Why is Blake Lively so overrated?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always thought she was a fake fraud because she’s a Jewish girl from California who had a ton of surgeries to try to look Nordic or something and then got married and tried to brand herself like some New England WASP mom. Everything about her is fake. Look at how she looked in her teens to now. Her face is totally different. It’s startling.

She is not Jewish. She was raised southern Baptist, but interesting that you assumed she is Jewish and she was determined to look Nordic and be a WASP. Sounds like you created a whole narrative in your head.

Baptist is a religion, Jewish is an ethnicity.

She's not Jewish either way you twist it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reading a thread on Reddit where most people see an uncomfortable person trying to politely redirect a handsy director. So, I concede, there are a few ways to read this. It’s certainly an interesting case given the setting. Actors acting. He has one vision; she has another.

I think it will come down to having an IC present to avoid situations like this.

Agree, and also want to note this is one scene. Lively's complaint is a series of events, of which this is just one.

I don't think this footage exonerates him or PR best her complaint. I see two people who don't like each other but have to work closely together. I see a somewhat demanding, hard to work with star. I see a director who is aggravated with that and overlooking/ignoring the fact that she does not seem happy or comfortable.

Beyond that, I don't know.

You’re in the minority. She is an *actress* acting the role of someone falling in love. this isn’t the scene from Last Tango in Paris.

In the minority on what? I'm just saying this is just one scene and I don't think it resolves the question of whether his behavior on set crossed the line. She also alleges that he repeatedly told her he had been communicating with her dead father -- this footage doesn't speak to that. She says they pressured her to do nudity in the birthing scene -- this footage doesn't speak to that. She says Heath came into the makeup trailer while she was having body makeup removed and refused to turn around to give her privacy -- this footage doesn't speak to that.

I have no idea if she was harassed or not but this footage does not actually resolve that question. What I see is a director/star who doesn't really get along with his costar and a tense scene where he is trying to initiate more physical intimacy between their characters and Lively is pushing back on that in several different ways. I don't think that means he harassed her. It's just what I'm seeing with my eyes in this scene. This is not some smoking gun for either of them.

This footage strongly contradicts one of her claims, which casts doubt on the rest of them.

In sexual harassment law, the contact has to be *unwelcome.* Zero indication of that here, and to the extent she claims that a kiss WHILE FILMING A ROMANTIC SCENE is “unwelcome,” she sounds totally delusional.

Which of her claims does it contradict? Her complaint says that Baldoni was kissing her neck and arms and face during a scene which the script describes as them simply slow dancing. That's what the footage shows. Her complaint also says that they were out of character, just talking, when he says "it smells good" in a way that felt inappropriate given the context of the conversation. I think this is subjective and can see it from her perspective and from his. But the footage doesn't contradict what her complaint says -- her complaint literally describes what I'm seeing that scene.

I see it as he was trying to say something positive when she mentions the spray tan. It wasn't some creepy way to come on to her. He's just trying to say what won't offend her, and boy did that not work out!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always thought she was a fake fraud because she’s a Jewish girl from California who had a ton of surgeries to try to look Nordic or something and then got married and tried to brand herself like some New England WASP mom. Everything about her is fake. Look at how she looked in her teens to now. Her face is totally different. It’s startling.

She is not Jewish. She was raised southern Baptist, but interesting that you assumed she is Jewish and she was determined to look Nordic and be a WASP. Sounds like you created a whole narrative in your head.

I am actually shocked that there are any Southern Baptists in California.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you could argue that when the director is one of the actors involved in a scene with intimacy, they should have an IC on set because it creates a weird dynamic. Especially in a situation like this where the director is playing a guy who turns out to be abusive.

I think, watching this, that the lines between Baldoni the director, Baldoni the actor, and Ryle the character, are getting crossed in ways that could be confusing or upsetting for his costar.

That doesn't mean I think he's a harasser. I don't. But I think the situation could have been handled better by the studio and by Baldoni himself, as they were in charge of the production.

The issue here is they are supposed to be acting a scene as characters in love and she doesn't want to stay in character by either staying silent as instructed, or just improvising some light in character dialogue. The talking muddled the boundaries so now instead of Lily and Ryle touching it's Blake and Justin touching. It's awkward.

We never see Baldoni say "let's do this in character" or "I want to improvise in character even though we aren't doing audio" though. He says he "was told" by others that he needed to get her to stop talking. Why doesn't he just say "Blake, we need a take without us talking, let's just act it out without words"? I see the part at the beginning where she's talking about how she likes the idea of them talking during this scene because that's how she and her husband fell in love, but Baldoni is passive about it. He just kind of ignores her and is like touching her face and nuzzling her. Why isn't he more direct about it?

His approach to directing in that scene was annoying to me. He won't just say "this is what I want" and he also doesn't try to find a diplomatic solution ("we'll do one take talking and one without, so we have both options"). Instead he's kind of passive aggressive, not giving Lively specific direction but just kind of trying to override her by playing the scene totally differently than what she's suggesting. It *is* awkward but I feel like the awkwardness is on Baldoni, who is the director and could have taken more control of the scene and done a better job communicating to his costar.

I don’t know if it’s one poster or multiple posters that keep bringing up his experience as a director. Being a less experienced director does not mean he gets to be labeled to sexual harasser for the rest of his life.

Martin Scorsese was not going to direct this film. They got what they got.

I’m sure in hindsight he would’ve done things differently, doesn’t mean he should be sued for sexual harassment and removed from the industry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you could argue that when the director is one of the actors involved in a scene with intimacy, they should have an IC on set because it creates a weird dynamic. Especially in a situation like this where the director is playing a guy who turns out to be abusive.

I think, watching this, that the lines between Baldoni the director, Baldoni the actor, and Ryle the character, are getting crossed in ways that could be confusing or upsetting for his costar.

That doesn't mean I think he's a harasser. I don't. But I think the situation could have been handled better by the studio and by Baldoni himself, as they were in charge of the production.

The issue here is they are supposed to be acting a scene as characters in love and she doesn't want to stay in character by either staying silent as instructed, or just improvising some light in character dialogue. The talking muddled the boundaries so now instead of Lily and Ryle touching it's Blake and Justin touching. It's awkward.

We never see Baldoni say "let's do this in character" or "I want to improvise in character even though we aren't doing audio" though. He says he "was told" by others that he needed to get her to stop talking. Why doesn't he just say "Blake, we need a take without us talking, let's just act it out without words"? I see the part at the beginning where she's talking about how she likes the idea of them talking during this scene because that's how she and her husband fell in love, but Baldoni is passive about it. He just kind of ignores her and is like touching her face and nuzzling her. Why isn't he more direct about it?

His approach to directing in that scene was annoying to me. He won't just say "this is what I want" and he also doesn't try to find a diplomatic solution ("we'll do one take talking and one without, so we have both options"). Instead he's kind of passive aggressive, not giving Lively specific direction but just kind of trying to override her by playing the scene totally differently than what she's suggesting. It *is* awkward but I feel like the awkwardness is on Baldoni, who is the director and could have taken more control of the scene and done a better job communicating to his costar.

What? They are filming a scene, why would he have to say, “let’s do this in character”? They are supposed to be in character! Anytime he is kissing her, they are in character. He does give direction. Doesn’t he say something like “let’s do this” before she lifts her hair and he kisses her neck? And don’t they talk about almost kissing before they start to kiss and then pull away?

They are in and out of character. Not in character the whole time. He says in his complaint he was trying to get her to stop talking. Why didn't he just say, "I want to do a take without talking"? Or suggest they do a take where they are in character the whole time (in which case he would also not break character) including talking in character as Lily and Ryle? He complains that she was trying to control the scene but I don't see him trying to control it. I see him being passive aggressive about it, getting annoyed that she's not doing what he wants even though he is not being clear about it.

I just see them being on two totally different wavelengths and as the director, it was within his power to fix that. Instead he just kind of acts annoyed the whole time (also not in character! Ryle is not annoyed with Lily in that scene) but never comes out and says "Thank you for your input but I want to do this so that we can get this specific shot." Which would be within his right to say as the director.

I think Baldoni was intimidated by Lively and handled it by being passive-aggressive, which annoyed her and sometimes came off as him being inappropriate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you could argue that when the director is one of the actors involved in a scene with intimacy, they should have an IC on set because it creates a weird dynamic. Especially in a situation like this where the director is playing a guy who turns out to be abusive.

I think, watching this, that the lines between Baldoni the director, Baldoni the actor, and Ryle the character, are getting crossed in ways that could be confusing or upsetting for his costar.

That doesn't mean I think he's a harasser. I don't. But I think the situation could have been handled better by the studio and by Baldoni himself, as they were in charge of the production.

OMG!!! She is an actress. If she is “confused” about her costar in a romantic movie kissing her, she needs a new job.

The script does not specify that they are kissing or being intimate. It describes them as slow dancing and "being in their own world" in the middle of a crowded bar. I can understand being confused when he's like kissing her neck and arms. That seems weird to me -- I remember the night I fell in love with my DH -- we went to a concert and then to a bar afterwards with friends, and we were very into each other but he wasn't like initiating a make out session in the middle of a crowd. It was like holding hands and looking at each other a lot, and talking just to each other.

It’s NOT sexual harassment to act out a scene of … two people falling in love … with a kiss, ffs. That claim is completely absurd and untenable. her specific allegation about the comment about “you smell good” was totally disproven by this showing the full context. If she felt subjectively uncomfortable, that was unreasonable on her part and cannot be the basis for a sexual harassment claim. It would be like if your job was a lactation consultant and you claimed that a woman’s bare breast offended you.

Further, the scene was supposed to have new talking. Justin did not want to talk and Blake insisted. She was the one going off script. Can’t have it both ways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you could argue that when the director is one of the actors involved in a scene with intimacy, they should have an IC on set because it creates a weird dynamic. Especially in a situation like this where the director is playing a guy who turns out to be abusive.

I think, watching this, that the lines between Baldoni the director, Baldoni the actor, and Ryle the character, are getting crossed in ways that could be confusing or upsetting for his costar.

That doesn't mean I think he's a harasser. I don't. But I think the situation could have been handled better by the studio and by Baldoni himself, as they were in charge of the production.

The issue here is they are supposed to be acting a scene as characters in love and she doesn't want to stay in character by either staying silent as instructed, or just improvising some light in character dialogue. The talking muddled the boundaries so now instead of Lily and Ryle touching it's Blake and Justin touching. It's awkward.

We never see Baldoni say "let's do this in character" or "I want to improvise in character even though we aren't doing audio" though. He says he "was told" by others that he needed to get her to stop talking. Why doesn't he just say "Blake, we need a take without us talking, let's just act it out without words"? I see the part at the beginning where she's talking about how she likes the idea of them talking during this scene because that's how she and her husband fell in love, but Baldoni is passive about it. He just kind of ignores her and is like touching her face and nuzzling her. Why isn't he more direct about it?

His approach to directing in that scene was annoying to me. He won't just say "this is what I want" and he also doesn't try to find a diplomatic solution ("we'll do one take talking and one without, so we have both options"). Instead he's kind of passive aggressive, not giving Lively specific direction but just kind of trying to override her by playing the scene totally differently than what she's suggesting. It *is* awkward but I feel like the awkwardness is on Baldoni, who is the director and could have taken more control of the scene and done a better job communicating to his costar.

What? They are filming a scene, why would he have to say, “let’s do this in character”? They are supposed to be in character! Anytime he is kissing her, they are in character. He does give direction. Doesn’t he say something like “let’s do this” before she lifts her hair and he kisses her neck? And don’t they talk about almost kissing before they start to kiss and then pull away?

They are in and out of character. Not in character the whole time. He says in his complaint he was trying to get her to stop talking. Why didn't he just say, "I want to do a take without talking"? Or suggest they do a take where they are in character the whole time (in which case he would also not break character) including talking in character as Lily and Ryle? He complains that she was trying to control the scene but I don't see him trying to control it. I see him being passive aggressive about it, getting annoyed that she's not doing what he wants even though he is not being clear about it.

I just see them being on two totally different wavelengths and as the director, it was within his power to fix that. Instead he just kind of acts annoyed the whole time (also not in character! Ryle is not annoyed with Lily in that scene) but never comes out and says "Thank you for your input but I want to do this so that we can get this specific shot." Which would be within his right to say as the director.

I think Baldoni was intimidated by Lively and handled it by being passive-aggressive, which annoyed her and sometimes came off as him being inappropriate.

He was actually being too accommodating. He was the director and therefore had the final say, but he was entertaining her chatter about the lighting and whether they should talk. He could have been a lot firmer about it and basically said tough crap, I'm the boss.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you could argue that when the director is one of the actors involved in a scene with intimacy, they should have an IC on set because it creates a weird dynamic. Especially in a situation like this where the director is playing a guy who turns out to be abusive.

I think, watching this, that the lines between Baldoni the director, Baldoni the actor, and Ryle the character, are getting crossed in ways that could be confusing or upsetting for his costar.

That doesn't mean I think he's a harasser. I don't. But I think the situation could have been handled better by the studio and by Baldoni himself, as they were in charge of the production.

The issue here is they are supposed to be acting a scene as characters in love and she doesn't want to stay in character by either staying silent as instructed, or just improvising some light in character dialogue. The talking muddled the boundaries so now instead of Lily and Ryle touching it's Blake and Justin touching. It's awkward.

We never see Baldoni say "let's do this in character" or "I want to improvise in character even though we aren't doing audio" though. He says he "was told" by others that he needed to get her to stop talking. Why doesn't he just say "Blake, we need a take without us talking, let's just act it out without words"? I see the part at the beginning where she's talking about how she likes the idea of them talking during this scene because that's how she and her husband fell in love, but Baldoni is passive about it. He just kind of ignores her and is like touching her face and nuzzling her. Why isn't he more direct about it?

His approach to directing in that scene was annoying to me. He won't just say "this is what I want" and he also doesn't try to find a diplomatic solution ("we'll do one take talking and one without, so we have both options"). Instead he's kind of passive aggressive, not giving Lively specific direction but just kind of trying to override her by playing the scene totally differently than what she's suggesting. It *is* awkward but I feel like the awkwardness is on Baldoni, who is the director and could have taken more control of the scene and done a better job communicating to his costar.

I don’t know if it’s one poster or multiple posters that keep bringing up his experience as a director. Being a less experienced director does not mean he gets to be labeled to sexual harasser for the rest of his life.

Martin Scorsese was not going to direct this film. They got what they got.

I’m sure in hindsight he would’ve done things differently, doesn’t mean he should be sued for sexual harassment and removed from the industry.

Being the director does, however, mean he had more control over the set. And it was his production studio making the movie, too.

If there were problems with the way the set was run, if the production was unprofessional or boundaries were being crossed or not observed, that's on Baldoni and Wayfarer. It doesn't actually matter how experience or inexperienced he was as a director. He was the boss.

But he doesn't really act like it in this footage and his description of this in is complaint is weird because he says others were telling him to "get her to stop talking" -- like he didn't really want to but was just following directions. Who is in charge here?

Perhaps Lively was pushy because there was a power vacuum on the set and it didn't feel like Baldoni or Wayfarer were taking the lead enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you could argue that when the director is one of the actors involved in a scene with intimacy, they should have an IC on set because it creates a weird dynamic. Especially in a situation like this where the director is playing a guy who turns out to be abusive.

I think, watching this, that the lines between Baldoni the director, Baldoni the actor, and Ryle the character, are getting crossed in ways that could be confusing or upsetting for his costar.

That doesn't mean I think he's a harasser. I don't. But I think the situation could have been handled better by the studio and by Baldoni himself, as they were in charge of the production.

The issue here is they are supposed to be acting a scene as characters in love and she doesn't want to stay in character by either staying silent as instructed, or just improvising some light in character dialogue. The talking muddled the boundaries so now instead of Lily and Ryle touching it's Blake and Justin touching. It's awkward.

We never see Baldoni say "let's do this in character" or "I want to improvise in character even though we aren't doing audio" though. He says he "was told" by others that he needed to get her to stop talking. Why doesn't he just say "Blake, we need a take without us talking, let's just act it out without words"? I see the part at the beginning where she's talking about how she likes the idea of them talking during this scene because that's how she and her husband fell in love, but Baldoni is passive about it. He just kind of ignores her and is like touching her face and nuzzling her. Why isn't he more direct about it?

His approach to directing in that scene was annoying to me. He won't just say "this is what I want" and he also doesn't try to find a diplomatic solution ("we'll do one take talking and one without, so we have both options"). Instead he's kind of passive aggressive, not giving Lively specific direction but just kind of trying to override her by playing the scene totally differently than what she's suggesting. It *is* awkward but I feel like the awkwardness is on Baldoni, who is the director and could have taken more control of the scene and done a better job communicating to his costar.

What? They are filming a scene, why would he have to say, “let’s do this in character”? They are supposed to be in character! Anytime he is kissing her, they are in character. He does give direction. Doesn’t he say something like “let’s do this” before she lifts her hair and he kisses her neck? And don’t they talk about almost kissing before they start to kiss and then pull away?

They are in and out of character. Not in character the whole time. He says in his complaint he was trying to get her to stop talking. Why didn't he just say, "I want to do a take without talking"? Or suggest they do a take where they are in character the whole time (in which case he would also not break character) including talking in character as Lily and Ryle? He complains that she was trying to control the scene but I don't see him trying to control it. I see him being passive aggressive about it, getting annoyed that she's not doing what he wants even though he is not being clear about it.

I just see them being on two totally different wavelengths and as the director, it was within his power to fix that. Instead he just kind of acts annoyed the whole time (also not in character! Ryle is not annoyed with Lily in that scene) but never comes out and says "Thank you for your input but I want to do this so that we can get this specific shot." Which would be within his right to say as the director.

I think Baldoni was intimidated by Lively and handled it by being passive-aggressive, which annoyed her and sometimes came off as him being inappropriate.

He was actually being too accommodating. He was the director and therefore had the final say, but he was entertaining her chatter about the lighting and whether they should talk. He could have been a lot firmer about it and basically said tough crap, I'm the boss.

This.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you could argue that when the director is one of the actors involved in a scene with intimacy, they should have an IC on set because it creates a weird dynamic. Especially in a situation like this where the director is playing a guy who turns out to be abusive.

I think, watching this, that the lines between Baldoni the director, Baldoni the actor, and Ryle the character, are getting crossed in ways that could be confusing or upsetting for his costar.

That doesn't mean I think he's a harasser. I don't. But I think the situation could have been handled better by the studio and by Baldoni himself, as they were in charge of the production.

The issue here is they are supposed to be acting a scene as characters in love and she doesn't want to stay in character by either staying silent as instructed, or just improvising some light in character dialogue. The talking muddled the boundaries so now instead of Lily and Ryle touching it's Blake and Justin touching. It's awkward.

We never see Baldoni say "let's do this in character" or "I want to improvise in character even though we aren't doing audio" though. He says he "was told" by others that he needed to get her to stop talking. Why doesn't he just say "Blake, we need a take without us talking, let's just act it out without words"? I see the part at the beginning where she's talking about how she likes the idea of them talking during this scene because that's how she and her husband fell in love, but Baldoni is passive about it. He just kind of ignores her and is like touching her face and nuzzling her. Why isn't he more direct about it?

His approach to directing in that scene was annoying to me. He won't just say "this is what I want" and he also doesn't try to find a diplomatic solution ("we'll do one take talking and one without, so we have both options"). Instead he's kind of passive aggressive, not giving Lively specific direction but just kind of trying to override her by playing the scene totally differently than what she's suggesting. It *is* awkward but I feel like the awkwardness is on Baldoni, who is the director and could have taken more control of the scene and done a better job communicating to his costar.

What? They are filming a scene, why would he have to say, “let’s do this in character”? They are supposed to be in character! Anytime he is kissing her, they are in character. He does give direction. Doesn’t he say something like “let’s do this” before she lifts her hair and he kisses her neck? And don’t they talk about almost kissing before they start to kiss and then pull away?

They are in and out of character. Not in character the whole time. He says in his complaint he was trying to get her to stop talking. Why didn't he just say, "I want to do a take without talking"? Or suggest they do a take where they are in character the whole time (in which case he would also not break character) including talking in character as Lily and Ryle? He complains that she was trying to control the scene but I don't see him trying to control it. I see him being passive aggressive about it, getting annoyed that she's not doing what he wants even though he is not being clear about it.

I just see them being on two totally different wavelengths and as the director, it was within his power to fix that. Instead he just kind of acts annoyed the whole time (also not in character! Ryle is not annoyed with Lily in that scene) but never comes out and says "Thank you for your input but I want to do this so that we can get this specific shot." Which would be within his right to say as the director.

I think Baldoni was intimidated by Lively and handled it by being passive-aggressive, which annoyed her and sometimes came off as him being inappropriate.

Yes, and I think in the context of all the texts we saw like the Khaleesi one plus Ryan Reynolds looming over, he had good reason to be on eggshells as well. They both messed up and escalated what was ultimately unfortunate and awkward.

[Anonymous]

Does anyone know how long the NYT has to respond to the lawsuit filed against them? That’s the one I really want to see!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you could argue that when the director is one of the actors involved in a scene with intimacy, they should have an IC on set because it creates a weird dynamic. Especially in a situation like this where the director is playing a guy who turns out to be abusive.

I think, watching this, that the lines between Baldoni the director, Baldoni the actor, and Ryle the character, are getting crossed in ways that could be confusing or upsetting for his costar.

That doesn't mean I think he's a harasser. I don't. But I think the situation could have been handled better by the studio and by Baldoni himself, as they were in charge of the production.

OMG!!! She is an actress. If she is “confused” about her costar in a romantic movie kissing her, she needs a new job.

The script does not specify that they are kissing or being intimate. It describes them as slow dancing and "being in their own world" in the middle of a crowded bar. I can understand being confused when he's like kissing her neck and arms. That seems weird to me -- I remember the night I fell in love with my DH -- we went to a concert and then to a bar afterwards with friends, and we were very into each other but he wasn't like initiating a make out session in the middle of a crowd. It was like holding hands and looking at each other a lot, and talking just to each other.

What is this possibly have to do with the night you fell in love with your husband?

They had a less than two hour movie. They had a couple of scenes where they needed to show them falling in love to move the story along. this was one and it was very intimate. He didn’t want talking in it, she did and she used his words against him, even though any reasonable person does not think there’s anything wrong with what he said.

This is not sexual harassment, and it’s deeply offensive for anyone who has been through it to say that it is. Blake is over privileged and wanted a me too moment. She didn’t realize the mics were picking up their audio. Oops.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you could argue that when the director is one of the actors involved in a scene with intimacy, they should have an IC on set because it creates a weird dynamic. Especially in a situation like this where the director is playing a guy who turns out to be abusive.

I think, watching this, that the lines between Baldoni the director, Baldoni the actor, and Ryle the character, are getting crossed in ways that could be confusing or upsetting for his costar.

That doesn't mean I think he's a harasser. I don't. But I think the situation could have been handled better by the studio and by Baldoni himself, as they were in charge of the production.

OMG!!! She is an actress. If she is “confused” about her costar in a romantic movie kissing her, she needs a new job.

The script does not specify that they are kissing or being intimate. It describes them as slow dancing and "being in their own world" in the middle of a crowded bar. I can understand being confused when he's like kissing her neck and arms. That seems weird to me -- I remember the night I fell in love with my DH -- we went to a concert and then to a bar afterwards with friends, and we were very into each other but he wasn't like initiating a make out session in the middle of a crowd. It was like holding hands and looking at each other a lot, and talking just to each other.

It’s NOT sexual harassment to act out a scene of … two people falling in love … with a kiss, ffs. That claim is completely absurd and untenable. her specific allegation about the comment about “you smell good” was totally disproven by this showing the full context. If she felt subjectively uncomfortable, that was unreasonable on her part and cannot be the basis for a sexual harassment claim. It would be like if your job was a lactation consultant and you claimed that a woman’s bare breast offended you.

Further, the scene was supposed to have new talking. Justin did not want to talk and Blake insisted. She was the one going off script. Can’t have it both ways.

Why does he not just say "I want a take with no talking" then. He's the director. Why do we never hear him say this?

He makes it sound like, in his complaint, the only way to get her to stop talking was to kiss her neck. That is weird. The best way to get her to stop talking would have been to say "we are going to do this one without talking." It makes no sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you could argue that when the director is one of the actors involved in a scene with intimacy, they should have an IC on set because it creates a weird dynamic. Especially in a situation like this where the director is playing a guy who turns out to be abusive.

I think, watching this, that the lines between Baldoni the director, Baldoni the actor, and Ryle the character, are getting crossed in ways that could be confusing or upsetting for his costar.

That doesn't mean I think he's a harasser. I don't. But I think the situation could have been handled better by the studio and by Baldoni himself, as they were in charge of the production.

OMG!!! She is an actress. If she is “confused” about her costar in a romantic movie kissing her, she needs a new job.

The script does not specify that they are kissing or being intimate. It describes them as slow dancing and "being in their own world" in the middle of a crowded bar. I can understand being confused when he's like kissing her neck and arms. That seems weird to me -- I remember the night I fell in love with my DH -- we went to a concert and then to a bar afterwards with friends, and we were very into each other but he wasn't like initiating a make out session in the middle of a crowd. It was like holding hands and looking at each other a lot, and talking just to each other.

What is this possibly have to do with the night you fell in love with your husband?

They had a less than two hour movie. They had a couple of scenes where they needed to show them falling in love to move the story along. this was one and it was very intimate. He didn’t want talking in it, she did and she used his words against him, even though any reasonable person does not think there’s anything wrong with what he said.

This is not sexual harassment, and it’s deeply offensive for anyone who has been through it to say that it is. Blake is over privileged and wanted a me too moment. She didn’t realize the mics were picking up their audio. Oops.

I have been both sexually assaulted by a supervisor in a workplace, and sexually harassed by multiple colleagues in the same workplace.

I get why she was bothered by the way he said "it smells good" while kissing her arm, when just a moment before they'd been talking as though out of character. That would have bothered me too. In fact having the experience of having been sexually harassed would make me particularly aware of something like that which yes, might seem small, but definitely feels like a blurring of the lines.

I also think the way she handled it in the moment was fine -- she gets serious and says something like "actually I'm talking about my body makeup" as though to bring him back to the idea that they are professionals on a set and not actually flirting. She does a good job of redrawing the boundary.

If stuff like that happened a lot while they were filming, I get why she felt it was crossing a line and why she would feel uncomfortable working with him without an IC present pretty much all the time. It's unprofessional.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you could argue that when the director is one of the actors involved in a scene with intimacy, they should have an IC on set because it creates a weird dynamic. Especially in a situation like this where the director is playing a guy who turns out to be abusive.

I think, watching this, that the lines between Baldoni the director, Baldoni the actor, and Ryle the character, are getting crossed in ways that could be confusing or upsetting for his costar.

That doesn't mean I think he's a harasser. I don't. But I think the situation could have been handled better by the studio and by Baldoni himself, as they were in charge of the production.

OMG!!! She is an actress. If she is “confused” about her costar in a romantic movie kissing her, she needs a new job.

The script does not specify that they are kissing or being intimate. It describes them as slow dancing and "being in their own world" in the middle of a crowded bar. I can understand being confused when he's like kissing her neck and arms. That seems weird to me -- I remember the night I fell in love with my DH -- we went to a concert and then to a bar afterwards with friends, and we were very into each other but he wasn't like initiating a make out session in the middle of a crowd. It was like holding hands and looking at each other a lot, and talking just to each other.

What is this possibly have to do with the night you fell in love with your husband?

They had a less than two hour movie. They had a couple of scenes where they needed to show them falling in love to move the story along. this was one and it was very intimate. He didn’t want talking in it, she did and she used his words against him, even though any reasonable person does not think there’s anything wrong with what he said.

This is not sexual harassment, and it’s deeply offensive for anyone who has been through it to say that it is. Blake is over privileged and wanted a me too moment. She didn’t realize the mics were picking up their audio. Oops.

I have been both sexually assaulted by a supervisor in a workplace, and sexually harassed by multiple colleagues in the same workplace.

I get why she was bothered by the way he said "it smells good" while kissing her arm, when just a moment before they'd been talking as though out of character. That would have bothered me too. In fact having the experience of having been sexually harassed would make me particularly aware of something like that which yes, might seem small, but definitely feels like a blurring of the lines.

I also think the way she handled it in the moment was fine -- she gets serious and says something like "actually I'm talking about my body makeup" as though to bring him back to the idea that they are professionals on a set and not actually flirting. She does a good job of redrawing the boundary.

If stuff like that happened a lot while they were filming, I get why she felt it was crossing a line and why she would feel uncomfortable working with him without an IC present pretty much all the time. It's unprofessional.

They are supposed to be professional actors looking like they are flirting. It's the entire point of the scene. You really cannot compare a normal workplace with a movie set on which people have to kiss and pretend they love each other on camera. It is part of the job. It's such an intrinsic part of the job that people who won't kiss on camera like Kirk Cameron (is there even another out there?) are notoriously famous for it.