Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims

[Anonymous]

[twitter]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is interesting to me having seen the movie is that there were two much more intimate scenes that Blake must’ve felt comfortable with because after all those months, I’ve not seen a word written or spoken about it.

There was one scene where Justin’s character basically almost attempts rape and she talks him down. It was probably a tough scene to film, and she didn’t seem to have a problem with that. I imagine because it was such a tough scene that protocol was followed to the letter and she couldn’t really say anything about it. I’m sure the intimacy coordinator was on set, even though they were clothed, as his character does overpower her, even though it doesn’t get very sexual and is stopped.

There is one other scene where he undresses her a little bit. She’s in high waisted fishnet stockings, and a bra, so not nude, and I think they kiss and he kind of tucked her in bed and leaves.

Those two seemed much more intimate, harder to film scenes, and she didn’t have a problem with that. Clearly, the IC must’ve been there and protocol followed.

But given all the rest that I’ve seen, it just seems like maybe she took advantage of the scenes where there wouldn’t be an IC and there would be more left to people to interpret. For example an IC has come out and said the dancing scene would not typically require an IC, because they were fully clothed, and there was no simulating sex. I mean, they were clearly in public in a bar. So it just seems like she took advantage of that to talk about how she didn’t feel comfortable in intimate scenes.

Same with the birthing scene. I’m not sure that there would’ve been a ic there because she wasn’t nude. I know there’s back-and-forth and whether they wanted her nude, but given the fact that there was no IC there it leads me to believe, well, she’s lying. She was covered and there was clearly no sex being simulated. I’ve watched the scene again and I just don’t get it. The guy playing the doctor was pretty far away from her. There were just lots of close-up shots of her face. And one of her legs.

I feel like she just took whatever scenes might be somewhat ambiguous and made them sound worse than they were.

All scripted sex scenes and nudity were filmed after the hiatus. The scenes you are referencing were filmed after they came back from hiatus and after Baldoni and Wayfarer had agreed to her demands. Her amended complaint even references how a major reason she felt she needed to voice her concerns and get an agreement regarding having an IC with her at all times was because she was dreading going back to set and having to film these scenes with him.

This is in Baldoni's complaint as well, btw. His timeline specifically talks about how all the scripted sex scenes were filmed post-hiatus. You can control+F it if you don't believe me.

So she was comfortable with those scenes because they were handled professionally thanks to her intervention to ensure that an IC would be present and they would be choreographed and that all elements of the scenes would have consent of all parties. And also that the *scripted* nudity in these scenes would be covered by a valid nudity rider. Whereas the nudity in the birth scene was unscripted and they didn't even have a nudity rider in place when it happened (because Lively's team was not expecting it to be a nude scene so they didn't realize this was potentially why Wayfarer was trying to push them to sign the nudity rider with very little time to review and before an IC had reviewed and approved it).

But isn’t this how the courts want these claims to be handled? There were complaints made, she was given a platform to address her concerns, they heard her concerns, changes were made.

I guess I don’t understand why there would be retaliation if things didn’t escalate to the point of an investigation. She had issues, they were addressed. What is to retaliate against?

And if the scenes that were shot did not require an IC, why did she sort of turn it act like they didn’t have an IC on set? You just said that the scenes I mentioned that would require an IC, were shot after the complaints were made, and there was an IC in set. So she was sort of preemptively complaining that there wouldn’t be an IC onset? I don’t understand. The scene that she was complaining about weren’t standard for an IC.

Certainly when she pulled in Sony those emails seem to be very cordial to wayfarer, even sort of agreeing with them, gosh she is pretty demanding, but sigh, sure we can add another producer on set. Obviously, I’m paraphrasing, but the emails were certainly not wow we need to address safety issues. Or yikes there’s harassment going on in this set. They were like isn’t there a producer for this? Yes but she wants another? OK I guess we can do that. We will send Angie on set or whoever that woman was to make her more comfortable. Things like that. It just seemed very mundane and by the book and certainly there didn’t seem to be among executives any escalation of anything near harassment.

That’s why it just all seems to be coming out of left field. And then to say that others complained months after production and just seems very odd to me.

Nude scenes are always supposed to have an IC. Even if it's partial nudity. There was actually a profile of a birth scene in another movie (recent movie with Andrew Garfield and Florence Pugh) in the NYT last fall that mentioned that they had an IC for the scene because Pugh was nude below the waist for the scene. So if they expected Lively to be nude in that birth scene, they should have let her know in advance and had an IC.

I think also that while the issues were handled during the hiatus and there are no reports of problems after they came back from hiatus, it's not clear that Wayfarer handled the issues prior to the hiatus well at all. If there were complaints from multiple actresses and some of these problems happened multiple times even after Lively or others had complained, that's a real sign of a problem on set. Lively is getting dragged for the "17 point list" and criticized for making demands at that Jan. 4 meeting, but it sounds like her actions actually solved the problem in a way that nothing Wayfarer had done did. It should not be on an actress to address it in that way -- Wayfarer should have taken a stronger stance and proactively made some of the adjustments Lively ultimately had to demand under threat of not returning. If only to protect their own interest in the film. So no, I don't think courts want it to be handled "this way." I think the expectation is that employers should proactively seek to address problems and that you shouldn't have to rely on an employee willing to stick their neck out the way Lively did -- she was only able to do that because she does have market power and as star of the movie had sway with the studio. If she'd been an actress with a smaller role or less sway, she probably wouldn't have felt she could stand up for herself in that way and it's possible the problems from the first few weeks of filming would have persisted. That's a problem.

And given that not every employee is going to be empowered the way Lively was, it's all the more reason for courts to protect employees from retaliation for coming forth with harassment allegations. Because if someone with Lively's fame and power can be effectively trashed in the media in retaliation for making valid complaints about SH on set, then what message does that send to other employees with far less power? It tells them they better shut up or they, too, can be "buried."

If her 17 point list solved the problem, why was he put in the basement? This is the question they’ll need to answer b/c the retaliation seems to be on Blake’s part. She made her demands then proceeded to completely railroad over him with the threat of making her concerns (which everyone agrees had been addressed) public.

It's a question I'd love to see answered, since I don't think it benefited her in any way to have him walk the red carpet separately (he did not view the film from the basement, but a separate theater).

I have many questions.

I just googled so I didn’t have to go back to the complaints, but there’s a great article that shows all the texts with dates. It seems like all through the first part of the shoot, preproduction, and all they shot in May and June 2023 before the strike, they were getting along famously. Like really sweet texts to each other, she invites him on a private plane with her and her children so that they can work and not lose time, she’s picking him up Matcha tea orders. Just like going out of their way to be kind and respectful to each other. Not only in a professional way, but in a true friendly way.

Then production obviously shut down that summer. Texts pick back up in August, he reaches out with a sweet birthday message and talks about editing. And then some of her requests for viewing the dailys start up. But like it really seems like the first part of the shoot they got along really well. I think, were they stunned to find that in November she starts talking about this list and putting together this list for this January 4 meeting? And Ryan berates him for fat shaming at the January 4, 2024 meeting, but that happened almost a year prior and preproduction when he was working with the trainer. Why the delay? Did he just find out about it during the shutdown? Did they go to the trainer and say hey did you experience anything weird with Justin when you were talking with him? And the trainer said well yeah he did ask me about Blake’s weight? I’m so confused why they were getting along for months and months, production shut down, she wanted to get more in the editing process and maybe wasn’t getting her way for a little while, and then things just really really took a turn. I’m not seeing any gradual drop off. I’m seeing really friendly, respectful texts, and then all of a sudden him being screamed at at a meeting with the 17 point list that he has to respond to.

It seems like tension started when she didn’t feel like she was getting her way with requests to see the dailies? Which is weird because eventually they did let her see all the dailies and she got everything that she wanted, including full editing power of the film. Or people’s theories that Ryan got a hold of the dailies and didn’t like what he was seeing with flirtatious behavior? I can’t figure it out, but it just seems really really weird that there was this turn.

Google the Molly McPherson podcast. She lays out a very convincing timeline for all of this and notes the abrupt shift. That shift coincides with Ryan coming back from filming in Australia.

+100000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is interesting to me having seen the movie is that there were two much more intimate scenes that Blake must’ve felt comfortable with because after all those months, I’ve not seen a word written or spoken about it.

There was one scene where Justin’s character basically almost attempts rape and she talks him down. It was probably a tough scene to film, and she didn’t seem to have a problem with that. I imagine because it was such a tough scene that protocol was followed to the letter and she couldn’t really say anything about it. I’m sure the intimacy coordinator was on set, even though they were clothed, as his character does overpower her, even though it doesn’t get very sexual and is stopped.

There is one other scene where he undresses her a little bit. She’s in high waisted fishnet stockings, and a bra, so not nude, and I think they kiss and he kind of tucked her in bed and leaves.

Those two seemed much more intimate, harder to film scenes, and she didn’t have a problem with that. Clearly, the IC must’ve been there and protocol followed.

But given all the rest that I’ve seen, it just seems like maybe she took advantage of the scenes where there wouldn’t be an IC and there would be more left to people to interpret. For example an IC has come out and said the dancing scene would not typically require an IC, because they were fully clothed, and there was no simulating sex. I mean, they were clearly in public in a bar. So it just seems like she took advantage of that to talk about how she didn’t feel comfortable in intimate scenes.

Same with the birthing scene. I’m not sure that there would’ve been a ic there because she wasn’t nude. I know there’s back-and-forth and whether they wanted her nude, but given the fact that there was no IC there it leads me to believe, well, she’s lying. She was covered and there was clearly no sex being simulated. I’ve watched the scene again and I just don’t get it. The guy playing the doctor was pretty far away from her. There were just lots of close-up shots of her face. And one of her legs.

I feel like she just took whatever scenes might be somewhat ambiguous and made them sound worse than they were.

All scripted sex scenes and nudity were filmed after the hiatus. The scenes you are referencing were filmed after they came back from hiatus and after Baldoni and Wayfarer had agreed to her demands. Her amended complaint even references how a major reason she felt she needed to voice her concerns and get an agreement regarding having an IC with her at all times was because she was dreading going back to set and having to film these scenes with him.

This is in Baldoni's complaint as well, btw. His timeline specifically talks about how all the scripted sex scenes were filmed post-hiatus. You can control+F it if you don't believe me.

So she was comfortable with those scenes because they were handled professionally thanks to her intervention to ensure that an IC would be present and they would be choreographed and that all elements of the scenes would have consent of all parties. And also that the *scripted* nudity in these scenes would be covered by a valid nudity rider. Whereas the nudity in the birth scene was unscripted and they didn't even have a nudity rider in place when it happened (because Lively's team was not expecting it to be a nude scene so they didn't realize this was potentially why Wayfarer was trying to push them to sign the nudity rider with very little time to review and before an IC had reviewed and approved it).

But isn’t this how the courts want these claims to be handled? There were complaints made, she was given a platform to address her concerns, they heard her concerns, changes were made.

I guess I don’t understand why there would be retaliation if things didn’t escalate to the point of an investigation. She had issues, they were addressed. What is to retaliate against?

And if the scenes that were shot did not require an IC, why did she sort of turn it act like they didn’t have an IC on set? You just said that the scenes I mentioned that would require an IC, were shot after the complaints were made, and there was an IC in set. So she was sort of preemptively complaining that there wouldn’t be an IC onset? I don’t understand. The scene that she was complaining about weren’t standard for an IC.

Certainly when she pulled in Sony those emails seem to be very cordial to wayfarer, even sort of agreeing with them, gosh she is pretty demanding, but sigh, sure we can add another producer on set. Obviously, I’m paraphrasing, but the emails were certainly not wow we need to address safety issues. Or yikes there’s harassment going on in this set. They were like isn’t there a producer for this? Yes but she wants another? OK I guess we can do that. We will send Angie on set or whoever that woman was to make her more comfortable. Things like that. It just seemed very mundane and by the book and certainly there didn’t seem to be among executives any escalation of anything near harassment.

That’s why it just all seems to be coming out of left field. And then to say that others complained months after production and just seems very odd to me.

Nude scenes are always supposed to have an IC. Even if it's partial nudity. There was actually a profile of a birth scene in another movie (recent movie with Andrew Garfield and Florence Pugh) in the NYT last fall that mentioned that they had an IC for the scene because Pugh was nude below the waist for the scene. So if they expected Lively to be nude in that birth scene, they should have let her know in advance and had an IC.

I think also that while the issues were handled during the hiatus and there are no reports of problems after they came back from hiatus, it's not clear that Wayfarer handled the issues prior to the hiatus well at all. If there were complaints from multiple actresses and some of these problems happened multiple times even after Lively or others had complained, that's a real sign of a problem on set. Lively is getting dragged for the "17 point list" and criticized for making demands at that Jan. 4 meeting, but it sounds like her actions actually solved the problem in a way that nothing Wayfarer had done did. It should not be on an actress to address it in that way -- Wayfarer should have taken a stronger stance and proactively made some of the adjustments Lively ultimately had to demand under threat of not returning. If only to protect their own interest in the film. So no, I don't think courts want it to be handled "this way." I think the expectation is that employers should proactively seek to address problems and that you shouldn't have to rely on an employee willing to stick their neck out the way Lively did -- she was only able to do that because she does have market power and as star of the movie had sway with the studio. If she'd been an actress with a smaller role or less sway, she probably wouldn't have felt she could stand up for herself in that way and it's possible the problems from the first few weeks of filming would have persisted. That's a problem.

And given that not every employee is going to be empowered the way Lively was, it's all the more reason for courts to protect employees from retaliation for coming forth with harassment allegations. Because if someone with Lively's fame and power can be effectively trashed in the media in retaliation for making valid complaints about SH on set, then what message does that send to other employees with far less power? It tells them they better shut up or they, too, can be "buried."

If her 17 point list solved the problem, why was he put in the basement? This is the question they’ll need to answer b/c the retaliation seems to be on Blake’s part. She made her demands then proceeded to completely railroad over him with the threat of making her concerns (which everyone agrees had been addressed) public.

It's a question I'd love to see answered, since I don't think it benefited her in any way to have him walk the red carpet separately (he did not view the film from the basement, but a separate theater).

I have many questions.

I just googled so I didn’t have to go back to the complaints, but there’s a great article that shows all the texts with dates. It seems like all through the first part of the shoot, preproduction, and all they shot in May and June 2023 before the strike, they were getting along famously. Like really sweet texts to each other, she invites him on a private plane with her and her children so that they can work and not lose time, she’s picking him up Matcha tea orders. Just like going out of their way to be kind and respectful to each other. Not only in a professional way, but in a true friendly way.

Then production obviously shut down that summer. Texts pick back up in August, he reaches out with a sweet birthday message and talks about editing. And then some of her requests for viewing the dailys start up. But like it really seems like the first part of the shoot they got along really well. I think, were they stunned to find that in November she starts talking about this list and putting together this list for this January 4 meeting? And Ryan berates him for fat shaming at the January 4, 2024 meeting, but that happened almost a year prior and preproduction when he was working with the trainer. Why the delay? Did he just find out about it during the shutdown? Did they go to the trainer and say hey did you experience anything weird with Justin when you were talking with him? And the trainer said well yeah he did ask me about Blake’s weight? I’m so confused why they were getting along for months and months, production shut down, she wanted to get more in the editing process and maybe wasn’t getting her way for a little while, and then things just really really took a turn. I’m not seeing any gradual drop off. I’m seeing really friendly, respectful texts, and then all of a sudden him being screamed at at a meeting with the 17 point list that he has to respond to.

It seems like tension started when she didn’t feel like she was getting her way with requests to see the dailies? Which is weird because eventually they did let her see all the dailies and she got everything that she wanted, including full editing power of the film. Or people’s theories that Ryan got a hold of the dailies and didn’t like what he was seeing with flirtatious behavior? I can’t figure it out, but it just seems really really weird that there was this turn.

Google the Molly McPherson podcast. She lays out a very convincing timeline for all of this and notes the abrupt shift. That shift coincides with Ryan coming back from filming in Australia.

So your theory is that Ryan got jealous or got pissed for some reason and initiated a lot of this? Blake just went along? I don’t think that’s a bad theory. I don’t think there was ever anything going on with Blake and Justin. I think they had an innocent friendship. But Ryan is as controlling as people say he might not have seen it that way. Or maybe it had nothing to do with their relationship and more of him just seeing this as a way to get control of the sequel. I don’t know.

Interesting in Blake’s new filing, she reveals that there’s a text exchange between their publicist and Ryan, it’s about this movie and Blake, but it’s to Ryan. Now you could say, she’s a mom of 4 and he wants to protect her from some of this because it’s stressful, but it just strike me that he infantilizes Blake and it’s just very controlling.

Also interesting, when the trainer addressed the fat shaming rumors, he was very vague in his instagram but said he had an uncomfortable conversation with Justin and decided to no longer work with him. That same phrase was used in the letter that Ryan and Blake gave Justin to release to the world, that he had done all these bad things, and it was time to have an uncomfortable conversation. A few podcasts I follow thought that was a tell that Ryan had written both of the statements lol.

Wild if true.

[Anonymous]

RR is a controlling narcissist. Absolutely no doubt. Look what he did on SNL.

[Anonymous]

Two different realities lol

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is interesting to me having seen the movie is that there were two much more intimate scenes that Blake must’ve felt comfortable with because after all those months, I’ve not seen a word written or spoken about it.

There was one scene where Justin’s character basically almost attempts rape and she talks him down. It was probably a tough scene to film, and she didn’t seem to have a problem with that. I imagine because it was such a tough scene that protocol was followed to the letter and she couldn’t really say anything about it. I’m sure the intimacy coordinator was on set, even though they were clothed, as his character does overpower her, even though it doesn’t get very sexual and is stopped.

There is one other scene where he undresses her a little bit. She’s in high waisted fishnet stockings, and a bra, so not nude, and I think they kiss and he kind of tucked her in bed and leaves.

Those two seemed much more intimate, harder to film scenes, and she didn’t have a problem with that. Clearly, the IC must’ve been there and protocol followed.

But given all the rest that I’ve seen, it just seems like maybe she took advantage of the scenes where there wouldn’t be an IC and there would be more left to people to interpret. For example an IC has come out and said the dancing scene would not typically require an IC, because they were fully clothed, and there was no simulating sex. I mean, they were clearly in public in a bar. So it just seems like she took advantage of that to talk about how she didn’t feel comfortable in intimate scenes.

Same with the birthing scene. I’m not sure that there would’ve been a ic there because she wasn’t nude. I know there’s back-and-forth and whether they wanted her nude, but given the fact that there was no IC there it leads me to believe, well, she’s lying. She was covered and there was clearly no sex being simulated. I’ve watched the scene again and I just don’t get it. The guy playing the doctor was pretty far away from her. There were just lots of close-up shots of her face. And one of her legs.

I feel like she just took whatever scenes might be somewhat ambiguous and made them sound worse than they were.

All scripted sex scenes and nudity were filmed after the hiatus. The scenes you are referencing were filmed after they came back from hiatus and after Baldoni and Wayfarer had agreed to her demands. Her amended complaint even references how a major reason she felt she needed to voice her concerns and get an agreement regarding having an IC with her at all times was because she was dreading going back to set and having to film these scenes with him.

This is in Baldoni's complaint as well, btw. His timeline specifically talks about how all the scripted sex scenes were filmed post-hiatus. You can control+F it if you don't believe me.

So she was comfortable with those scenes because they were handled professionally thanks to her intervention to ensure that an IC would be present and they would be choreographed and that all elements of the scenes would have consent of all parties. And also that the *scripted* nudity in these scenes would be covered by a valid nudity rider. Whereas the nudity in the birth scene was unscripted and they didn't even have a nudity rider in place when it happened (because Lively's team was not expecting it to be a nude scene so they didn't realize this was potentially why Wayfarer was trying to push them to sign the nudity rider with very little time to review and before an IC had reviewed and approved it).

But isn’t this how the courts want these claims to be handled? There were complaints made, she was given a platform to address her concerns, they heard her concerns, changes were made.

I guess I don’t understand why there would be retaliation if things didn’t escalate to the point of an investigation. She had issues, they were addressed. What is to retaliate against?

And if the scenes that were shot did not require an IC, why did she sort of turn it act like they didn’t have an IC on set? You just said that the scenes I mentioned that would require an IC, were shot after the complaints were made, and there was an IC in set. So she was sort of preemptively complaining that there wouldn’t be an IC onset? I don’t understand. The scene that she was complaining about weren’t standard for an IC.

Certainly when she pulled in Sony those emails seem to be very cordial to wayfarer, even sort of agreeing with them, gosh she is pretty demanding, but sigh, sure we can add another producer on set. Obviously, I’m paraphrasing, but the emails were certainly not wow we need to address safety issues. Or yikes there’s harassment going on in this set. They were like isn’t there a producer for this? Yes but she wants another? OK I guess we can do that. We will send Angie on set or whoever that woman was to make her more comfortable. Things like that. It just seemed very mundane and by the book and certainly there didn’t seem to be among executives any escalation of anything near harassment.

That’s why it just all seems to be coming out of left field. And then to say that others complained months after production and just seems very odd to me.

Nude scenes are always supposed to have an IC. Even if it's partial nudity. There was actually a profile of a birth scene in another movie (recent movie with Andrew Garfield and Florence Pugh) in the NYT last fall that mentioned that they had an IC for the scene because Pugh was nude below the waist for the scene. So if they expected Lively to be nude in that birth scene, they should have let her know in advance and had an IC.

I think also that while the issues were handled during the hiatus and there are no reports of problems after they came back from hiatus, it's not clear that Wayfarer handled the issues prior to the hiatus well at all. If there were complaints from multiple actresses and some of these problems happened multiple times even after Lively or others had complained, that's a real sign of a problem on set. Lively is getting dragged for the "17 point list" and criticized for making demands at that Jan. 4 meeting, but it sounds like her actions actually solved the problem in a way that nothing Wayfarer had done did. It should not be on an actress to address it in that way -- Wayfarer should have taken a stronger stance and proactively made some of the adjustments Lively ultimately had to demand under threat of not returning. If only to protect their own interest in the film. So no, I don't think courts want it to be handled "this way." I think the expectation is that employers should proactively seek to address problems and that you shouldn't have to rely on an employee willing to stick their neck out the way Lively did -- she was only able to do that because she does have market power and as star of the movie had sway with the studio. If she'd been an actress with a smaller role or less sway, she probably wouldn't have felt she could stand up for herself in that way and it's possible the problems from the first few weeks of filming would have persisted. That's a problem.

And given that not every employee is going to be empowered the way Lively was, it's all the more reason for courts to protect employees from retaliation for coming forth with harassment allegations. Because if someone with Lively's fame and power can be effectively trashed in the media in retaliation for making valid complaints about SH on set, then what message does that send to other employees with far less power? It tells them they better shut up or they, too, can be "buried."

If her 17 point list solved the problem, why was he put in the basement? This is the question they’ll need to answer b/c the retaliation seems to be on Blake’s part. She made her demands then proceeded to completely railroad over him with the threat of making her concerns (which everyone agrees had been addressed) public.

It's a question I'd love to see answered, since I don't think it benefited her in any way to have him walk the red carpet separately (he did not view the film from the basement, but a separate theater).

I have many questions.

I just googled so I didn’t have to go back to the complaints, but there’s a great article that shows all the texts with dates. It seems like all through the first part of the shoot, preproduction, and all they shot in May and June 2023 before the strike, they were getting along famously. Like really sweet texts to each other, she invites him on a private plane with her and her children so that they can work and not lose time, she’s picking him up Matcha tea orders. Just like going out of their way to be kind and respectful to each other. Not only in a professional way, but in a true friendly way.

Then production obviously shut down that summer. Texts pick back up in August, he reaches out with a sweet birthday message and talks about editing. And then some of her requests for viewing the dailys start up. But like it really seems like the first part of the shoot they got along really well. I think, were they stunned to find that in November she starts talking about this list and putting together this list for this January 4 meeting? And Ryan berates him for fat shaming at the January 4, 2024 meeting, but that happened almost a year prior and preproduction when he was working with the trainer. Why the delay? Did he just find out about it during the shutdown? Did they go to the trainer and say hey did you experience anything weird with Justin when you were talking with him? And the trainer said well yeah he did ask me about Blake’s weight? I’m so confused why they were getting along for months and months, production shut down, she wanted to get more in the editing process and maybe wasn’t getting her way for a little while, and then things just really really took a turn. I’m not seeing any gradual drop off. I’m seeing really friendly, respectful texts, and then all of a sudden him being screamed at at a meeting with the 17 point list that he has to respond to.

It seems like tension started when she didn’t feel like she was getting her way with requests to see the dailies? Which is weird because eventually they did let her see all the dailies and she got everything that she wanted, including full editing power of the film. Or people’s theories that Ryan got a hold of the dailies and didn’t like what he was seeing with flirtatious behavior? I can’t figure it out, but it just seems really really weird that there was this turn.

Google the Molly McPherson podcast. She lays out a very convincing timeline for all of this and notes the abrupt shift. That shift coincides with Ryan coming back from filming in Australia.

So your theory is that Ryan got jealous or got pissed for some reason and initiated a lot of this? Blake just went along? I don’t think that’s a bad theory. I don’t think there was ever anything going on with Blake and Justin. I think they had an innocent friendship. But Ryan is as controlling as people say he might not have seen it that way. Or maybe it had nothing to do with their relationship and more of him just seeing this as a way to get control of the sequel. I don’t know.

Interesting in Blake’s new filing, she reveals that there’s a text exchange between their publicist and Ryan, it’s about this movie and Blake, but it’s to Ryan. Now you could say, she’s a mom of 4 and he wants to protect her from some of this because it’s stressful, but it just strike me that he infantilizes Blake and it’s just very controlling.

Also interesting, when the trainer addressed the fat shaming rumors, he was very vague in his instagram but said he had an uncomfortable conversation with Justin and decided to no longer work with him. That same phrase was used in the letter that Ryan and Blake gave Justin to release to the world, that he had done all these bad things, and it was time to have an uncomfortable conversation. A few podcasts I follow thought that was a tell that Ryan had written both of the statements lol.

Wild if true.

This will be hard to prove with spousal privilege, but it does sound plausible. Ryan and Blake both have a history of hooking up with coworkers. The phrase “you lose them how you get them” comes to mind. She dated her gossip girl costar (who looks like a less attractive version of Justin) for 3 years while they were filming. She met Ryan on the set of green lantern while he was very much still married to scarlet Johansson and married him within a year of their divorce. With this kind of history, he may be very insecure about her on screen romances and vice versa.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is interesting to me having seen the movie is that there were two much more intimate scenes that Blake must’ve felt comfortable with because after all those months, I’ve not seen a word written or spoken about it.

There was one scene where Justin’s character basically almost attempts rape and she talks him down. It was probably a tough scene to film, and she didn’t seem to have a problem with that. I imagine because it was such a tough scene that protocol was followed to the letter and she couldn’t really say anything about it. I’m sure the intimacy coordinator was on set, even though they were clothed, as his character does overpower her, even though it doesn’t get very sexual and is stopped.

There is one other scene where he undresses her a little bit. She’s in high waisted fishnet stockings, and a bra, so not nude, and I think they kiss and he kind of tucked her in bed and leaves.

Those two seemed much more intimate, harder to film scenes, and she didn’t have a problem with that. Clearly, the IC must’ve been there and protocol followed.

But given all the rest that I’ve seen, it just seems like maybe she took advantage of the scenes where there wouldn’t be an IC and there would be more left to people to interpret. For example an IC has come out and said the dancing scene would not typically require an IC, because they were fully clothed, and there was no simulating sex. I mean, they were clearly in public in a bar. So it just seems like she took advantage of that to talk about how she didn’t feel comfortable in intimate scenes.

Same with the birthing scene. I’m not sure that there would’ve been a ic there because she wasn’t nude. I know there’s back-and-forth and whether they wanted her nude, but given the fact that there was no IC there it leads me to believe, well, she’s lying. She was covered and there was clearly no sex being simulated. I’ve watched the scene again and I just don’t get it. The guy playing the doctor was pretty far away from her. There were just lots of close-up shots of her face. And one of her legs.

I feel like she just took whatever scenes might be somewhat ambiguous and made them sound worse than they were.

All scripted sex scenes and nudity were filmed after the hiatus. The scenes you are referencing were filmed after they came back from hiatus and after Baldoni and Wayfarer had agreed to her demands. Her amended complaint even references how a major reason she felt she needed to voice her concerns and get an agreement regarding having an IC with her at all times was because she was dreading going back to set and having to film these scenes with him.

This is in Baldoni's complaint as well, btw. His timeline specifically talks about how all the scripted sex scenes were filmed post-hiatus. You can control+F it if you don't believe me.

So she was comfortable with those scenes because they were handled professionally thanks to her intervention to ensure that an IC would be present and they would be choreographed and that all elements of the scenes would have consent of all parties. And also that the *scripted* nudity in these scenes would be covered by a valid nudity rider. Whereas the nudity in the birth scene was unscripted and they didn't even have a nudity rider in place when it happened (because Lively's team was not expecting it to be a nude scene so they didn't realize this was potentially why Wayfarer was trying to push them to sign the nudity rider with very little time to review and before an IC had reviewed and approved it).

But isn’t this how the courts want these claims to be handled? There were complaints made, she was given a platform to address her concerns, they heard her concerns, changes were made.

I guess I don’t understand why there would be retaliation if things didn’t escalate to the point of an investigation. She had issues, they were addressed. What is to retaliate against?

And if the scenes that were shot did not require an IC, why did she sort of turn it act like they didn’t have an IC on set? You just said that the scenes I mentioned that would require an IC, were shot after the complaints were made, and there was an IC in set. So she was sort of preemptively complaining that there wouldn’t be an IC onset? I don’t understand. The scene that she was complaining about weren’t standard for an IC.

Certainly when she pulled in Sony those emails seem to be very cordial to wayfarer, even sort of agreeing with them, gosh she is pretty demanding, but sigh, sure we can add another producer on set. Obviously, I’m paraphrasing, but the emails were certainly not wow we need to address safety issues. Or yikes there’s harassment going on in this set. They were like isn’t there a producer for this? Yes but she wants another? OK I guess we can do that. We will send Angie on set or whoever that woman was to make her more comfortable. Things like that. It just seemed very mundane and by the book and certainly there didn’t seem to be among executives any escalation of anything near harassment.

That’s why it just all seems to be coming out of left field. And then to say that others complained months after production and just seems very odd to me.

Nude scenes are always supposed to have an IC. Even if it's partial nudity. There was actually a profile of a birth scene in another movie (recent movie with Andrew Garfield and Florence Pugh) in the NYT last fall that mentioned that they had an IC for the scene because Pugh was nude below the waist for the scene. So if they expected Lively to be nude in that birth scene, they should have let her know in advance and had an IC.

I think also that while the issues were handled during the hiatus and there are no reports of problems after they came back from hiatus, it's not clear that Wayfarer handled the issues prior to the hiatus well at all. If there were complaints from multiple actresses and some of these problems happened multiple times even after Lively or others had complained, that's a real sign of a problem on set. Lively is getting dragged for the "17 point list" and criticized for making demands at that Jan. 4 meeting, but it sounds like her actions actually solved the problem in a way that nothing Wayfarer had done did. It should not be on an actress to address it in that way -- Wayfarer should have taken a stronger stance and proactively made some of the adjustments Lively ultimately had to demand under threat of not returning. If only to protect their own interest in the film. So no, I don't think courts want it to be handled "this way." I think the expectation is that employers should proactively seek to address problems and that you shouldn't have to rely on an employee willing to stick their neck out the way Lively did -- she was only able to do that because she does have market power and as star of the movie had sway with the studio. If she'd been an actress with a smaller role or less sway, she probably wouldn't have felt she could stand up for herself in that way and it's possible the problems from the first few weeks of filming would have persisted. That's a problem.

And given that not every employee is going to be empowered the way Lively was, it's all the more reason for courts to protect employees from retaliation for coming forth with harassment allegations. Because if someone with Lively's fame and power can be effectively trashed in the media in retaliation for making valid complaints about SH on set, then what message does that send to other employees with far less power? It tells them they better shut up or they, too, can be "buried."

If her 17 point list solved the problem, why was he put in the basement? This is the question they’ll need to answer b/c the retaliation seems to be on Blake’s part. She made her demands then proceeded to completely railroad over him with the threat of making her concerns (which everyone agrees had been addressed) public.

It's a question I'd love to see answered, since I don't think it benefited her in any way to have him walk the red carpet separately (he did not view the film from the basement, but a separate theater).

I have many questions.

I just googled so I didn’t have to go back to the complaints, but there’s a great article that shows all the texts with dates. It seems like all through the first part of the shoot, preproduction, and all they shot in May and June 2023 before the strike, they were getting along famously. Like really sweet texts to each other, she invites him on a private plane with her and her children so that they can work and not lose time, she’s picking him up Matcha tea orders. Just like going out of their way to be kind and respectful to each other. Not only in a professional way, but in a true friendly way.

Then production obviously shut down that summer. Texts pick back up in August, he reaches out with a sweet birthday message and talks about editing. And then some of her requests for viewing the dailys start up. But like it really seems like the first part of the shoot they got along really well. I think, were they stunned to find that in November she starts talking about this list and putting together this list for this January 4 meeting? And Ryan berates him for fat shaming at the January 4, 2024 meeting, but that happened almost a year prior and preproduction when he was working with the trainer. Why the delay? Did he just find out about it during the shutdown? Did they go to the trainer and say hey did you experience anything weird with Justin when you were talking with him? And the trainer said well yeah he did ask me about Blake’s weight? I’m so confused why they were getting along for months and months, production shut down, she wanted to get more in the editing process and maybe wasn’t getting her way for a little while, and then things just really really took a turn. I’m not seeing any gradual drop off. I’m seeing really friendly, respectful texts, and then all of a sudden him being screamed at at a meeting with the 17 point list that he has to respond to.

It seems like tension started when she didn’t feel like she was getting her way with requests to see the dailies? Which is weird because eventually they did let her see all the dailies and she got everything that she wanted, including full editing power of the film. Or people’s theories that Ryan got a hold of the dailies and didn’t like what he was seeing with flirtatious behavior? I can’t figure it out, but it just seems really really weird that there was this turn.

Google the Molly McPherson podcast. She lays out a very convincing timeline for all of this and notes the abrupt shift. That shift coincides with Ryan coming back from filming in Australia.

So your theory is that Ryan got jealous or got pissed for some reason and initiated a lot of this? Blake just went along? I don’t think that’s a bad theory. I don’t think there was ever anything going on with Blake and Justin. I think they had an innocent friendship. But Ryan is as controlling as people say he might not have seen it that way. Or maybe it had nothing to do with their relationship and more of him just seeing this as a way to get control of the sequel. I don’t know.

Interesting in Blake’s new filing, she reveals that there’s a text exchange between their publicist and Ryan, it’s about this movie and Blake, but it’s to Ryan. Now you could say, she’s a mom of 4 and he wants to protect her from some of this because it’s stressful, but it just strike me that he infantilizes Blake and it’s just very controlling.

Also interesting, when the trainer addressed the fat shaming rumors, he was very vague in his instagram but said he had an uncomfortable conversation with Justin and decided to no longer work with him. That same phrase was used in the letter that Ryan and Blake gave Justin to release to the world, that he had done all these bad things, and it was time to have an uncomfortable conversation. A few podcasts I follow thought that was a tell that Ryan had written both of the statements lol.

Wild if true.

This will be hard to prove with spousal privilege, but it does sound plausible. Ryan and Blake both have a history of hooking up with coworkers. The phrase “you lose them how you get them” comes to mind. She dated her gossip girl costar (who looks like a less attractive version of Justin) for 3 years while they were filming. She met Ryan on the set of green lantern while he was very much still married to scarlet Johansson and married him within a year of their divorce. With this kind of history, he may be very insecure about her on screen romances and vice versa.

Yes!! He is probably totally insecure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is interesting to me having seen the movie is that there were two much more intimate scenes that Blake must’ve felt comfortable with because after all those months, I’ve not seen a word written or spoken about it.

There was one scene where Justin’s character basically almost attempts rape and she talks him down. It was probably a tough scene to film, and she didn’t seem to have a problem with that. I imagine because it was such a tough scene that protocol was followed to the letter and she couldn’t really say anything about it. I’m sure the intimacy coordinator was on set, even though they were clothed, as his character does overpower her, even though it doesn’t get very sexual and is stopped.

There is one other scene where he undresses her a little bit. She’s in high waisted fishnet stockings, and a bra, so not nude, and I think they kiss and he kind of tucked her in bed and leaves.

Those two seemed much more intimate, harder to film scenes, and she didn’t have a problem with that. Clearly, the IC must’ve been there and protocol followed.

But given all the rest that I’ve seen, it just seems like maybe she took advantage of the scenes where there wouldn’t be an IC and there would be more left to people to interpret. For example an IC has come out and said the dancing scene would not typically require an IC, because they were fully clothed, and there was no simulating sex. I mean, they were clearly in public in a bar. So it just seems like she took advantage of that to talk about how she didn’t feel comfortable in intimate scenes.

Same with the birthing scene. I’m not sure that there would’ve been a ic there because she wasn’t nude. I know there’s back-and-forth and whether they wanted her nude, but given the fact that there was no IC there it leads me to believe, well, she’s lying. She was covered and there was clearly no sex being simulated. I’ve watched the scene again and I just don’t get it. The guy playing the doctor was pretty far away from her. There were just lots of close-up shots of her face. And one of her legs.

I feel like she just took whatever scenes might be somewhat ambiguous and made them sound worse than they were.

All scripted sex scenes and nudity were filmed after the hiatus. The scenes you are referencing were filmed after they came back from hiatus and after Baldoni and Wayfarer had agreed to her demands. Her amended complaint even references how a major reason she felt she needed to voice her concerns and get an agreement regarding having an IC with her at all times was because she was dreading going back to set and having to film these scenes with him.

This is in Baldoni's complaint as well, btw. His timeline specifically talks about how all the scripted sex scenes were filmed post-hiatus. You can control+F it if you don't believe me.

So she was comfortable with those scenes because they were handled professionally thanks to her intervention to ensure that an IC would be present and they would be choreographed and that all elements of the scenes would have consent of all parties. And also that the *scripted* nudity in these scenes would be covered by a valid nudity rider. Whereas the nudity in the birth scene was unscripted and they didn't even have a nudity rider in place when it happened (because Lively's team was not expecting it to be a nude scene so they didn't realize this was potentially why Wayfarer was trying to push them to sign the nudity rider with very little time to review and before an IC had reviewed and approved it).

But isn’t this how the courts want these claims to be handled? There were complaints made, she was given a platform to address her concerns, they heard her concerns, changes were made.

I guess I don’t understand why there would be retaliation if things didn’t escalate to the point of an investigation. She had issues, they were addressed. What is to retaliate against?

And if the scenes that were shot did not require an IC, why did she sort of turn it act like they didn’t have an IC on set? You just said that the scenes I mentioned that would require an IC, were shot after the complaints were made, and there was an IC in set. So she was sort of preemptively complaining that there wouldn’t be an IC onset? I don’t understand. The scene that she was complaining about weren’t standard for an IC.

Certainly when she pulled in Sony those emails seem to be very cordial to wayfarer, even sort of agreeing with them, gosh she is pretty demanding, but sigh, sure we can add another producer on set. Obviously, I’m paraphrasing, but the emails were certainly not wow we need to address safety issues. Or yikes there’s harassment going on in this set. They were like isn’t there a producer for this? Yes but she wants another? OK I guess we can do that. We will send Angie on set or whoever that woman was to make her more comfortable. Things like that. It just seemed very mundane and by the book and certainly there didn’t seem to be among executives any escalation of anything near harassment.

That’s why it just all seems to be coming out of left field. And then to say that others complained months after production and just seems very odd to me.

Nude scenes are always supposed to have an IC. Even if it's partial nudity. There was actually a profile of a birth scene in another movie (recent movie with Andrew Garfield and Florence Pugh) in the NYT last fall that mentioned that they had an IC for the scene because Pugh was nude below the waist for the scene. So if they expected Lively to be nude in that birth scene, they should have let her know in advance and had an IC.

I think also that while the issues were handled during the hiatus and there are no reports of problems after they came back from hiatus, it's not clear that Wayfarer handled the issues prior to the hiatus well at all. If there were complaints from multiple actresses and some of these problems happened multiple times even after Lively or others had complained, that's a real sign of a problem on set. Lively is getting dragged for the "17 point list" and criticized for making demands at that Jan. 4 meeting, but it sounds like her actions actually solved the problem in a way that nothing Wayfarer had done did. It should not be on an actress to address it in that way -- Wayfarer should have taken a stronger stance and proactively made some of the adjustments Lively ultimately had to demand under threat of not returning. If only to protect their own interest in the film. So no, I don't think courts want it to be handled "this way." I think the expectation is that employers should proactively seek to address problems and that you shouldn't have to rely on an employee willing to stick their neck out the way Lively did -- she was only able to do that because she does have market power and as star of the movie had sway with the studio. If she'd been an actress with a smaller role or less sway, she probably wouldn't have felt she could stand up for herself in that way and it's possible the problems from the first few weeks of filming would have persisted. That's a problem.

And given that not every employee is going to be empowered the way Lively was, it's all the more reason for courts to protect employees from retaliation for coming forth with harassment allegations. Because if someone with Lively's fame and power can be effectively trashed in the media in retaliation for making valid complaints about SH on set, then what message does that send to other employees with far less power? It tells them they better shut up or they, too, can be "buried."

If her 17 point list solved the problem, why was he put in the basement? This is the question they’ll need to answer b/c the retaliation seems to be on Blake’s part. She made her demands then proceeded to completely railroad over him with the threat of making her concerns (which everyone agrees had been addressed) public.

It's a question I'd love to see answered, since I don't think it benefited her in any way to have him walk the red carpet separately (he did not view the film from the basement, but a separate theater).

I have many questions.

I just googled so I didn’t have to go back to the complaints, but there’s a great article that shows all the texts with dates. It seems like all through the first part of the shoot, preproduction, and all they shot in May and June 2023 before the strike, they were getting along famously. Like really sweet texts to each other, she invites him on a private plane with her and her children so that they can work and not lose time, she’s picking him up Matcha tea orders. Just like going out of their way to be kind and respectful to each other. Not only in a professional way, but in a true friendly way.

Then production obviously shut down that summer. Texts pick back up in August, he reaches out with a sweet birthday message and talks about editing. And then some of her requests for viewing the dailys start up. But like it really seems like the first part of the shoot they got along really well. I think, were they stunned to find that in November she starts talking about this list and putting together this list for this January 4 meeting? And Ryan berates him for fat shaming at the January 4, 2024 meeting, but that happened almost a year prior and preproduction when he was working with the trainer. Why the delay? Did he just find out about it during the shutdown? Did they go to the trainer and say hey did you experience anything weird with Justin when you were talking with him? And the trainer said well yeah he did ask me about Blake’s weight? I’m so confused why they were getting along for months and months, production shut down, she wanted to get more in the editing process and maybe wasn’t getting her way for a little while, and then things just really really took a turn. I’m not seeing any gradual drop off. I’m seeing really friendly, respectful texts, and then all of a sudden him being screamed at at a meeting with the 17 point list that he has to respond to.

It seems like tension started when she didn’t feel like she was getting her way with requests to see the dailies? Which is weird because eventually they did let her see all the dailies and she got everything that she wanted, including full editing power of the film. Or people’s theories that Ryan got a hold of the dailies and didn’t like what he was seeing with flirtatious behavior? I can’t figure it out, but it just seems really really weird that there was this turn.

Google the Molly McPherson podcast. She lays out a very convincing timeline for all of this and notes the abrupt shift. That shift coincides with Ryan coming back from filming in Australia.

So your theory is that Ryan got jealous or got pissed for some reason and initiated a lot of this? Blake just went along? I don’t think that’s a bad theory. I don’t think there was ever anything going on with Blake and Justin. I think they had an innocent friendship. But Ryan is as controlling as people say he might not have seen it that way. Or maybe it had nothing to do with their relationship and more of him just seeing this as a way to get control of the sequel. I don’t know.

Interesting in Blake’s new filing, she reveals that there’s a text exchange between their publicist and Ryan, it’s about this movie and Blake, but it’s to Ryan. Now you could say, she’s a mom of 4 and he wants to protect her from some of this because it’s stressful, but it just strike me that he infantilizes Blake and it’s just very controlling.

Also interesting, when the trainer addressed the fat shaming rumors, he was very vague in his instagram but said he had an uncomfortable conversation with Justin and decided to no longer work with him. That same phrase was used in the letter that Ryan and Blake gave Justin to release to the world, that he had done all these bad things, and it was time to have an uncomfortable conversation. A few podcasts I follow thought that was a tell that Ryan had written both of the statements lol.

Wild if true.

It's been a few weeks since I listened to it, but she's been pointing the finger towards Reynolds since last August as the missing piece in all of this. Her theory (as a PR pro, not as a lawyer) is that things are generally going really well between Blake and Justin while Ryan is away. Postpartum Blake is happy to get out of the house and have something away from the kids and Justin, very much unlike her husband, is this really sensitive (sometimes cringe-ily so!) guy who is really supportive, happy about collaborating with her, and generally a source of support. There's nothing "untoward" happening and Justin isn't really playing ball even when Blake is a little boundary pushing, but they're friends, they're vibing.

Blake is a diva and Justin is generally extremely accomodating but they both low-key grouch a little to their friends and spouses, as one does about their workplace.

Then the writers strike happens and control-freak (McPherson has some interesting examples of this and some inside baseball insights) Ryan is back in NY in an environment where no one can work. He's kind of tired of hearing about this Justin guy all the time, who he considers to be a pathetic beta-male nobody plus he's not really a fan of his wife having male friends. He's also got a head full of steam, narcissism and ego on max mode coming back from his own film where he managed to completely take over and thinks, why not this one too? They invite Justin over and absolutely tear him a new one in a way that's so severe the exec said he had never seen anything like it. Ryan is back and the rest of this production is going to be a lot different with him in town!

Baldoni is totally freaked out. Leaves the apologetic cringe voicemail. He's also very confused where this is coming from. Of course he didn't "fat shame" or whatever, what's this about? This is where Ryan begins to put the takeover plan into action. He has the reins now. It's unclear how Blake feels about it, but she's swayed by her husband and desperate for approval as more than an actress, so she's along for the ride. Plus, who tf is Baldoni anyway? They're A-listers! Ryan did the same thing!

At this point, the horse is out of the barn and there's all the rest of it we know with the NYT and PR firms and premiere and everything, but this is the theory on how this started and jumped the shark to where we are now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is interesting to me having seen the movie is that there were two much more intimate scenes that Blake must’ve felt comfortable with because after all those months, I’ve not seen a word written or spoken about it.

There was one scene where Justin’s character basically almost attempts rape and she talks him down. It was probably a tough scene to film, and she didn’t seem to have a problem with that. I imagine because it was such a tough scene that protocol was followed to the letter and she couldn’t really say anything about it. I’m sure the intimacy coordinator was on set, even though they were clothed, as his character does overpower her, even though it doesn’t get very sexual and is stopped.

There is one other scene where he undresses her a little bit. She’s in high waisted fishnet stockings, and a bra, so not nude, and I think they kiss and he kind of tucked her in bed and leaves.

Those two seemed much more intimate, harder to film scenes, and she didn’t have a problem with that. Clearly, the IC must’ve been there and protocol followed.

But given all the rest that I’ve seen, it just seems like maybe she took advantage of the scenes where there wouldn’t be an IC and there would be more left to people to interpret. For example an IC has come out and said the dancing scene would not typically require an IC, because they were fully clothed, and there was no simulating sex. I mean, they were clearly in public in a bar. So it just seems like she took advantage of that to talk about how she didn’t feel comfortable in intimate scenes.

Same with the birthing scene. I’m not sure that there would’ve been a ic there because she wasn’t nude. I know there’s back-and-forth and whether they wanted her nude, but given the fact that there was no IC there it leads me to believe, well, she’s lying. She was covered and there was clearly no sex being simulated. I’ve watched the scene again and I just don’t get it. The guy playing the doctor was pretty far away from her. There were just lots of close-up shots of her face. And one of her legs.

I feel like she just took whatever scenes might be somewhat ambiguous and made them sound worse than they were.

All scripted sex scenes and nudity were filmed after the hiatus. The scenes you are referencing were filmed after they came back from hiatus and after Baldoni and Wayfarer had agreed to her demands. Her amended complaint even references how a major reason she felt she needed to voice her concerns and get an agreement regarding having an IC with her at all times was because she was dreading going back to set and having to film these scenes with him.

This is in Baldoni's complaint as well, btw. His timeline specifically talks about how all the scripted sex scenes were filmed post-hiatus. You can control+F it if you don't believe me.

So she was comfortable with those scenes because they were handled professionally thanks to her intervention to ensure that an IC would be present and they would be choreographed and that all elements of the scenes would have consent of all parties. And also that the *scripted* nudity in these scenes would be covered by a valid nudity rider. Whereas the nudity in the birth scene was unscripted and they didn't even have a nudity rider in place when it happened (because Lively's team was not expecting it to be a nude scene so they didn't realize this was potentially why Wayfarer was trying to push them to sign the nudity rider with very little time to review and before an IC had reviewed and approved it).

But isn’t this how the courts want these claims to be handled? There were complaints made, she was given a platform to address her concerns, they heard her concerns, changes were made.

I guess I don’t understand why there would be retaliation if things didn’t escalate to the point of an investigation. She had issues, they were addressed. What is to retaliate against?

And if the scenes that were shot did not require an IC, why did she sort of turn it act like they didn’t have an IC on set? You just said that the scenes I mentioned that would require an IC, were shot after the complaints were made, and there was an IC in set. So she was sort of preemptively complaining that there wouldn’t be an IC onset? I don’t understand. The scene that she was complaining about weren’t standard for an IC.

Certainly when she pulled in Sony those emails seem to be very cordial to wayfarer, even sort of agreeing with them, gosh she is pretty demanding, but sigh, sure we can add another producer on set. Obviously, I’m paraphrasing, but the emails were certainly not wow we need to address safety issues. Or yikes there’s harassment going on in this set. They were like isn’t there a producer for this? Yes but she wants another? OK I guess we can do that. We will send Angie on set or whoever that woman was to make her more comfortable. Things like that. It just seemed very mundane and by the book and certainly there didn’t seem to be among executives any escalation of anything near harassment.

That’s why it just all seems to be coming out of left field. And then to say that others complained months after production and just seems very odd to me.

Nude scenes are always supposed to have an IC. Even if it's partial nudity. There was actually a profile of a birth scene in another movie (recent movie with Andrew Garfield and Florence Pugh) in the NYT last fall that mentioned that they had an IC for the scene because Pugh was nude below the waist for the scene. So if they expected Lively to be nude in that birth scene, they should have let her know in advance and had an IC.

I think also that while the issues were handled during the hiatus and there are no reports of problems after they came back from hiatus, it's not clear that Wayfarer handled the issues prior to the hiatus well at all. If there were complaints from multiple actresses and some of these problems happened multiple times even after Lively or others had complained, that's a real sign of a problem on set. Lively is getting dragged for the "17 point list" and criticized for making demands at that Jan. 4 meeting, but it sounds like her actions actually solved the problem in a way that nothing Wayfarer had done did. It should not be on an actress to address it in that way -- Wayfarer should have taken a stronger stance and proactively made some of the adjustments Lively ultimately had to demand under threat of not returning. If only to protect their own interest in the film. So no, I don't think courts want it to be handled "this way." I think the expectation is that employers should proactively seek to address problems and that you shouldn't have to rely on an employee willing to stick their neck out the way Lively did -- she was only able to do that because she does have market power and as star of the movie had sway with the studio. If she'd been an actress with a smaller role or less sway, she probably wouldn't have felt she could stand up for herself in that way and it's possible the problems from the first few weeks of filming would have persisted. That's a problem.

And given that not every employee is going to be empowered the way Lively was, it's all the more reason for courts to protect employees from retaliation for coming forth with harassment allegations. Because if someone with Lively's fame and power can be effectively trashed in the media in retaliation for making valid complaints about SH on set, then what message does that send to other employees with far less power? It tells them they better shut up or they, too, can be "buried."

If her 17 point list solved the problem, why was he put in the basement? This is the question they’ll need to answer b/c the retaliation seems to be on Blake’s part. She made her demands then proceeded to completely railroad over him with the threat of making her concerns (which everyone agrees had been addressed) public.

It's a question I'd love to see answered, since I don't think it benefited her in any way to have him walk the red carpet separately (he did not view the film from the basement, but a separate theater).

I have many questions.

I just googled so I didn’t have to go back to the complaints, but there’s a great article that shows all the texts with dates. It seems like all through the first part of the shoot, preproduction, and all they shot in May and June 2023 before the strike, they were getting along famously. Like really sweet texts to each other, she invites him on a private plane with her and her children so that they can work and not lose time, she’s picking him up Matcha tea orders. Just like going out of their way to be kind and respectful to each other. Not only in a professional way, but in a true friendly way.

Then production obviously shut down that summer. Texts pick back up in August, he reaches out with a sweet birthday message and talks about editing. And then some of her requests for viewing the dailys start up. But like it really seems like the first part of the shoot they got along really well. I think, were they stunned to find that in November she starts talking about this list and putting together this list for this January 4 meeting? And Ryan berates him for fat shaming at the January 4, 2024 meeting, but that happened almost a year prior and preproduction when he was working with the trainer. Why the delay? Did he just find out about it during the shutdown? Did they go to the trainer and say hey did you experience anything weird with Justin when you were talking with him? And the trainer said well yeah he did ask me about Blake’s weight? I’m so confused why they were getting along for months and months, production shut down, she wanted to get more in the editing process and maybe wasn’t getting her way for a little while, and then things just really really took a turn. I’m not seeing any gradual drop off. I’m seeing really friendly, respectful texts, and then all of a sudden him being screamed at at a meeting with the 17 point list that he has to respond to.

It seems like tension started when she didn’t feel like she was getting her way with requests to see the dailies? Which is weird because eventually they did let her see all the dailies and she got everything that she wanted, including full editing power of the film. Or people’s theories that Ryan got a hold of the dailies and didn’t like what he was seeing with flirtatious behavior? I can’t figure it out, but it just seems really really weird that there was this turn.

Google the Molly McPherson podcast. She lays out a very convincing timeline for all of this and notes the abrupt shift. That shift coincides with Ryan coming back from filming in Australia.

So your theory is that Ryan got jealous or got pissed for some reason and initiated a lot of this? Blake just went along? I don’t think that’s a bad theory. I don’t think there was ever anything going on with Blake and Justin. I think they had an innocent friendship. But Ryan is as controlling as people say he might not have seen it that way. Or maybe it had nothing to do with their relationship and more of him just seeing this as a way to get control of the sequel. I don’t know.

Interesting in Blake’s new filing, she reveals that there’s a text exchange between their publicist and Ryan, it’s about this movie and Blake, but it’s to Ryan. Now you could say, she’s a mom of 4 and he wants to protect her from some of this because it’s stressful, but it just strike me that he infantilizes Blake and it’s just very controlling.

Also interesting, when the trainer addressed the fat shaming rumors, he was very vague in his instagram but said he had an uncomfortable conversation with Justin and decided to no longer work with him. That same phrase was used in the letter that Ryan and Blake gave Justin to release to the world, that he had done all these bad things, and it was time to have an uncomfortable conversation. A few podcasts I follow thought that was a tell that Ryan had written both of the statements lol.

Wild if true.

It's been a few weeks since I listened to it, but she's been pointing the finger towards Reynolds since last August as the missing piece in all of this. Her theory (as a PR pro, not as a lawyer) is that things are generally going really well between Blake and Justin while Ryan is away. Postpartum Blake is happy to get out of the house and have something away from the kids and Justin, very much unlike her husband, is this really sensitive (sometimes cringe-ily so!) guy who is really supportive, happy about collaborating with her, and generally a source of support. There's nothing "untoward" happening and Justin isn't really playing ball even when Blake is a little boundary pushing, but they're friends, they're vibing.

Blake is a diva and Justin is generally extremely accomodating but they both low-key grouch a little to their friends and spouses, as one does about their workplace.

Then the writers strike happens and control-freak (McPherson has some interesting examples of this and some inside baseball insights) Ryan is back in NY in an environment where no one can work. He's kind of tired of hearing about this Justin guy all the time, who he considers to be a pathetic beta-male nobody plus he's not really a fan of his wife having male friends. He's also got a head full of steam, narcissism and ego on max mode coming back from his own film where he managed to completely take over and thinks, why not this one too? They invite Justin over and absolutely tear him a new one in a way that's so severe the exec said he had never seen anything like it. Ryan is back and the rest of this production is going to be a lot different with him in town!

Baldoni is totally freaked out. Leaves the apologetic cringe voicemail. He's also very confused where this is coming from. Of course he didn't "fat shame" or whatever, what's this about? This is where Ryan begins to put the takeover plan into action. He has the reins now. It's unclear how Blake feels about it, but she's swayed by her husband and desperate for approval as more than an actress, so she's along for the ride. Plus, who tf is Baldoni anyway? They're A-listers! Ryan did the same thing!

At this point, the horse is out of the barn and there's all the rest of it we know with the NYT and PR firms and premiere and everything, but this is the theory on how this started and jumped the shark to where we are now.

Oh, and her takeaway she's been saying since last summer in this PR battle is that this ALWAYS been a battle of power and money. It's not about the birth scene. It's not about hiring a friend. It's about who has the power and how can they use it to own the other party. She predicts Baldoni walks away a little wounded but generally good in terms of reputation. Ryan and Blake do not. Blake can regain her reputation but it is going to take work and probably won't happen until years down the line when they divorce (which she thinks is almost a certainty).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is interesting to me having seen the movie is that there were two much more intimate scenes that Blake must’ve felt comfortable with because after all those months, I’ve not seen a word written or spoken about it.

There was one scene where Justin’s character basically almost attempts rape and she talks him down. It was probably a tough scene to film, and she didn’t seem to have a problem with that. I imagine because it was such a tough scene that protocol was followed to the letter and she couldn’t really say anything about it. I’m sure the intimacy coordinator was on set, even though they were clothed, as his character does overpower her, even though it doesn’t get very sexual and is stopped.

There is one other scene where he undresses her a little bit. She’s in high waisted fishnet stockings, and a bra, so not nude, and I think they kiss and he kind of tucked her in bed and leaves.

Those two seemed much more intimate, harder to film scenes, and she didn’t have a problem with that. Clearly, the IC must’ve been there and protocol followed.

But given all the rest that I’ve seen, it just seems like maybe she took advantage of the scenes where there wouldn’t be an IC and there would be more left to people to interpret. For example an IC has come out and said the dancing scene would not typically require an IC, because they were fully clothed, and there was no simulating sex. I mean, they were clearly in public in a bar. So it just seems like she took advantage of that to talk about how she didn’t feel comfortable in intimate scenes.

Same with the birthing scene. I’m not sure that there would’ve been a ic there because she wasn’t nude. I know there’s back-and-forth and whether they wanted her nude, but given the fact that there was no IC there it leads me to believe, well, she’s lying. She was covered and there was clearly no sex being simulated. I’ve watched the scene again and I just don’t get it. The guy playing the doctor was pretty far away from her. There were just lots of close-up shots of her face. And one of her legs.

I feel like she just took whatever scenes might be somewhat ambiguous and made them sound worse than they were.

All scripted sex scenes and nudity were filmed after the hiatus. The scenes you are referencing were filmed after they came back from hiatus and after Baldoni and Wayfarer had agreed to her demands. Her amended complaint even references how a major reason she felt she needed to voice her concerns and get an agreement regarding having an IC with her at all times was because she was dreading going back to set and having to film these scenes with him.

This is in Baldoni's complaint as well, btw. His timeline specifically talks about how all the scripted sex scenes were filmed post-hiatus. You can control+F it if you don't believe me.

So she was comfortable with those scenes because they were handled professionally thanks to her intervention to ensure that an IC would be present and they would be choreographed and that all elements of the scenes would have consent of all parties. And also that the *scripted* nudity in these scenes would be covered by a valid nudity rider. Whereas the nudity in the birth scene was unscripted and they didn't even have a nudity rider in place when it happened (because Lively's team was not expecting it to be a nude scene so they didn't realize this was potentially why Wayfarer was trying to push them to sign the nudity rider with very little time to review and before an IC had reviewed and approved it).

But isn’t this how the courts want these claims to be handled? There were complaints made, she was given a platform to address her concerns, they heard her concerns, changes were made.

I guess I don’t understand why there would be retaliation if things didn’t escalate to the point of an investigation. She had issues, they were addressed. What is to retaliate against?

And if the scenes that were shot did not require an IC, why did she sort of turn it act like they didn’t have an IC on set? You just said that the scenes I mentioned that would require an IC, were shot after the complaints were made, and there was an IC in set. So she was sort of preemptively complaining that there wouldn’t be an IC onset? I don’t understand. The scene that she was complaining about weren’t standard for an IC.

Certainly when she pulled in Sony those emails seem to be very cordial to wayfarer, even sort of agreeing with them, gosh she is pretty demanding, but sigh, sure we can add another producer on set. Obviously, I’m paraphrasing, but the emails were certainly not wow we need to address safety issues. Or yikes there’s harassment going on in this set. They were like isn’t there a producer for this? Yes but she wants another? OK I guess we can do that. We will send Angie on set or whoever that woman was to make her more comfortable. Things like that. It just seemed very mundane and by the book and certainly there didn’t seem to be among executives any escalation of anything near harassment.

That’s why it just all seems to be coming out of left field. And then to say that others complained months after production and just seems very odd to me.

Nude scenes are always supposed to have an IC. Even if it's partial nudity. There was actually a profile of a birth scene in another movie (recent movie with Andrew Garfield and Florence Pugh) in the NYT last fall that mentioned that they had an IC for the scene because Pugh was nude below the waist for the scene. So if they expected Lively to be nude in that birth scene, they should have let her know in advance and had an IC.

I think also that while the issues were handled during the hiatus and there are no reports of problems after they came back from hiatus, it's not clear that Wayfarer handled the issues prior to the hiatus well at all. If there were complaints from multiple actresses and some of these problems happened multiple times even after Lively or others had complained, that's a real sign of a problem on set. Lively is getting dragged for the "17 point list" and criticized for making demands at that Jan. 4 meeting, but it sounds like her actions actually solved the problem in a way that nothing Wayfarer had done did. It should not be on an actress to address it in that way -- Wayfarer should have taken a stronger stance and proactively made some of the adjustments Lively ultimately had to demand under threat of not returning. If only to protect their own interest in the film. So no, I don't think courts want it to be handled "this way." I think the expectation is that employers should proactively seek to address problems and that you shouldn't have to rely on an employee willing to stick their neck out the way Lively did -- she was only able to do that because she does have market power and as star of the movie had sway with the studio. If she'd been an actress with a smaller role or less sway, she probably wouldn't have felt she could stand up for herself in that way and it's possible the problems from the first few weeks of filming would have persisted. That's a problem.

And given that not every employee is going to be empowered the way Lively was, it's all the more reason for courts to protect employees from retaliation for coming forth with harassment allegations. Because if someone with Lively's fame and power can be effectively trashed in the media in retaliation for making valid complaints about SH on set, then what message does that send to other employees with far less power? It tells them they better shut up or they, too, can be "buried."

If her 17 point list solved the problem, why was he put in the basement? This is the question they’ll need to answer b/c the retaliation seems to be on Blake’s part. She made her demands then proceeded to completely railroad over him with the threat of making her concerns (which everyone agrees had been addressed) public.

It's a question I'd love to see answered, since I don't think it benefited her in any way to have him walk the red carpet separately (he did not view the film from the basement, but a separate theater).

I have many questions.

I just googled so I didn’t have to go back to the complaints, but there’s a great article that shows all the texts with dates. It seems like all through the first part of the shoot, preproduction, and all they shot in May and June 2023 before the strike, they were getting along famously. Like really sweet texts to each other, she invites him on a private plane with her and her children so that they can work and not lose time, she’s picking him up Matcha tea orders. Just like going out of their way to be kind and respectful to each other. Not only in a professional way, but in a true friendly way.

Then production obviously shut down that summer. Texts pick back up in August, he reaches out with a sweet birthday message and talks about editing. And then some of her requests for viewing the dailys start up. But like it really seems like the first part of the shoot they got along really well. I think, were they stunned to find that in November she starts talking about this list and putting together this list for this January 4 meeting? And Ryan berates him for fat shaming at the January 4, 2024 meeting, but that happened almost a year prior and preproduction when he was working with the trainer. Why the delay? Did he just find out about it during the shutdown? Did they go to the trainer and say hey did you experience anything weird with Justin when you were talking with him? And the trainer said well yeah he did ask me about Blake’s weight? I’m so confused why they were getting along for months and months, production shut down, she wanted to get more in the editing process and maybe wasn’t getting her way for a little while, and then things just really really took a turn. I’m not seeing any gradual drop off. I’m seeing really friendly, respectful texts, and then all of a sudden him being screamed at at a meeting with the 17 point list that he has to respond to.

It seems like tension started when she didn’t feel like she was getting her way with requests to see the dailies? Which is weird because eventually they did let her see all the dailies and she got everything that she wanted, including full editing power of the film. Or people’s theories that Ryan got a hold of the dailies and didn’t like what he was seeing with flirtatious behavior? I can’t figure it out, but it just seems really really weird that there was this turn.

Google the Molly McPherson podcast. She lays out a very convincing timeline for all of this and notes the abrupt shift. That shift coincides with Ryan coming back from filming in Australia.

So your theory is that Ryan got jealous or got pissed for some reason and initiated a lot of this? Blake just went along? I don’t think that’s a bad theory. I don’t think there was ever anything going on with Blake and Justin. I think they had an innocent friendship. But Ryan is as controlling as people say he might not have seen it that way. Or maybe it had nothing to do with their relationship and more of him just seeing this as a way to get control of the sequel. I don’t know.

Interesting in Blake’s new filing, she reveals that there’s a text exchange between their publicist and Ryan, it’s about this movie and Blake, but it’s to Ryan. Now you could say, she’s a mom of 4 and he wants to protect her from some of this because it’s stressful, but it just strike me that he infantilizes Blake and it’s just very controlling.

Also interesting, when the trainer addressed the fat shaming rumors, he was very vague in his instagram but said he had an uncomfortable conversation with Justin and decided to no longer work with him. That same phrase was used in the letter that Ryan and Blake gave Justin to release to the world, that he had done all these bad things, and it was time to have an uncomfortable conversation. A few podcasts I follow thought that was a tell that Ryan had written both of the statements lol.

Wild if true.

It's been a few weeks since I listened to it, but she's been pointing the finger towards Reynolds since last August as the missing piece in all of this. Her theory (as a PR pro, not as a lawyer) is that things are generally going really well between Blake and Justin while Ryan is away. Postpartum Blake is happy to get out of the house and have something away from the kids and Justin, very much unlike her husband, is this really sensitive (sometimes cringe-ily so!) guy who is really supportive, happy about collaborating with her, and generally a source of support. There's nothing "untoward" happening and Justin isn't really playing ball even when Blake is a little boundary pushing, but they're friends, they're vibing.

Blake is a diva and Justin is generally extremely accomodating but they both low-key grouch a little to their friends and spouses, as one does about their workplace.

Then the writers strike happens and control-freak (McPherson has some interesting examples of this and some inside baseball insights) Ryan is back in NY in an environment where no one can work. He's kind of tired of hearing about this Justin guy all the time, who he considers to be a pathetic beta-male nobody plus he's not really a fan of his wife having male friends. He's also got a head full of steam, narcissism and ego on max mode coming back from his own film where he managed to completely take over and thinks, why not this one too? They invite Justin over and absolutely tear him a new one in a way that's so severe the exec said he had never seen anything like it. Ryan is back and the rest of this production is going to be a lot different with him in town!

Baldoni is totally freaked out. Leaves the apologetic cringe voicemail. He's also very confused where this is coming from. Of course he didn't "fat shame" or whatever, what's this about? This is where Ryan begins to put the takeover plan into action. He has the reins now. It's unclear how Blake feels about it, but she's swayed by her husband and desperate for approval as more than an actress, so she's along for the ride. Plus, who tf is Baldoni anyway? They're A-listers! Ryan did the same thing!

At this point, the horse is out of the barn and there's all the rest of it we know with the NYT and PR firms and premiere and everything, but this is the theory on how this started and jumped the shark to where we are now.

Oh, and her takeaway she's been saying since last summer in this PR battle is that this ALWAYS been a battle of power and money. It's not about the birth scene. It's not about hiring a friend. It's about who has the power and how can they use it to own the other party. She predicts Baldoni walks away a little wounded but generally good in terms of reputation. Ryan and Blake do not. Blake can regain her reputation but it is going to take work and probably won't happen until years down the line when they divorce (which she thinks is almost a certainty).

I think they’ll divorce when it’s all said and done, too. The texts between Justin and Blake were flirty. There were vibes. Ryan is likely pissed but can’t show it publicly while they’re in litigation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is interesting to me having seen the movie is that there were two much more intimate scenes that Blake must’ve felt comfortable with because after all those months, I’ve not seen a word written or spoken about it.

There was one scene where Justin’s character basically almost attempts rape and she talks him down. It was probably a tough scene to film, and she didn’t seem to have a problem with that. I imagine because it was such a tough scene that protocol was followed to the letter and she couldn’t really say anything about it. I’m sure the intimacy coordinator was on set, even though they were clothed, as his character does overpower her, even though it doesn’t get very sexual and is stopped.

There is one other scene where he undresses her a little bit. She’s in high waisted fishnet stockings, and a bra, so not nude, and I think they kiss and he kind of tucked her in bed and leaves.

Those two seemed much more intimate, harder to film scenes, and she didn’t have a problem with that. Clearly, the IC must’ve been there and protocol followed.

But given all the rest that I’ve seen, it just seems like maybe she took advantage of the scenes where there wouldn’t be an IC and there would be more left to people to interpret. For example an IC has come out and said the dancing scene would not typically require an IC, because they were fully clothed, and there was no simulating sex. I mean, they were clearly in public in a bar. So it just seems like she took advantage of that to talk about how she didn’t feel comfortable in intimate scenes.

Same with the birthing scene. I’m not sure that there would’ve been a ic there because she wasn’t nude. I know there’s back-and-forth and whether they wanted her nude, but given the fact that there was no IC there it leads me to believe, well, she’s lying. She was covered and there was clearly no sex being simulated. I’ve watched the scene again and I just don’t get it. The guy playing the doctor was pretty far away from her. There were just lots of close-up shots of her face. And one of her legs.

I feel like she just took whatever scenes might be somewhat ambiguous and made them sound worse than they were.

All scripted sex scenes and nudity were filmed after the hiatus. The scenes you are referencing were filmed after they came back from hiatus and after Baldoni and Wayfarer had agreed to her demands. Her amended complaint even references how a major reason she felt she needed to voice her concerns and get an agreement regarding having an IC with her at all times was because she was dreading going back to set and having to film these scenes with him.

This is in Baldoni's complaint as well, btw. His timeline specifically talks about how all the scripted sex scenes were filmed post-hiatus. You can control+F it if you don't believe me.

So she was comfortable with those scenes because they were handled professionally thanks to her intervention to ensure that an IC would be present and they would be choreographed and that all elements of the scenes would have consent of all parties. And also that the *scripted* nudity in these scenes would be covered by a valid nudity rider. Whereas the nudity in the birth scene was unscripted and they didn't even have a nudity rider in place when it happened (because Lively's team was not expecting it to be a nude scene so they didn't realize this was potentially why Wayfarer was trying to push them to sign the nudity rider with very little time to review and before an IC had reviewed and approved it).

But isn’t this how the courts want these claims to be handled? There were complaints made, she was given a platform to address her concerns, they heard her concerns, changes were made.

I guess I don’t understand why there would be retaliation if things didn’t escalate to the point of an investigation. She had issues, they were addressed. What is to retaliate against?

And if the scenes that were shot did not require an IC, why did she sort of turn it act like they didn’t have an IC on set? You just said that the scenes I mentioned that would require an IC, were shot after the complaints were made, and there was an IC in set. So she was sort of preemptively complaining that there wouldn’t be an IC onset? I don’t understand. The scene that she was complaining about weren’t standard for an IC.

Certainly when she pulled in Sony those emails seem to be very cordial to wayfarer, even sort of agreeing with them, gosh she is pretty demanding, but sigh, sure we can add another producer on set. Obviously, I’m paraphrasing, but the emails were certainly not wow we need to address safety issues. Or yikes there’s harassment going on in this set. They were like isn’t there a producer for this? Yes but she wants another? OK I guess we can do that. We will send Angie on set or whoever that woman was to make her more comfortable. Things like that. It just seemed very mundane and by the book and certainly there didn’t seem to be among executives any escalation of anything near harassment.

That’s why it just all seems to be coming out of left field. And then to say that others complained months after production and just seems very odd to me.

Nude scenes are always supposed to have an IC. Even if it's partial nudity. There was actually a profile of a birth scene in another movie (recent movie with Andrew Garfield and Florence Pugh) in the NYT last fall that mentioned that they had an IC for the scene because Pugh was nude below the waist for the scene. So if they expected Lively to be nude in that birth scene, they should have let her know in advance and had an IC.

I think also that while the issues were handled during the hiatus and there are no reports of problems after they came back from hiatus, it's not clear that Wayfarer handled the issues prior to the hiatus well at all. If there were complaints from multiple actresses and some of these problems happened multiple times even after Lively or others had complained, that's a real sign of a problem on set. Lively is getting dragged for the "17 point list" and criticized for making demands at that Jan. 4 meeting, but it sounds like her actions actually solved the problem in a way that nothing Wayfarer had done did. It should not be on an actress to address it in that way -- Wayfarer should have taken a stronger stance and proactively made some of the adjustments Lively ultimately had to demand under threat of not returning. If only to protect their own interest in the film. So no, I don't think courts want it to be handled "this way." I think the expectation is that employers should proactively seek to address problems and that you shouldn't have to rely on an employee willing to stick their neck out the way Lively did -- she was only able to do that because she does have market power and as star of the movie had sway with the studio. If she'd been an actress with a smaller role or less sway, she probably wouldn't have felt she could stand up for herself in that way and it's possible the problems from the first few weeks of filming would have persisted. That's a problem.

And given that not every employee is going to be empowered the way Lively was, it's all the more reason for courts to protect employees from retaliation for coming forth with harassment allegations. Because if someone with Lively's fame and power can be effectively trashed in the media in retaliation for making valid complaints about SH on set, then what message does that send to other employees with far less power? It tells them they better shut up or they, too, can be "buried."

If her 17 point list solved the problem, why was he put in the basement? This is the question they’ll need to answer b/c the retaliation seems to be on Blake’s part. She made her demands then proceeded to completely railroad over him with the threat of making her concerns (which everyone agrees had been addressed) public.

It's a question I'd love to see answered, since I don't think it benefited her in any way to have him walk the red carpet separately (he did not view the film from the basement, but a separate theater).

I have many questions.

I just googled so I didn’t have to go back to the complaints, but there’s a great article that shows all the texts with dates. It seems like all through the first part of the shoot, preproduction, and all they shot in May and June 2023 before the strike, they were getting along famously. Like really sweet texts to each other, she invites him on a private plane with her and her children so that they can work and not lose time, she’s picking him up Matcha tea orders. Just like going out of their way to be kind and respectful to each other. Not only in a professional way, but in a true friendly way.

Then production obviously shut down that summer. Texts pick back up in August, he reaches out with a sweet birthday message and talks about editing. And then some of her requests for viewing the dailys start up. But like it really seems like the first part of the shoot they got along really well. I think, were they stunned to find that in November she starts talking about this list and putting together this list for this January 4 meeting? And Ryan berates him for fat shaming at the January 4, 2024 meeting, but that happened almost a year prior and preproduction when he was working with the trainer. Why the delay? Did he just find out about it during the shutdown? Did they go to the trainer and say hey did you experience anything weird with Justin when you were talking with him? And the trainer said well yeah he did ask me about Blake’s weight? I’m so confused why they were getting along for months and months, production shut down, she wanted to get more in the editing process and maybe wasn’t getting her way for a little while, and then things just really really took a turn. I’m not seeing any gradual drop off. I’m seeing really friendly, respectful texts, and then all of a sudden him being screamed at at a meeting with the 17 point list that he has to respond to.

It seems like tension started when she didn’t feel like she was getting her way with requests to see the dailies? Which is weird because eventually they did let her see all the dailies and she got everything that she wanted, including full editing power of the film. Or people’s theories that Ryan got a hold of the dailies and didn’t like what he was seeing with flirtatious behavior? I can’t figure it out, but it just seems really really weird that there was this turn.

Google the Molly McPherson podcast. She lays out a very convincing timeline for all of this and notes the abrupt shift. That shift coincides with Ryan coming back from filming in Australia.

So your theory is that Ryan got jealous or got pissed for some reason and initiated a lot of this? Blake just went along? I don’t think that’s a bad theory. I don’t think there was ever anything going on with Blake and Justin. I think they had an innocent friendship. But Ryan is as controlling as people say he might not have seen it that way. Or maybe it had nothing to do with their relationship and more of him just seeing this as a way to get control of the sequel. I don’t know.

Interesting in Blake’s new filing, she reveals that there’s a text exchange between their publicist and Ryan, it’s about this movie and Blake, but it’s to Ryan. Now you could say, she’s a mom of 4 and he wants to protect her from some of this because it’s stressful, but it just strike me that he infantilizes Blake and it’s just very controlling.

Also interesting, when the trainer addressed the fat shaming rumors, he was very vague in his instagram but said he had an uncomfortable conversation with Justin and decided to no longer work with him. That same phrase was used in the letter that Ryan and Blake gave Justin to release to the world, that he had done all these bad things, and it was time to have an uncomfortable conversation. A few podcasts I follow thought that was a tell that Ryan had written both of the statements lol.

Wild if true.

This will be hard to prove with spousal privilege, but it does sound plausible. Ryan and Blake both have a history of hooking up with coworkers. The phrase “you lose them how you get them” comes to mind. She dated her gossip girl costar (who looks like a less attractive version of Justin) for 3 years while they were filming. She met Ryan on the set of green lantern while he was very much still married to scarlet Johansson and married him within a year of their divorce. With this kind of history, he may be very insecure about her on screen romances and vice versa.

Yes!! He is probably totally insecure.

Yes, plus the nudie pics (at a minimum...) to a very much married Affleck. I think he's generally a control freak and would be with any woman he was with (he was with Alanis and Scarlet and to my knowledge there was nothing scandalous there, they just found him oppressive) but he definitely has some reason to be wary with Blake.

[Anonymous]

Two things that struck me about the amended complaint. There is a really annoying pattern of using actual text messages, that at least appear to be legit downloaded messages. And then paraphrasing and quoting other messages. Seems to be a mix and it makes it seem like anything that’s not a downloaded message screenshot type of thing is fake or paraphrased to change meaning. Might work for public opinion or grabbing headlines, but can’t imagine that’s going stand as evidence in court.

Second kind of glaring thing. Seems like on around May 23 24th or something happened on that set. I believe that might’ve been with the birthing scene was filmed. There’s text messages back-and-forth between Blake and a female cast member. They want to imply in this amendment that sexual harassment happened around this time. But what strikes me is the text messages are so very vague.

So like I was waiting for proof that Blake was really uncomfortable with the OB/GYN actor. I was sort of expecting a text, “can’t believe he bought in his unqualified friend, really grossed out and freaked out right now.” Anything of that nature. But the texts from that time, are things like, sorry today was hard. It implied like a heaviness, but nothing of a sexual nature. In other words, not clear whether the dispute onset were in fact, creative differences, or that was around the time the two assistant directors were fired because of Blake. It could be any tension on set and nothing points to anything sexual in nature. They’re putting it together in a narrative way as as if to heavily imply that, but there’s actually no evidence of that.

I was just waiting for something more definitive. A text or an email to Sony or to Blake’s own team… I’m uncomfortable with the actor they bought in to play the doctor. Or even, this was not scripted. I mean, people pull in their agents and managers all the time especially high profile people.

Did anyone watch the perfect couple on Netflix with Nicole Kidman? The dancing scene at the beginning was apparently really controversial. And the actors were saying that when it came time to film, everyone had their agents and managers on the phone complaining that they didn’t agree to dance. It was apparently a last minute add by the director who thought it would be a fun way to open the show. It turned out to be a funny story, and they all eventually agreed to do it, but the point was that is how high profile actors work when there’s a creative difference or something that they didn’t agree to. They call someone on their team. It’s just weird that there’s no evidence that Blake seemed to have done that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is interesting to me having seen the movie is that there were two much more intimate scenes that Blake must’ve felt comfortable with because after all those months, I’ve not seen a word written or spoken about it.

There was one scene where Justin’s character basically almost attempts rape and she talks him down. It was probably a tough scene to film, and she didn’t seem to have a problem with that. I imagine because it was such a tough scene that protocol was followed to the letter and she couldn’t really say anything about it. I’m sure the intimacy coordinator was on set, even though they were clothed, as his character does overpower her, even though it doesn’t get very sexual and is stopped.

There is one other scene where he undresses her a little bit. She’s in high waisted fishnet stockings, and a bra, so not nude, and I think they kiss and he kind of tucked her in bed and leaves.

Those two seemed much more intimate, harder to film scenes, and she didn’t have a problem with that. Clearly, the IC must’ve been there and protocol followed.

But given all the rest that I’ve seen, it just seems like maybe she took advantage of the scenes where there wouldn’t be an IC and there would be more left to people to interpret. For example an IC has come out and said the dancing scene would not typically require an IC, because they were fully clothed, and there was no simulating sex. I mean, they were clearly in public in a bar. So it just seems like she took advantage of that to talk about how she didn’t feel comfortable in intimate scenes.

Same with the birthing scene. I’m not sure that there would’ve been a ic there because she wasn’t nude. I know there’s back-and-forth and whether they wanted her nude, but given the fact that there was no IC there it leads me to believe, well, she’s lying. She was covered and there was clearly no sex being simulated. I’ve watched the scene again and I just don’t get it. The guy playing the doctor was pretty far away from her. There were just lots of close-up shots of her face. And one of her legs.

I feel like she just took whatever scenes might be somewhat ambiguous and made them sound worse than they were.

All scripted sex scenes and nudity were filmed after the hiatus. The scenes you are referencing were filmed after they came back from hiatus and after Baldoni and Wayfarer had agreed to her demands. Her amended complaint even references how a major reason she felt she needed to voice her concerns and get an agreement regarding having an IC with her at all times was because she was dreading going back to set and having to film these scenes with him.

This is in Baldoni's complaint as well, btw. His timeline specifically talks about how all the scripted sex scenes were filmed post-hiatus. You can control+F it if you don't believe me.

So she was comfortable with those scenes because they were handled professionally thanks to her intervention to ensure that an IC would be present and they would be choreographed and that all elements of the scenes would have consent of all parties. And also that the *scripted* nudity in these scenes would be covered by a valid nudity rider. Whereas the nudity in the birth scene was unscripted and they didn't even have a nudity rider in place when it happened (because Lively's team was not expecting it to be a nude scene so they didn't realize this was potentially why Wayfarer was trying to push them to sign the nudity rider with very little time to review and before an IC had reviewed and approved it).

But isn’t this how the courts want these claims to be handled? There were complaints made, she was given a platform to address her concerns, they heard her concerns, changes were made.

I guess I don’t understand why there would be retaliation if things didn’t escalate to the point of an investigation. She had issues, they were addressed. What is to retaliate against?

And if the scenes that were shot did not require an IC, why did she sort of turn it act like they didn’t have an IC on set? You just said that the scenes I mentioned that would require an IC, were shot after the complaints were made, and there was an IC in set. So she was sort of preemptively complaining that there wouldn’t be an IC onset? I don’t understand. The scene that she was complaining about weren’t standard for an IC.

Certainly when she pulled in Sony those emails seem to be very cordial to wayfarer, even sort of agreeing with them, gosh she is pretty demanding, but sigh, sure we can add another producer on set. Obviously, I’m paraphrasing, but the emails were certainly not wow we need to address safety issues. Or yikes there’s harassment going on in this set. They were like isn’t there a producer for this? Yes but she wants another? OK I guess we can do that. We will send Angie on set or whoever that woman was to make her more comfortable. Things like that. It just seemed very mundane and by the book and certainly there didn’t seem to be among executives any escalation of anything near harassment.

That’s why it just all seems to be coming out of left field. And then to say that others complained months after production and just seems very odd to me.

Nude scenes are always supposed to have an IC. Even if it's partial nudity. There was actually a profile of a birth scene in another movie (recent movie with Andrew Garfield and Florence Pugh) in the NYT last fall that mentioned that they had an IC for the scene because Pugh was nude below the waist for the scene. So if they expected Lively to be nude in that birth scene, they should have let her know in advance and had an IC.

I think also that while the issues were handled during the hiatus and there are no reports of problems after they came back from hiatus, it's not clear that Wayfarer handled the issues prior to the hiatus well at all. If there were complaints from multiple actresses and some of these problems happened multiple times even after Lively or others had complained, that's a real sign of a problem on set. Lively is getting dragged for the "17 point list" and criticized for making demands at that Jan. 4 meeting, but it sounds like her actions actually solved the problem in a way that nothing Wayfarer had done did. It should not be on an actress to address it in that way -- Wayfarer should have taken a stronger stance and proactively made some of the adjustments Lively ultimately had to demand under threat of not returning. If only to protect their own interest in the film. So no, I don't think courts want it to be handled "this way." I think the expectation is that employers should proactively seek to address problems and that you shouldn't have to rely on an employee willing to stick their neck out the way Lively did -- she was only able to do that because she does have market power and as star of the movie had sway with the studio. If she'd been an actress with a smaller role or less sway, she probably wouldn't have felt she could stand up for herself in that way and it's possible the problems from the first few weeks of filming would have persisted. That's a problem.

And given that not every employee is going to be empowered the way Lively was, it's all the more reason for courts to protect employees from retaliation for coming forth with harassment allegations. Because if someone with Lively's fame and power can be effectively trashed in the media in retaliation for making valid complaints about SH on set, then what message does that send to other employees with far less power? It tells them they better shut up or they, too, can be "buried."

If her 17 point list solved the problem, why was he put in the basement? This is the question they’ll need to answer b/c the retaliation seems to be on Blake’s part. She made her demands then proceeded to completely railroad over him with the threat of making her concerns (which everyone agrees had been addressed) public.

It's a question I'd love to see answered, since I don't think it benefited her in any way to have him walk the red carpet separately (he did not view the film from the basement, but a separate theater).

I have many questions.

I just googled so I didn’t have to go back to the complaints, but there’s a great article that shows all the texts with dates. It seems like all through the first part of the shoot, preproduction, and all they shot in May and June 2023 before the strike, they were getting along famously. Like really sweet texts to each other, she invites him on a private plane with her and her children so that they can work and not lose time, she’s picking him up Matcha tea orders. Just like going out of their way to be kind and respectful to each other. Not only in a professional way, but in a true friendly way.

Then production obviously shut down that summer. Texts pick back up in August, he reaches out with a sweet birthday message and talks about editing. And then some of her requests for viewing the dailys start up. But like it really seems like the first part of the shoot they got along really well. I think, were they stunned to find that in November she starts talking about this list and putting together this list for this January 4 meeting? And Ryan berates him for fat shaming at the January 4, 2024 meeting, but that happened almost a year prior and preproduction when he was working with the trainer. Why the delay? Did he just find out about it during the shutdown? Did they go to the trainer and say hey did you experience anything weird with Justin when you were talking with him? And the trainer said well yeah he did ask me about Blake’s weight? I’m so confused why they were getting along for months and months, production shut down, she wanted to get more in the editing process and maybe wasn’t getting her way for a little while, and then things just really really took a turn. I’m not seeing any gradual drop off. I’m seeing really friendly, respectful texts, and then all of a sudden him being screamed at at a meeting with the 17 point list that he has to respond to.

It seems like tension started when she didn’t feel like she was getting her way with requests to see the dailies? Which is weird because eventually they did let her see all the dailies and she got everything that she wanted, including full editing power of the film. Or people’s theories that Ryan got a hold of the dailies and didn’t like what he was seeing with flirtatious behavior? I can’t figure it out, but it just seems really really weird that there was this turn.

Google the Molly McPherson podcast. She lays out a very convincing timeline for all of this and notes the abrupt shift. That shift coincides with Ryan coming back from filming in Australia.

So your theory is that Ryan got jealous or got pissed for some reason and initiated a lot of this? Blake just went along? I don’t think that’s a bad theory. I don’t think there was ever anything going on with Blake and Justin. I think they had an innocent friendship. But Ryan is as controlling as people say he might not have seen it that way. Or maybe it had nothing to do with their relationship and more of him just seeing this as a way to get control of the sequel. I don’t know.

Interesting in Blake’s new filing, she reveals that there’s a text exchange between their publicist and Ryan, it’s about this movie and Blake, but it’s to Ryan. Now you could say, she’s a mom of 4 and he wants to protect her from some of this because it’s stressful, but it just strike me that he infantilizes Blake and it’s just very controlling.

Also interesting, when the trainer addressed the fat shaming rumors, he was very vague in his instagram but said he had an uncomfortable conversation with Justin and decided to no longer work with him. That same phrase was used in the letter that Ryan and Blake gave Justin to release to the world, that he had done all these bad things, and it was time to have an uncomfortable conversation. A few podcasts I follow thought that was a tell that Ryan had written both of the statements lol.

Wild if true.

Blake isn’t some naive babe in the woods. She’s a schemer married to a schemer. They were both in on this scam. Of course Ryan thinks he’s smarter than her, because he is smarter than her. She’s a transparent idiot.

THAT SAID, Ryan has an out on this — throw her under the bus and blame her for gaslighting and manipulating him and twisting the truth. Then divorce her and trade up. Ryan seem like a protective husband, while Blake would be smeared as a compulsive lying wackjob. You could argue the SNL joke was Ryan soft launching throwing Blake under the bus…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The way some of you see all these people as heros, from Baldoni to Freedman to billionaire Sarowitz, is crazy to me. We truly are living in two different realities.

They aren’t seen as heroes. If someone could just post some credible proof that Justin was wrong that may sway some opinions. All that’s been proven so far is that a double standard existed and Blake appeared to be permitted do and say whatever she pleased. Justin was the producer of the film, as well as playing character Ryle. Justin was trying to produce a perfect film presumably. Producing a perfect film may look different from various perspectives, this was Justin’s perspective.

Nah, about 5 pages ago we had a pretty good consensus going that both sides here had overreached a bit and thereby assured relatively mutual destruction, and that Baldoni was no saint. But now someone is posting like "the billionaire backer [came in] with guns blazing with Freedman" as though they are truly saving the day for the righteous, when Baldoni is no princess in need of rescue here. He caused much of this all by himself. And plenty of "credible proof" has been shown to you throughout here, you hate Lively too much to see it that way, so I guess Baldoni's PR firm did their job really well. A+ for them.

Nope, don’t really care about Baldoni, I’m not familiar with him at all. He is no saint, who is? Certainly neither Blake nor Ryan. Objectively speaking, Justin looks less malicious here. He may be a pervert, he may cross boundaries, but he didn’t try to maliciously slander someone. He is now defending himself, and rightfully so. Both Blake and Ryan are coming across very badly here, maybe I am missing something? Some of the claims seem to be very exaggerated, if not outright lies. I don’t personally care about any of these people.

Again, we are just living in two realities if you think Baldoni hired Johnny Depo’s PR firm and questioned whether they were going hard enough for him for some purpose *other* than to destroy her in the public opinion.

I’m sorry, I just don’t think it makes sense to judge someone based on the prior clients of their PR rep. Blake’s PR person represented Harvey Weinstein.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Ryan and Blake gave Justin to release to Ryan and Blake both have a history of hooking up with coworkers.

So just like everyone else in the industry?

[Anonymous]

I’m convinced the nutty pro Blake troll might be Blake herself.