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…
What was the SNL joke? I’ve only seen part of the anniversary special, and he joked about eating a toxic conehead….came across as really cringey /awkward….
The conehead joke was clearly jammed in last minute and did not flow at all with the rest of the skit. Absolutely cringy and awkward. But the joke about Blake was when Tina or Amy said, oh Ryan Reynolds everyone. How are you?
And he goes, fine. Why, what have you heard?
People are criticizing him for obviously referencing everything they are going through in a joking manner, which could be disrespectful for Blake. Blake was sitting beside him, and obviously knew he was going to be part of the bit, but her reaction to that last part lead some people to believe that she didn’t know he was going to make that joke. Who knows.
What I really found interesting is that someone posted video at the end, Blake is standing awkwardly in the audience seating section after everyone has gotten up from the seats and are milling around. She’s standing alone and Ryan is up on stage. Funny enough he is up. there talking to Chevy Chase. He was out the night before and the only picture of the whole weekend of Blake and Ryan is with Chevy Chase. And people are speculating that no celebrities wanted selfies or pictures with them so it looks like he threw Blake under the bus to go freaking talk to Chevy Chase again. He just wanted to be up on that stage and he didn’t care that she was standing alone awkwardly.
There are times when I feel some sympathy for Blake for being married to him, but like a PP said before, they are schemers together so….
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…
What was the SNL joke? I’ve only seen part of the anniversary special, and he joked about eating a toxic conehead….came across as really cringey /awkward….
The conehead joke was clearly jammed in last minute and did not flow at all with the rest of the skit. Absolutely cringy and awkward. But the joke about Blake was when Tina or Amy said, oh Ryan Reynolds everyone. How are you?
And he goes, fine. Why, what have you heard?
People are criticizing him for obviously referencing everything they are going through in a joking manner, which could be disrespectful for Blake. Blake was sitting beside him, and obviously knew he was going to be part of the bit, but her reaction to that last part lead some people to believe that she didn’t know he was going to make that joke. Who knows.
What I really found interesting is that someone posted video at the end, Blake is standing awkwardly in the audience seating section after everyone has gotten up from the seats and are milling around. She’s standing alone and Ryan is up on stage. Funny enough he is up. there talking to Chevy Chase. He was out the night before and the only picture of the whole weekend of Blake and Ryan is with Chevy Chase. And people are speculating that no celebrities wanted selfies or pictures with them so it looks like he threw Blake under the bus to go freaking talk to Chevy Chase again. He just wanted to be up on that stage and he didn’t care that she was standing alone awkwardly.
There are times when I feel some sympathy for Blake for being married to him, but like a PP said before, they are schemers together so….
She was also seen hugging and talking to Amy Schumer. It definitely looked like Schumer was being supportive and kind, and that Lively looked nervous and uncomfortable but was grateful for Schumer. There are videos of it online, I'm on my phone and can't link right now.
I think people see what they want to see. A lot of people who, for some reason, have latched onto Baldoni as some kind of folk hero perceive everything Lively or Reynolds does through this prism where they are evil. The truth is I obviously a lot more nuanced and dramatic than that -- everyone involved in this mess is flawed and there are no villains. No matter where you land on whose narrative is more correct, both these people made errors in judgment, also have redeeming values, is a complex human with multiple facets.
I imagine it was hard for Lively to go to that event knowing the conversation about her online. She seems to have handled herself well.
Yes yes yes ma’am Baldoni is a folk hero. Before, I think people who saw BL as a liar were “jealous” and “wanted to marry him but he’ll never marry you!!” It’s hard out here for a huge years long fan (bot?!?!) of Baldoni.
Schumer issued a little statement saying she believed BL in December. Might be a little tricky to pull an I Don’t Know Her in public while they’re each in terrible for them gowns.
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…
What was the SNL joke? I’ve only seen part of the anniversary special, and he joked about eating a toxic conehead….came across as really cringey /awkward….
The conehead joke was clearly jammed in last minute and did not flow at all with the rest of the skit. Absolutely cringy and awkward. But the joke about Blake was when Tina or Amy said, oh Ryan Reynolds everyone. How are you?
And he goes, fine. Why, what have you heard?
People are criticizing him for obviously referencing everything they are going through in a joking manner, which could be disrespectful for Blake. Blake was sitting beside him, and obviously knew he was going to be part of the bit, but her reaction to that last part lead some people to believe that she didn’t know he was going to make that joke. Who knows.
What I really found interesting is that someone posted video at the end, Blake is standing awkwardly in the audience seating section after everyone has gotten up from the seats and are milling around. She’s standing alone and Ryan is up on stage. Funny enough he is up. there talking to Chevy Chase. He was out the night before and the only picture of the whole weekend of Blake and Ryan is with Chevy Chase. And people are speculating that no celebrities wanted selfies or pictures with them so it looks like he threw Blake under the bus to go freaking talk to Chevy Chase again. He just wanted to be up on that stage and he didn’t care that she was standing alone awkwardly.
There are times when I feel some sympathy for Blake for being married to him, but like a PP said before, they are schemers together so….
She was also seen hugging and talking to Amy Schumer. It definitely looked like Schumer was being supportive and kind, and that Lively looked nervous and uncomfortable but was grateful for Schumer. There are videos of it online, I'm on my phone and can't link right now.
I think people see what they want to see. A lot of people who, for some reason, have latched onto Baldoni as some kind of folk hero perceive everything Lively or Reynolds does through this prism where they are evil. The truth is I obviously a lot more nuanced and dramatic than that -- everyone involved in this mess is flawed and there are no villains. No matter where you land on whose narrative is more correct, both these people made errors in judgment, also have redeeming values, is a complex human with multiple facets.
I imagine it was hard for Lively to go to that event knowing the conversation about her online. She seems to have handled herself well.
For sure and she has also had a lot of death threats and threats of harm to her and her children so there is a significant vulnerability in going out in public when you have had those kinds of threats. I am sure they have had a lot of support in private. Amber Heard had similar vitriol online and she moved to Spain!
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…
What was the SNL joke? I’ve only seen part of the anniversary special, and he joked about eating a toxic conehead….came across as really cringey /awkward….
The conehead joke was clearly jammed in last minute and did not flow at all with the rest of the skit. Absolutely cringy and awkward. But the joke about Blake was when Tina or Amy said, oh Ryan Reynolds everyone. How are you?
And he goes, fine. Why, what have you heard?
People are criticizing him for obviously referencing everything they are going through in a joking manner, which could be disrespectful for Blake. Blake was sitting beside him, and obviously knew he was going to be part of the bit, but her reaction to that last part lead some people to believe that she didn’t know he was going to make that joke. Who knows.
What I really found interesting is that someone posted video at the end, Blake is standing awkwardly in the audience seating section after everyone has gotten up from the seats and are milling around. She’s standing alone and Ryan is up on stage. Funny enough he is up. there talking to Chevy Chase. He was out the night before and the only picture of the whole weekend of Blake and Ryan is with Chevy Chase. And people are speculating that no celebrities wanted selfies or pictures with them so it looks like he threw Blake under the bus to go freaking talk to Chevy Chase again. He just wanted to be up on that stage and he didn’t care that she was standing alone awkwardly.
There are times when I feel some sympathy for Blake for being married to him, but like a PP said before, they are schemers together so….
She was also seen hugging and talking to Amy Schumer. It definitely looked like Schumer was being supportive and kind, and that Lively looked nervous and uncomfortable but was grateful for Schumer. There are videos of it online, I'm on my phone and can't link right now.
I think people see what they want to see. A lot of people who, for some reason, have latched onto Baldoni as some kind of folk hero perceive everything Lively or Reynolds does through this prism where they are evil. The truth is I obviously a lot more nuanced and dramatic than that -- everyone involved in this mess is flawed and there are no villains. No matter where you land on whose narrative is more correct, both these people made errors in judgment, also have redeeming values, is a complex human with multiple facets.
I imagine it was hard for Lively to go to that event knowing the conversation about her online. She seems to have handled herself well.
Yes, someone captured that video of Blake and Amy backstage. Agree it looks like Amy was being supportive. That said the whole weekend, they went to two major events, and those are the only things people see?
Go back to before all this happened and if Blake and Ryan had been at an event a lot of celebs would have posted pics with them. To not acknowledge the climate has changed seems naïve.
Anonymous wrote:Yes yes yes ma’am Baldoni is a folk hero. Before, I think people who saw BL as a liar were “jealous” and “wanted to marry him but he’ll never marry you!!” It’s hard out here for a huge years long fan (bot?!?!) of Baldoni.
Schumer issued a little statement saying she believed BL in December. Might be a little tricky to pull an I Don’t Know Her in public while they’re each in terrible for them gowns.
Nobody has come out and supported Blake publicly since he dropped his lawsuit on New Year’s Eve.
And there have been tons of chances, considering all the attacks that she has gotten since then. I noticed Amy hasn’t posted I still believe Blake and noticed that she didn’t try to snap a picture with her and post it on Instagram.
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…
What was the SNL joke? I’ve only seen part of the anniversary special, and he joked about eating a toxic conehead….came across as really cringey /awkward….
The conehead joke was clearly jammed in last minute and did not flow at all with the rest of the skit. Absolutely cringy and awkward. But the joke about Blake was when Tina or Amy said, oh Ryan Reynolds everyone. How are you?
And he goes, fine. Why, what have you heard?
People are criticizing him for obviously referencing everything they are going through in a joking manner, which could be disrespectful for Blake. Blake was sitting beside him, and obviously knew he was going to be part of the bit, but her reaction to that last part lead some people to believe that she didn’t know he was going to make that joke. Who knows.
What I really found interesting is that someone posted video at the end, Blake is standing awkwardly in the audience seating section after everyone has gotten up from the seats and are milling around. She’s standing alone and Ryan is up on stage. Funny enough he is up. there talking to Chevy Chase. He was out the night before and the only picture of the whole weekend of Blake and Ryan is with Chevy Chase. And people are speculating that no celebrities wanted selfies or pictures with them so it looks like he threw Blake under the bus to go freaking talk to Chevy Chase again. He just wanted to be up on that stage and he didn’t care that she was standing alone awkwardly.
There are times when I feel some sympathy for Blake for being married to him, but like a PP said before, they are schemers together so….
She was also seen hugging and talking to Amy Schumer. It definitely looked like Schumer was being supportive and kind, and that Lively looked nervous and uncomfortable but was grateful for Schumer. There are videos of it online, I'm on my phone and can't link right now.
I think people see what they want to see. A lot of people who, for some reason, have latched onto Baldoni as some kind of folk hero perceive everything Lively or Reynolds does through this prism where they are evil. The truth is I obviously a lot more nuanced and dramatic than that -- everyone involved in this mess is flawed and there are no villains. No matter where you land on whose narrative is more correct, both these people made errors in judgment, also have redeeming values, is a complex human with multiple facets.
I imagine it was hard for Lively to go to that event knowing the conversation about her online. She seems to have handled herself well.
For sure and she has also had a lot of death threats and threats of harm to her and her children so there is a significant vulnerability in going out in public when you have had those kinds of threats. I am sure they have had a lot of support in private. Amber Heard had similar vitriol online and she moved to Spain!
lol. The psychopaths who tried destroy a man for sport are the real victims. This is rich.
It seems like Baldoni billionaire friend/protector Steve Sarowitz is maybe a bit of a monster? He is going to spend $100 million to “protect the studio like Israel protected itself from Hamas. There were 39,000 dead bodies. There will be two dead bodies when I’m done. Minimum. Not dead, but ‘you’re dead to me.’ So that kind of dead. But dead to a lot of people. If they ever get me to that point. Then I’ll make it worth their while. Because I’m going to spend a lot of money to make sure the studio is protected.”
Had never heard of him before but wonder what is up with him.
Anonymous wrote:It seems like Baldoni billionaire friend/protector Steve Sarowitz is maybe a bit of a monster? He is going to spend $100 million to “protect the studio like Israel protected itself from Hamas. There were 39,000 dead bodies. There will be two dead bodies when I’m done. Minimum. Not dead, but ‘you’re dead to me.’ So that kind of dead. But dead to a lot of people. If they ever get me to that point. Then I’ll make it worth their while. Because I’m going to spend a lot of money to make sure the studio is protected.”
Had never heard of him before but wonder what is up with him.
lol. Ryan’s perineum soliloquy and exquisite writing of the character Nicepool (remarkably stupid and violent) would like a word.
Anonymous wrote:It seems like Baldoni billionaire friend/protector Steve Sarowitz is maybe a bit of a monster? He is going to spend $100 million to “protect the studio like Israel protected itself from Hamas. There were 39,000 dead bodies. There will be two dead bodies when I’m done. Minimum. Not dead, but ‘you’re dead to me.’ So that kind of dead. But dead to a lot of people. If they ever get me to that point. Then I’ll make it worth their while. Because I’m going to spend a lot of money to make sure the studio is protected.”
Had never heard of him before but wonder what is up with him.
I wonder how this will play with Judge Liman. Lively's attorneys highlighted that quote today in a letter to the judge including a model protective order that would allow the parties to mark documents produced in discovery as confidential or for attorney's eyes only. It's presented as an example of what defendants may try to do with information obtained during the suit. It's a really bad quote but also kind of politically sensitive. The judge has ordered other parties to respond by Feb 25.
"There is zero protection for us and it makes me afraid."
If what you’re doing has ramifications for another [celebrity], you’re now going to think that you could get sued.” duh
"Protecting a client and playing defense is one thing; targeting others proactively is completely another.” again duh.
This publicist admits he’s not proud of things they’ve done to hide client behavior in the past. “A lot of the times, we are at the mercy of the people who pay our bills,” AWFUL! Down with this whole system.
From the very start of the Lively-Baldoni shitshow, it was PR who kind of made the situation worse,” notes a third veteran publicist, who believes that the case is “changing the face of PR.”
Anonymous wrote:It seems like Baldoni billionaire friend/protector Steve Sarowitz is maybe a bit of a monster? He is going to spend $100 million to “protect the studio like Israel protected itself from Hamas. There were 39,000 dead bodies. There will be two dead bodies when I’m done. Minimum. Not dead, but ‘you’re dead to me.’ So that kind of dead. But dead to a lot of people. If they ever get me to that point. Then I’ll make it worth their while. Because I’m going to spend a lot of money to make sure the studio is protected.”
Had never heard of him before but wonder what is up with him.
That is a pretty deranged comment that says a lot about Wayfarer and how they operate. Using Israel / Hamas as your reference point to respond to a complaint about sexual harrassment is scary. Seems to be a lot of power and ego on the Wayfarer side - even more than BL who only conjured up fictional characters of Khaleesi and dragons. Israel / Hamas and using the actual deaths of tens of thousand of innocent women and children says a lot about him - and none of it good. I can't imagine most judges will look positively on that at all.
Forum Index
»
Entertainment and Pop Culture
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}