Why is Blake Lively so overrated?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, I think that based on Baldoni’s obsequiousness during the filming (He rolled over for her during the filming to avoid antagonizing her), Blake thought he would cower under threats and she would come out on top. Just because someone is deferential at the workplace in order to achieve their aims, does not mean they are fools who won’t fight back when you have them in a corner.

Isn't it a problem that he "rolled over" for her during filming though? It seems like he really mishandled his position during filming and that goes to her allegation that the set was unprofessionally run.

Being unprofessional isn't illegal and if he was unprofessional by showing too much deference, that hurts her claims overall.

Yeah, I don’t get how he was too accommodating and differential and also sexually harassed her.

My perception of the footage that has been released is that he is not accommodating or deferential, but he communicated poorly and was not direct or authoritative. It's not like he just lets her change the scene so they are talking the whole time -- he doesn't actually engage with her the way she's proposing. He just kind of ignores her suggestions and then argues with her and then goes ahead doing it his way with all the nuzzling/kissing (which only he does).

He just seems like a bad communicator and that will give rise to misunderstandings.

But not sexual harassment. Also, why didn’t she speak up. She never once said she was uncomfortable. Communication works both ways.

She says she has documentation of her raising these issues on several occasions prior to the break in filming during the strike, and then the January meeting where she says these issues were raised and Baldoni and Heath agreed to correct their behavior.

We'll see if the evidence backs that up but she is claiming she raised concerns about feeling uncomfortable on the set and wanting an IC present in numerous occasions.

This was shot in May 2023. But my point is that she didn’t raise any objections in this 10 minute footage. He may not have been communicating great, but she doesn’t seem to be either. The burden should be on both of them to communicate. Also, he laid out what he wanted in the scene. She laid out why she thought it would be more romantic to have them talking, and it seems like they met in the middle. With some moments of them not talking and some moments of them talking. It seems like they both communicated what they wanted if she felt differently, she really needed to speak up.

She did speak up when he said "it smells good." She immediately straightens up and tells him she was talking about her body makeup. It's very clear in context that she did not like what he said and felt it crossed a line.

Saying someone smells good crosses a line and is sexual harassment? lol. This is beyond outlandish. You all are not real people. This is all absurd.

It’s either a troll or Blake pr. No real person could be this illogical, and also committed to posting endlessly on this thread. It doesn’t matter, in the real world, Blake’s case is toast and everyone knows it. Really curious how long it takes The NY Times to hit the escape hatch. And I think it will be a long long time before they publish another story about sexual harassment. We can thank Blake for that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, I think that based on Baldoni’s obsequiousness during the filming (He rolled over for her during the filming to avoid antagonizing her), Blake thought he would cower under threats and she would come out on top. Just because someone is deferential at the workplace in order to achieve their aims, does not mean they are fools who won’t fight back when you have them in a corner.

Isn't it a problem that he "rolled over" for her during filming though? It seems like he really mishandled his position during filming and that goes to her allegation that the set was unprofessionally run.

Being unprofessional isn't illegal and if he was unprofessional by showing too much deference, that hurts her claims overall.

Yeah, I don’t get how he was too accommodating and differential and also sexually harassed her.

My perception of the footage that has been released is that he is not accommodating or deferential, but he communicated poorly and was not direct or authoritative. It's not like he just lets her change the scene so they are talking the whole time -- he doesn't actually engage with her the way she's proposing. He just kind of ignores her suggestions and then argues with her and then goes ahead doing it his way with all the nuzzling/kissing (which only he does).

He just seems like a bad communicator and that will give rise to misunderstandings.

But not sexual harassment. Also, why didn’t she speak up. She never once said she was uncomfortable. Communication works both ways.

She says she has documentation of her raising these issues on several occasions prior to the break in filming during the strike, and then the January meeting where she says these issues were raised and Baldoni and Heath agreed to correct their behavior.

We'll see if the evidence backs that up but she is claiming she raised concerns about feeling uncomfortable on the set and wanting an IC present in numerous occasions.

This was shot in May 2023. But my point is that she didn’t raise any objections in this 10 minute footage. He may not have been communicating great, but she doesn’t seem to be either. The burden should be on both of them to communicate. Also, he laid out what he wanted in the scene. She laid out why she thought it would be more romantic to have them talking, and it seems like they met in the middle. With some moments of them not talking and some moments of them talking. It seems like they both communicated what they wanted if she felt differently, she really needed to speak up.

She did speak up when he said "it smells good." She immediately straightens up and tells him she was talking about her body makeup. It's very clear in context that she did not like what he said and felt it crossed a line.

Saying someone smells good crosses a line and is sexual harassment? lol. This is beyond outlandish. You all are not real people. This is all absurd.

It’s either a troll or Blake pr. No real person could be this illogical, and also committed to posting endlessly on this thread. It doesn’t matter, in the real world, Blake’s case is toast and everyone knows it. Really curious how long it takes The NY Times to hit the escape hatch. And I think it will be a long long time before they publish another story about sexual harassment. We can thank Blake for that.

It's like 10:1 Baldoni posts to Blake posts but Baldoni's fan girls freak the eff out if they read one post that isn't completely in favor of him and cry about trolling

[Anonymous]

Wow Blake and Ryan filed a letter in court asking the judge to gag Baldoni’s lawyer and stop him from talking to the media. Who is giving them this advice? Amazing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, I think that based on Baldoni’s obsequiousness during the filming (He rolled over for her during the filming to avoid antagonizing her), Blake thought he would cower under threats and she would come out on top. Just because someone is deferential at the workplace in order to achieve their aims, does not mean they are fools who won’t fight back when you have them in a corner.

Isn't it a problem that he "rolled over" for her during filming though? It seems like he really mishandled his position during filming and that goes to her allegation that the set was unprofessionally run.

Being unprofessional isn't illegal and if he was unprofessional by showing too much deference, that hurts her claims overall.

Yeah, I don’t get how he was too accommodating and differential and also sexually harassed her.

My perception of the footage that has been released is that he is not accommodating or deferential, but he communicated poorly and was not direct or authoritative. It's not like he just lets her change the scene so they are talking the whole time -- he doesn't actually engage with her the way she's proposing. He just kind of ignores her suggestions and then argues with her and then goes ahead doing it his way with all the nuzzling/kissing (which only he does).

He just seems like a bad communicator and that will give rise to misunderstandings.

But not sexual harassment. Also, why didn’t she speak up. She never once said she was uncomfortable. Communication works both ways.

She says she has documentation of her raising these issues on several occasions prior to the break in filming during the strike, and then the January meeting where she says these issues were raised and Baldoni and Heath agreed to correct their behavior.

We'll see if the evidence backs that up but she is claiming she raised concerns about feeling uncomfortable on the set and wanting an IC present in numerous occasions.

This was shot in May 2023. But my point is that she didn’t raise any objections in this 10 minute footage. He may not have been communicating great, but she doesn’t seem to be either. The burden should be on both of them to communicate. Also, he laid out what he wanted in the scene. She laid out why she thought it would be more romantic to have them talking, and it seems like they met in the middle. With some moments of them not talking and some moments of them talking. It seems like they both communicated what they wanted if she felt differently, she really needed to speak up.

She did speak up when he said "it smells good." She immediately straightens up and tells him she was talking about her body makeup. It's very clear in context that she did not like what he said and felt it crossed a line.

Saying someone smells good crosses a line and is sexual harassment? lol. This is beyond outlandish. You all are not real people. This is all absurd.

It’s either a troll or Blake pr. No real person could be this illogical, and also committed to posting endlessly on this thread. It doesn’t matter, in the real world, Blake’s case is toast and everyone knows it. Really curious how long it takes The NY Times to hit the escape hatch. And I think it will be a long long time before they publish another story about sexual harassment. We can thank Blake for that.

I hope they stop publishing that type of story. It’s weird because it’s one sided, unlike if they were reporting on an actual case and could objectively report on both sides. It kind of reminds me of the story they ran about Ryan Adams, how he was skeezy with women or something. I don’t understand the point journalistically.

[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.

Again, let’s remember that awkwardness or a failure to do one’s job well isn’t the same as sexually harassing or abusing someone.

[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.

Yes and him being this way gives me even more reason to disbelieve that he harassed her. It just doesn’t add up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I tend to think it's normal for them to drift in and out of character during scenes where they know the audio will be replaced by music in the final cut. Lively wanted to talk because she thought it would look more romantic onscreen and the audience would wonder what they were saying. That's fine. Also fine to do it the other way. Adding kissing and touching to a slow dancing is also within the realm of appropriate ways to stage the scene, even if the script originally didn't include those things.

As someone who had supported Lively in the past, it's just hard to argue she's not being completely disingenuous here. In fact if it were reversed (with him arguing that talking was more romantic and saying he and his wife would stay up talking for hours, and it's more than cute, and talking about Blake's nose) I'm pretty sure she would categorize those things in her complaint as inappropriate harassment.

She'd better hope this was his strongest evidence and the rest is less compelling.

I thought I heard him say that it would be filmed in slow motion. Can you imagine the movie showing them talking in slow motion during the dance? It would be a comedy. It’s not the vision.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, I think that based on Baldoni’s obsequiousness during the filming (He rolled over for her during the filming to avoid antagonizing her), Blake thought he would cower under threats and she would come out on top. Just because someone is deferential at the workplace in order to achieve their aims, does not mean they are fools who won’t fight back when you have them in a corner.

Isn't it a problem that he "rolled over" for her during filming though? It seems like he really mishandled his position during filming and that goes to her allegation that the set was unprofessionally run.

Being unprofessional isn't illegal and if he was unprofessional by showing too much deference, that hurts her claims overall.

Yeah, I don’t get how he was too accommodating and differential and also sexually harassed her.

My perception of the footage that has been released is that he is not accommodating or deferential, but he communicated poorly and was not direct or authoritative. It's not like he just lets her change the scene so they are talking the whole time -- he doesn't actually engage with her the way she's proposing. He just kind of ignores her suggestions and then argues with her and then goes ahead doing it his way with all the nuzzling/kissing (which only he does).

He just seems like a bad communicator and that will give rise to misunderstandings.

But not sexual harassment. Also, why didn’t she speak up. She never once said she was uncomfortable. Communication works both ways.

She says she has documentation of her raising these issues on several occasions prior to the break in filming during the strike, and then the January meeting where she says these issues were raised and Baldoni and Heath agreed to correct their behavior.

We'll see if the evidence backs that up but she is claiming she raised concerns about feeling uncomfortable on the set and wanting an IC present in numerous occasions.

This was shot in May 2023. But my point is that she didn’t raise any objections in this 10 minute footage. He may not have been communicating great, but she doesn’t seem to be either. The burden should be on both of them to communicate. Also, he laid out what he wanted in the scene. She laid out why she thought it would be more romantic to have them talking, and it seems like they met in the middle. With some moments of them not talking and some moments of them talking. It seems like they both communicated what they wanted if she felt differently, she really needed to speak up.

She did speak up when he said "it smells good." She immediately straightens up and tells him she was talking about her body makeup. It's very clear in context that she did not like what he said and felt it crossed a line.

Saying someone smells good crosses a line and is sexual harassment? lol. This is beyond outlandish. You all are not real people. This is all absurd.

It’s either a troll or Blake pr. No real person could be this illogical, and also committed to posting endlessly on this thread. It doesn’t matter, in the real world, Blake’s case is toast and everyone knows it. Really curious how long it takes The NY Times to hit the escape hatch. And I think it will be a long long time before they publish another story about sexual harassment. We can thank Blake for that.

NP. Way to shift the goal posts. PP says she should have spoken up, so someone points out that she did... now it's "that alone is SH, you must be a troll!" No. PP was pointing out that she did speak up, making it clear she was uncomfortable. If this kind of interaction happened once, it would 100% not be SH. If over and over again he did this and every time she tried to put a stop to it? Of course it would be. Note that I'm not saying that happened, because I have no idea. But my take on this scene is that Blake is clearly uncomfortable from the get go, constantly tries to ramp down the physical/sexual parts of the scene and, when he oversteps line, pushes back. I can absolutely see how your boss doing this repeatedly would create a hostile environment.

[Anonymous]

I’m embarrassed for Blake, releasing unedited film is now an attempt to smear her. No one is this tone deaf and stupid, there’s no way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m embarrassed for Blake, releasing unedited film is now an attempt to smear her. No one is this tone deaf and stupid, there’s no way.

She is so pissed she’s trying to silence his lawyer from talking to the media. In their letter to the judge requesting the gag, they apparently mention the released video. I thought the video was supposed to verify her claims?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:His lawyer is telling the media they are coming out with a website that has all the receipts. Brilliant move; TikTok will have a field day and I suspect they wouldn’t be releasing a site if it were not for that platform. Blake needs to settle and figure out how to change her pr strategy.

Have yall ever been in a lawsuit? No this is not a brilliant move. Blake hasn't had the chance to respond as to the lawsuit and Justin hasn't responded to hers. They aren't settling when they haven't even had 1 hearing yet.

[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:Also, I think that based on Baldoni’s obsequiousness during the filming (He rolled over for her during the filming to avoid antagonizing her), Blake thought he would cower under threats and she would come out on top. Just because someone is deferential at the workplace in order to achieve their aims, does not mean they are fools who won’t fight back when you have them in a corner.

Isn't it a problem that he "rolled over" for her during filming though? It seems like he really mishandled his position during filming and that goes to her allegation that the set was unprofessionally run.

Being unprofessional isn't illegal and if he was unprofessional by showing too much deference, that hurts her claims overall.

Yeah, I don’t get how he was too accommodating and differential and also sexually harassed her.

My perception of the footage that has been released is that he is not accommodating or deferential, but he communicated poorly and was not direct or authoritative. It's not like he just lets her change the scene so they are talking the whole time -- he doesn't actually engage with her the way she's proposing. He just kind of ignores her suggestions and then argues with her and then goes ahead doing it his way with all the nuzzling/kissing (which only he does).

He just seems like a bad communicator and that will give rise to misunderstandings.

But not sexual harassment. Also, why didn’t she speak up. She never once said she was uncomfortable. Communication works both ways.

She says she has documentation of her raising these issues on several occasions prior to the break in filming during the strike, and then the January meeting where she says these issues were raised and Baldoni and Heath agreed to correct their behavior.

We'll see if the evidence backs that up but she is claiming she raised concerns about feeling uncomfortable on the set and wanting an IC present in numerous occasions.

This was shot in May 2023. But my point is that she didn’t raise any objections in this 10 minute footage. He may not have been communicating great, but she doesn’t seem to be either. The burden should be on both of them to communicate. Also, he laid out what he wanted in the scene. She laid out why she thought it would be more romantic to have them talking, and it seems like they met in the middle. With some moments of them not talking and some moments of them talking. It seems like they both communicated what they wanted if she felt differently, she really needed to speak up.

She did speak up when he said "it smells good." She immediately straightens up and tells him she was talking about her body makeup. It's very clear in context that she did not like what he said and felt it crossed a line.

Saying someone smells good crosses a line and is sexual harassment? lol. This is beyond outlandish. You all are not real people. This is all absurd.

It’s either a troll or Blake pr. No real person could be this illogical, and also committed to posting endlessly on this thread. It doesn’t matter, in the real world, Blake’s case is toast and everyone knows it. Really curious how long it takes The NY Times to hit the escape hatch. And I think it will be a long long time before they publish another story about sexual harassment. We can thank Blake for that.

NP. Way to shift the goal posts. PP says she should have spoken up, so someone points out that she did... now it's "that alone is SH, you must be a troll!" No. PP was pointing out that she did speak up, making it clear she was uncomfortable. If this kind of interaction happened once, it would 100% not be SH. If over and over again he did this and every time she tried to put a stop to it? Of course it would be. Note that I'm not saying that happened, because I have no idea. But my take on this scene is that Blake is clearly uncomfortable from the get go, constantly tries to ramp down the physical/sexual parts of the scene and, when he oversteps line, pushes back. I can absolutely see how your boss doing this repeatedly would create a hostile environment.

Thank you for proving my point.

Meanwhile, in the real world, Blake is desperately in need of better advisors. Any one else wondering if this debacle is having a negative effect on her marriage?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have to say I find Blake Lively's complaint about the dancing scene really odd. She previously has done at least one raunchy sex scene in The Town where she and Ben Affleck were acting out vigorous sex. And now she is offended by dancing and staring romantically? It makes very little sense. This is not intended as a commentary about Ben Affleck but rather about her experience in romantic scenes.

The big difference here is when she filmed the town she was not with Ryan. I think he is super controlling. I don’t recall her doing a sex scene since the town. I watched age of Adaline, its implied that they go to bed together, but nothing is shown. Similarly there are no sex scenes in It Ends With Us. Just a few intimate seems like the dancing in the bar and one where she has slightly fewer clothes on, she has fishnet tights on and a bra, but he tucks her into bed and leaves.

In the movie the shallow, she basically acts with a shark. And in a simple favor, she seduces Henry Goulding and it’s implied that they go get busy in an airplane bathroom but it’s not shown.

This is a good point. Ryan seems egotistical and smug, and I can see him being controlling. I am actually more interested in their relationship dynamic than Lively and Baldoni.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also, I think that based on Baldoni’s obsequiousness during the filming (He rolled over for her during the filming to avoid antagonizing her), Blake thought he would cower under threats and she would come out on top. Just because someone is deferential at the workplace in order to achieve their aims, does not mean they are fools who won’t fight back when you have them in a corner.

Isn't it a problem that he "rolled over" for her during filming though? It seems like he really mishandled his position during filming and that goes to her allegation that the set was unprofessionally run.

Being unprofessional isn't illegal and if he was unprofessional by showing too much deference, that hurts her claims overall.

Yeah, I don’t get how he was too accommodating and differential and also sexually harassed her.

My perception of the footage that has been released is that he is not accommodating or deferential, but he communicated poorly and was not direct or authoritative. It's not like he just lets her change the scene so they are talking the whole time -- he doesn't actually engage with her the way she's proposing. He just kind of ignores her suggestions and then argues with her and then goes ahead doing it his way with all the nuzzling/kissing (which only he does).

He just seems like a bad communicator and that will give rise to misunderstandings.

But not sexual harassment. Also, why didn’t she speak up. She never once said she was uncomfortable. Communication works both ways.

She says she has documentation of her raising these issues on several occasions prior to the break in filming during the strike, and then the January meeting where she says these issues were raised and Baldoni and Heath agreed to correct their behavior.

We'll see if the evidence backs that up but she is claiming she raised concerns about feeling uncomfortable on the set and wanting an IC present in numerous occasions.

This was shot in May 2023. But my point is that she didn’t raise any objections in this 10 minute footage. He may not have been communicating great, but she doesn’t seem to be either. The burden should be on both of them to communicate. Also, he laid out what he wanted in the scene. She laid out why she thought it would be more romantic to have them talking, and it seems like they met in the middle. With some moments of them not talking and some moments of them talking. It seems like they both communicated what they wanted if she felt differently, she really needed to speak up.

She did speak up when he said "it smells good." She immediately straightens up and tells him she was talking about her body makeup. It's very clear in context that she did not like what he said and felt it crossed a line.

Saying someone smells good crosses a line and is sexual harassment? lol. This is beyond outlandish. You all are not real people. This is all absurd.

It’s either a troll or Blake pr. No real person could be this illogical, and also committed to posting endlessly on this thread. It doesn’t matter, in the real world, Blake’s case is toast and everyone knows it. Really curious how long it takes The NY Times to hit the escape hatch. And I think it will be a long long time before they publish another story about sexual harassment. We can thank Blake for that.

This is the only case I can think of where a claimant was completely lying and has consequently done some actual damage to real victims. It’s just unbelievable to me! Lively is enormously wealthy and privileged, was paid fairly for her work, and on any level it seems from the videos released, enjoyed a good work environment. She lied like crazy, her husband is a massive ahole, and both are far enough from a shared reality that they thought they could ruin someone who would have nothing to lose by fighting back -with evidence- on his side. This is not the same to me as instances like the Duke Lacrosse case, where the accuser was a mess with little to lose, abetted by a criminally dishonest and ambitious prosecutor. But maybe this isn’t surprising, eh? Entitled people will be what they are - her response to people saying uh hey why’d you have your wedding at a plantation? showed that she’s basically a solipsistic monster. She never grew.

I do wonder what the water cooler talk is at the NYT about this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wow Blake and Ryan filed a letter in court asking the judge to gag Baldoni’s lawyer and stop him from talking to the media. Who is giving them this advice? Amazing.

Someone predicted this would happen a few pages ago—that JB’s lawyer was probably releasing things now, quickly, before a gag issue was ordered. I do wonder why they started with this video. Is it possible they don’t have what they say they have?