things with it, but at what cost? Why shut him out? If he was sexually harassing her, it makes sense, but I seriously doubt that at this point. It sounds like things were really murky and I’m just not ready to say he’s a sexual harasser. Too many things don’t add up, all of which have been listed on this thread.

I’m going with the theory that Ryan and Blake wanted full control and they did not see him hiring a bulldog lawyer since he himself couldn’t have afforded it but his backer could. Like I just posted upthread, the talent agency dropped him, his podcast dropped him, and they probably thought his backer would drop him but instead he’s going to toe to toe.

Your first part is really Justin's problem. He is very two faced. He gushes effusive praise when he is actually thinking the opposite. There are so many contradictions and examples of this in the complaint. He is saying completely opposite things at the same time. He is trying to people please everyone and seem like everyone's ally and best friend but isn't really true or direct about his own feelings or opinions. He is wishy washy and like a chameleon changing his spots to fit in with whomever he is around. This may be due to his inexperience but given other accounts of this in his career by at least 2 other people, it seems it is more his personality. Not what a director needs to run a film set.

You can’t be serious. Hollywood is riddled with costars that hate each other, but play nice to get the marketing of the movie done. What he did was his job and it was professional. You think he should’ve gone off to the press and whined about what a diva Blake lively was? Do you think that would’ve helped the movie? I think he did his job just fine.

yep. When he panicked was when Lively made clear that she was going after him publicly during the marketing. up to that point he was professional, but she pushed to the point that he had to protect himself. unfortunately his PR agent advised him poorly and got caught up in her own drama, so … here we are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the end, the movie did really well and given the assertions in the complaint that apparently Blake controlled everything, made all the decisions, took over the set and all roles and directed, produced, and edited the movie herself...she did a pretty damn good job considering how well it did at the box office and how much money it made all the key players involved. Maybe if she hadn't stepped in and hadn't done it all herself, it would have flopped. Who knows.

This is perhaps true (though we’ll never know how his version would have done, or how much RR and his high-rolling team did), but I think JB would rather have directed a dud than be blackballed for the rest of his career and thought of as a sexual predator. So to what end.

Same can be said for Lively. She’s never going to get another role or direct or produce unless it’s via Ryan or she’s paying for it. Her career is over. If she had just been able to control herself instead of deciding to go for the jugular it would have worked out perfectly for her.

[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:I get that people are skeezed out by the male feminist thing, but I’m not sure it makes him a terrible person.

Anyway, at the end of the day, I think this shows what happens in any business when there isn’t a clear delineation of power. When people’s values line up, everything can go well. But when they don’t, it’s a total mess. Who even can tell what BL was supposed to be doing or not doing. Seems like she wanted to be doing it all, but the studio wanted to limit her role because it was slowing things down. And JB was just stuck in the middle, going back and forth asking what he was supposed to do at every turn.

I just wrote about this in a longer post but wanted to reiterate it here: the stuff about Lively being demanding strikes me as dumb because that's just what happens when you hire a big name actor. The tradeoff is she brings a lot more commercial viability to the project. They hired her because she's very well known and recognizable, which will result in more people going to the movie (news flash: it worked). Well with her fame comes power and that is going to mean she might want to have more creative input into the movie, might make demands a lesser known actor wouldn't dare to make, etc. They know this going in. The vast majority of actors at Lively's fame level will be a PITA in similar ways.

I also think a huge part of the problem was Baldoni's approach to directing and collaborating. You can see it in the texts he includes in his complaint. He doesn't know how to stand up to anyone (not Lively, not his producing partners, not the studio). He's "collaborative" but how this really comes off is wishy-washy and indirect. Everyone is talking about how Lively was hard to work with (which I'm sure she is) but he also sounds like a bad director. It sounds like he basically let her take over a bunch of stuff in the production and then when his studio/partners got mad and told him to rein her in, he couldn't do it. I suspect this dynamic is where a lot of the problems arose. Maybe in trying to rein her in, he crossed lines that felt harassing to Lively. And maybe they were harassing if he did it in an unprofessional way, which seems likely because he really does come off as inexperienced. He might have tried to soft pedal studio demands to Lively because he was afraid of being direct, but his soft pedaling came off to her like him trying to exploit their friendliness in inappropriate ways.

I really think they are both responsible for the toxicity here and that the studio effed up in casting and didn't think about what it would be like for a star at Lively's level to work with a director at Baldoni's level with his specific personality.

I disagree. The problem was that she didn’t make these demands during contract negotiations, she kept adding them as the movie went through production, which really hurt both the film’s budget and timeline. Had she made them during negotiations, they could have easily decided to go with another actress. Because she waited to make her demands until they were in production, they were hamstrung.

The movie made $325 million, a large portion of which Baldoni pockets ad director and co-producer. Did it really "hurt" the movie's budget?

What other actress do you think they could have hired that would bring the box office leverage Lively brought but would not have made similar demands during production?

There are many, the actress playing the part should have been younger anyway.

Name one who has the same recognizability as Lively but who you think would not make a demand like this wardrobe thing. Just one.

They could have hired a younger, less well-known actress who was a dream to work with. Does the movie make as much money if they do? Almost definitely not.

You present this as if Blake is some A list actress, rather than a past her prime tv actress who married well. There are probably a dozen or more former Disney stars who could have done this movie and brought in a more desirable demographic.

Nope, the PP upthread who pointed out Lively is truly unique in this respect was right. She's weird because she's not truly A-list as an actress (no A-list actress would make this movie) but her star power is huge. And yes it is partly due to Ryan Reynolds. But it's also due to Taylor Swift and Lively's own hustle -- she is good at courting the right kinds of publicity, like all her involvement with the Met Ball over the years which has netted her a ton of positive press and helps her gain a following on social media. Remember her whole stunt with that "Statue of Liberty" dress at the Ball a few years back where there was this dramatic reveal on the stairs as the dress changed color to mimic the verdigris process or whatever? That kind of stunt is genius and I don't think Ryan Reynolds came up with it.

I don't think there are any former Disney stars who could have offered what she did in terms of exposure and box office. Zendaya is way too big, she'd never do it. Someone like Dove Cameron does not have anywhere near the name recognition. I just don't see it.

My college age kid would definitely go see a Dove Cameron movie over a Blake Lively film.

Great, so that's $20. Go find me the other $349,999,980 in box office revenue for a Dove Cameron movie.

I think people debating what other actresses should play in this movie should go on another thread. I’m not sure what it has to do with this case. I think we can establish that Blake lively was a huge part of the money making power behind this movie. I still don’t think it gives her the right to burn people’s careers down and accuse people of sexual harassment, do you?

What it has to do with it is there are people saying that Blake Lively is so unique that no one else could play the part of Lilly Flower Bloom or WTF the character is called. People are pointing at the plenty of similar actresses can play the Flower Bloom role.

No, what we are arguing is that casting Lively made the movie significantly more commercially successful than casting another actor (because high profile actresses wouldn't touch the role which isn't very good). Thus it was reasonable for Lively to, for instance, expect the production to spend extra money to bring wardrobe to her instead of making her go out to Hoboken for fittings. She made the production far more money than she cost them. Thus the allegation that she someone ruined the production doesn't hold water. The movie likely would not even have gotten Sony's full distribution or the major marketing campaign without Lively attached.

And what we are arguing is that it could have had the same success with any similar actors because 2009 is over.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the end, the movie did really well and given the assertions in the complaint that apparently Blake controlled everything, made all the decisions, took over the set and all roles and directed, produced, and edited the movie herself...she did a pretty damn good job considering how well it did at the box office and how much money it made all the key players involved. Maybe if she hadn't stepped in and hadn't done it all herself, it would have flopped. Who knows.

This is perhaps true (though we’ll never know how his version would have done, or how much RR and his high-rolling team did), but I think JB would rather have directed a dud than be blackballed for the rest of his career and thought of as a sexual predator. So to what end.

Same can be said for Lively. She’s never going to get another role or direct or produce unless it’s via Ryan or she’s paying for it. Her career is over. If she had just been able to control herself instead of deciding to go for the jugular it would have worked out perfectly for her.

+1. I said something similar upthread and one of Blake's fangirls disagreed, arguing that Blake is just so special people will put up with anything from her.

[Anonymous]

I see our favorite Blake supporter is now awake.

[Anonymous]

I haven’t read this whole thread but I’m on Lively’s side in this. When Lively brought her 17 issues to the producers, many of which were rather horrifying, the producers said 1-10 were absolutely correct and couldn’t be argued with. Why didn’t they already have an intimacy coordinator?

Now Baldoni sees Reynolds as a cash cow and is trying to make millions off of it by hiring a dirty public relations firm, because he has seen that that can work for men and understands (as does the PR firm) that there if a premature audience of people out there ready to side with the man over the woman in a case like this.


I can understand Baldoni got his feelings hurt by losing power in the movie. That was his own fault, resulting from his own actions like having his friend come to the birth scene etc. Ewwwww.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the end, the movie did really well and given the assertions in the complaint that apparently Blake controlled everything, made all the decisions, took over the set and all roles and directed, produced, and edited the movie herself...she did a pretty damn good job considering how well it did at the box office and how much money it made all the key players involved. Maybe if she hadn't stepped in and hadn't done it all herself, it would have flopped. Who knows.

Agree, and I feel like Justin was very grateful. During the premier, his separate one by the way, since he was kicked out of the actual one, he did nothing but gush about Blake there, and throughout the marketing of the movie. He gave her all the credit. He said he had she had her hands in everything and made it a much better movie. He said she should direct the next film!

So great that she, or she and Ryan, or whatever, improved the film because of Baldoni‘s inexperience.

But it was a $25 million movie so it seemed appropriate that Justin direct, and produce. Especially since Colleen Hoover hand picked him to do that. People questioning that are definitely rewriting history. He was picked to do it, it was a $25 million movie, definitely appropriate that a director of his caliber would do this. Sorry, but Martin Scorsese is not going to direct it ends with us.

Blake seemed the one that should not have been in the role. It seems like she is used to much better accommodations, calling the shots in her companies, and wielding the power. It doesn’t seem like she was a good fit for this role. Great that she did such great things with it, but at what cost? Why shut him out? If he was sexually harassing her, it makes sense, but I seriously doubt that at this point. It sounds like things were really murky and I’m just not ready to say he’s a sexual harasser. Too many things don’t add up, all of which have been listed on this thread.

I’m going with the theory that Ryan and Blake wanted full control and they did not see him hiring a bulldog lawyer since he himself couldn’t have afforded it but his backer could. Like I just posted upthread, the talent agency dropped him, his podcast dropped him, and they probably thought his backer would drop him but instead he’s going to toe to toe.

Your first part is really Justin's problem. He is very two faced. He gushes effusive praise when he is actually thinking the opposite. There are so many contradictions and examples of this in the complaint. He is saying completely opposite things at the same time. He is trying to people please everyone and seem like everyone's ally and best friend but isn't really true or direct about his own feelings or opinions. He is wishy washy and like a chameleon changing his spots to fit in with whomever he is around. This may be due to his inexperience but given other accounts of this in his career by at least 2 other people, it seems it is more his personality. Not what a director needs to run a film set.

You can’t be serious. Hollywood is riddled with costars that hate each other, but play nice to get the marketing of the movie done. What he did was his job and it was professional. You think he should’ve gone off to the press and whined about what a diva Blake lively was? Do you think that would’ve helped the movie? I think he did his job just fine.

No, I never mentioned the press or going public. I don't think he was professional at all in his role as director. His complaint highlights a lot of these same contradictions.

For example in the complaint, they use texts and comments to show how amazing the relationship was between Justin and Blake in early 2023 before the strike. That she was collaborative, had great ideas, that they were super close, besties, texted daily, sent silly jokes to eac other, hung out, laughed late into the night, supported each other through personal things, an incredible team.

But also they talk about how at the SAME TIME she was a monster and demanding from day 1, how she took over and had terrible ideas that cost the production a lot of money and time, that she made unreasonable demands, that she was entitled and inserting herself where she didn't belong from the start, that she ignored the director's vision, that she made Justin rethink the entire script and a year of work over a pair of shoes she wanted to wear, and that Justin only reluctantly conceded to her demands to try and maintain harmony on set.

They are using each point as evidence for different things but they never speak to the contradictions. The effusive praise about how amazing everything was is to support their claim that there were no issues before the strike and that the list and complaints her frustrations came out of nowhere after the strike.

But the she was a monster aspect is to support their claim that she was unmanageable and controlling and misused her power.

But it isn't possible that in the first few months, everything was both amazingly collaborative, and that she had great ideas and they had this close relationship AND she was a monster that was making Justin's life a living hell everyday.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I see our favorite Blake supporter is now awake.

? is this supposed to be a Baldoni fan club? It's a discussion. If you want an echo chamber go somewhere else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't think he intentionally harrassed her but she experienced his behaviour as uncomfortable and harrassing. I guess it comes down to how much intentions matter. If someone doesn't harm you intentionally but you are still harmed, do you have a claim?

There are many scenarios where girls and women feel harrassed even though the men have very different intentions and think they are doing something else and are upset at being told that what they are doing is harrassment.

I think her scenario is similar. For example with Heath in her trailer. She had asked him to turn around and keep his back to her but then her top slipped and she looked up and he was looking at her. Was he intentionally trying to get a look at her breasts - likely not, but he didn't feel the need to have his back turned as she had requested.

If he sexually harassed her, then she sexually harassed him. I mean she whipped her boobs out at him. This is just so dumb in context. This isn’t what the law was made to protect people from.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't think he intentionally harrassed her but she experienced his behaviour as uncomfortable and harrassing. I guess it comes down to how much intentions matter. If someone doesn't harm you intentionally but you are still harmed, do you have a claim?

There are many scenarios where girls and women feel harrassed even though the men have very different intentions and think they are doing something else and are upset at being told that what they are doing is harrassment.

I think her scenario is similar. For example with Heath in her trailer. She had asked him to turn around and keep his back to her but then her top slipped and she looked up and he was looking at her. Was he intentionally trying to get a look at her breasts - likely not, but he didn't feel the need to have his back turned as she had requested.

But this puts Jamey in a tough situation. If he had said, I understand we need to meet, but you are in your trailer getting makeup off and about to breast-feed, I don’t want either of us to be in an awkward situation so why don’t you just meet me after?

The headline would have been, Hollywood is impossible for women! Poor Blake is trying to run three companies and star in a movie and breastfeed! She should be able to multitask and have a meeting! But Jamey heath insisted that she come to his office!

I’m sorry if she felt uncomfortable, but she helped create that situation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the end, the movie did really well and given the assertions in the complaint that apparently Blake controlled everything, made all the decisions, took over the set and all roles and directed, produced, and edited the movie herself...she did a pretty damn good job considering how well it did at the box office and how much money it made all the key players involved. Maybe if she hadn't stepped in and hadn't done it all herself, it would have flopped. Who knows.

This is perhaps true (though we’ll never know how his version would have done, or how much RR and his high-rolling team did), but I think JB would rather have directed a dud than be blackballed for the rest of his career and thought of as a sexual predator. So to what end.

Same can be said for Lively. She’s never going to get another role or direct or produce unless it’s via Ryan or she’s paying for it. Her career is over. If she had just been able to control herself instead of deciding to go for the jugular it would have worked out perfectly for her.

So true. Without this drama she’d have starred in a hugely successful movie - biggest of her career - and probably on the way to staring in and coproducing the sequel. But here we are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I haven’t read this whole thread but I’m on Lively’s side in this. When Lively brought her 17 issues to the producers, many of which were rather horrifying, the producers said 1-10 were absolutely correct and couldn’t be argued with. Why didn’t they already have an intimacy coordinator?

Now Baldoni sees Reynolds as a cash cow and is trying to make millions off of it by hiring a dirty public relations firm, because he has seen that that can work for men and understands (as does the PR firm) that there if a premature audience of people out there ready to side with the man over the woman in a case like this.


I can understand Baldoni got his feelings hurt by losing power in the movie. That was his own fault, resulting from his own actions like having his friend come to the birth scene etc. Ewwwww.

They had an IC before anyone stepped foot on the set. You are not up-to-date on the latest information.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here is an example of Justin Baldoni being a ridiculous tool:

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/how-deadpool-justin-baldoni-blake-lively-nicepool-1236110331/

He is claiming that the character "Nicepool" in the Deadpool & Wolverine movie is based on him, Baldoni, and was intended as an intentional slight.

Even if it's true... isn't this a self-own by Baldoni? Nicepool is an annoying character to hides being a passive-aggressive jerk behind being a feminist. Here's how the article describes the relevant scene:

In one scene involving Nicepool, played by an unmasked Reynolds, the character comments that Ladypool (Lively) just had a baby, and she’s so gorgeous that “you can’t even tell.” Deadpool responds, “I don’t think you’re supposed to say that,” to which Nicepool rejoins, “That’s OK. I identify as a feminist.” In an outtake available on home entertainment, Nicepool notes his “calling is to one day start a podcast that monetizes the women’s movement.”

First of all, that's funny. Second, if Baldoni self identifies with Nicepool, the problem there is that he sees too much truth in the send up. Not that Ryan Reynold's was inspired by Baldoni to write/perform the part. Sometimes the truth hurts.

All Baldoni has done by raising this issue is highlight the ways in which he is, indeed, like Nicepool. Not smart.

I think you’re exactly wrong. the Nicepool thing just demonstrates that Ryan and Blake are fixated on Baldoni and have the power & inclination to crush him. They are actually doing what they claim Baldoni was doing.

Yeah. They’re using their power to mock him in a very public way. It doesn’t mean JB sees himself as their caricature of him. It just means he understands that is how RR wants others to see him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the end, the movie did really well and given the assertions in the complaint that apparently Blake controlled everything, made all the decisions, took over the set and all roles and directed, produced, and edited the movie herself...she did a pretty damn good job considering how well it did at the box office and how much money it made all the key players involved. Maybe if she hadn't stepped in and hadn't done it all herself, it would have flopped. Who knows.

This is perhaps true (though we’ll never know how his version would have done, or how much RR and his high-rolling team did), but I think JB would rather have directed a dud than be blackballed for the rest of his career and thought of as a sexual predator. So to what end.

Same can be said for Lively. She’s never going to get another role or direct or produce unless it’s via Ryan or she’s paying for it. Her career is over. If she had just been able to control herself instead of deciding to go for the jugular it would have worked out perfectly for her.

Except she did this to herself. JB didn’t want this.