Anonymous wrote:Just watched a YouTube video that called out something really interesting in Leslie Sloane’s filing. She includes text messages between she and Ryan where he’s explicitly telling her not to smear Justin. However, the problem is she starts the text “Hi, it’s Les” even though she’s been his PR for a decade. No one starts a text like that with someone they know (her number should be in his phone and if it wasn’t he wouldn’t have responded without verifying). Dead give away that they were creating a paper trail for their alibi. The rest of it reads very much like an alibi. Fascinating.
You are nuts. If I haven’t texted someone in a while and I know they text a lot of people I start with a “hi it’s [my name]. Especially not crazy where as here it’s Ryan Reynolds.
Agree it's a huge leap.
Also having known fame-adjacent people, I would not be surprised at all if they use multiple phones or often have an assistant handling their phone. If this was mid-August, it would have been right in the midst of Reynolds doing press with Lively for IEWU plus continuing to promote Deadpool, plus Welcome to Wrexham was nominated for an Emmy right around that time as well. Ryan Reynolds was not sitting in his office checking texts between reading emails and working on a document. He was traveling constantly promoting multiple projects. It is entirely reasonable that anyone who works with him is in the habit of identifying themselves when texting, sorry.
You know how a lot of people don't believe Lively because they feel she doesn't have enough "hard evidence" of inappopriate things happening on set? Well speculation like this is NOT hard evidence. It's flimsy sht. Come on.
Just checked and the screenshots appear to be from Ryan’s phone and the contact is labeled Leslie.
Anonymous wrote:Just watched a YouTube video that called out something really interesting in Leslie Sloane’s filing. She includes text messages between she and Ryan where he’s explicitly telling her not to smear Justin. However, the problem is she starts the text “Hi, it’s Les” even though she’s been his PR for a decade. No one starts a text like that with someone they know (her number should be in his phone and if it wasn’t he wouldn’t have responded without verifying). Dead give away that they were creating a paper trail for their alibi. The rest of it reads very much like an alibi. Fascinating.
This is a legit good catch. Color me impressed.
Except it’s built on sketchy assumption - I send messages all the time to good friends saying Hi It’s (insert nick name) - that did not look fishy to me at all
We obviously need more evidence (like everything in this case) but it doesn’t look great. Context will be the give away. Was it a new number, was it someone else’s phone and she jumped on? They’ll find out in discovery, but if none of those things are true it looks crazy. The overall thread reads like an alibi. Ryan says something like “remember I also told you in Denmark not to say anything” and she says something like “I haven’t per your instructions”. I’m paraphrasing but that’s the gist. Let’s hope the trial is televised lol lol
I mean i give them some credit for having a few brain cells between them unlike Nathan and Abel texting about how they can't put anything in writing! These people are all so dumb RR must be the genius mastermind.
Anonymous wrote:I’m really curious how this movie made so much money. It’s currently grossed over $350 million, which is a crazy amount for a domestic violence film. Baldwin has come nowhere close to these numbers — Five Feet Apart grossed 45 million but Clouds grossed far less, I can’t even find real numbers but maybe only $2 million? Lively’s A Simple Favor (I) with Kendrick grossed about $100 million. I don’t think Hoover’s ever come close to this before. Was the success in fact from all the controversy? Was Reynold’s promotion firm really successful here? $350 million is a lot of viewers.
Maybe this was the plan all along, sort of reverse psychology. Even negative attention is better than no attention.
No,no. You guys are missing that Colleen Hoover‘s book was hugely popular. People have been waiting for this movie to be made for years and there was a lot of attention on it as soon as it was announced. She has a ginormous fan base. Another one of her books, verity, is being made with Anne Hathaway, Josh Hartnett, and Dakota Johnson.
I personally don’t understand the popularity of the books, but she is a huge deal. This was a really covered role that Blake scored.
Sorry, should say coveted role.
I mean, okay, but Come. On. Three past Hoover books have been made into movies: Ugly Love, Confess, and Maybe Someday, and none of them have made anywhere near this much money. I don't think I've heard of them, even. Not that fans may not have been looking out for this one, particularly, but are you really saying that would get the movie to $350M? I think It Ends With Us sold one or two million last year - that's not really getting into the half-of-a-Marvel-movie where the film's gross wound up, as far as I'm aware.
Anne Hathaway is an Oscar winner. SHe has her pick of any roles. The fact that she’s doing verity means these movies are going to be seen. I think you are really over estimating Blake here and really underestimating the machine that is Colleen Hoover.
It's being made by Amazon studios, though, and it's not yet clear if it's getting a theater release. It may be streaming only. Hathaway's last movie (The Idea of You) was a streaming-only feature on Prime, and she also was one of the big names who did an episode of their Modern Love series a few years ago (Tina Fey also did an episode, there were other A-list type people in it). She also starred in that WeCrashed series about the WeWork people -- I don't think that was Amazon though, maybe Max? Still a streaming product.
Streaming makes it much harder to evaluate the market for actor's box office power these days. Lots of big stars do streaming-only movies and limited series these days, and the streamers spend HUGE money on those productions right now, so it can be quite lucrative for the creators involved. But unlike a film with a theater release, you never get the kind of clear numbers with streaming products -- the streamers don't even release a transparent list of top streamed shows or movies (they release these partial lists but it's often not even clear what they represent because there are lots of ways to count something as "viewed" that don't necessarily equate to a ticket sale in a movie theater).
All of which is not to say that Colleen Hoover is not a lucrative product right now -- obviously she's having a moment and studios like that her book adaptations have a build in audience. In fact the success of IEWU actually makes it more likely that Verity will get a theater release of some kind. But I also think you can argue that IEWU outperformed expectations even knowing it was a popular Hoover book with a decent following. One thing I will note is that international box office accounted for over 200m of its box office -- that's huge. I think Hoover might have a decent following in Europe, but also Lively went out of her way to go promote the film in London (attended the London premiere in person and paid for Ferrer to accompany her to it on Lively's own dime -- not sure if Lively also paid for her own travel/lodging for that premiere as well). I think you can argue that Lively played an important role in the success of the movie given it's international success, because of her willingness to go the extra mile on the promotional tour and also because of her recognizability to an international audience thanks to both Gossip Girl and her association with Reynolds. She's also a fashion darling and may receive more pressing Europe because of that -- her relationship with Vogue and certain designers (including Versace who did a lot of her clothes for the promotional tour for IEWU) is pretty well known among people interested in fashion.
She’s a fashion nightmare but ok
PP here and I personally don't like her style but that's beside the point. She's got good relationships with designers and fashion editors including a really good relationship with Vogue. She did the Vogue cover in September to coincide with the release of IEWU (the September issue comes out in August, and also is considered the most important issue of the year so the cover is a big get). She's hosted the Met Gala more than once and tends to be more involved and get better reviews than most celebrity hosts. She is a frequent front row guest at both Paris and New York fashion weeks and has attended Paris FW with Anna Wintour which is a weird special honor that tends to go to this very small group of actresses who Wintour dotes on (Emma Stone would be another actress in this group).
I find her personal fashion kind of obvious BUT it's true she famously does not work with a stylist and that she generally looks great on red carpets, which means she does know something because that's really hard to do -- not just because it requires understanding what looks good and how to put the whole look together, but it's also a logistics challenge because it means she has to have the relationships directly with designers and know how to manage the kind of political/interpersonal aspect of it which is more complicated than you might realize.
All of which is to say that Lively has some special attributes as an actress that would make her especially appealing from a box office standpoint for a movie with a primarily female audience in the 18-35 and 35-50 demographics -- those overlap perfectly with the audience for fashion content whether you are talking about Vogue magazine or In Style or just people who pay close attention to fashion blogs and red carpet events. And given IEWU's international box office, I would bet that her willingness to go abroad to promote the movie, to wear big name fashion and do red carpet events in London where it's going to get picked up by European fashion press who are already very familiar with her, translates to actual money for the studio in a very real way. Ever magazine article, blog post, and social media photo of Lively wearing big name fashion on a red carpet while promoting the movie is worth a lot of exposure that it could be hard to get with another actress. It's real value she brings to the project.
I mean, sure if you like tons of gaudy bangles and large chunky earrings, and colorful mismatched prints. It’s trying a little too hard and outdated but whatever floats your boat. With the huge hair, huge white teeth, huge silicone breasts…less is probably more. She’s like her bff TS, far from a style icon. This is partly why I fail to see Europeans following her, as they tend to have more sophisticated low key style generally.
Lol to the idea that Europeans as a group have "sophisticated, low key" style. American fashion is much more stripped down and low key when compared to what comes out of Europe, with the excess of the couture houses as well as all the avant garde fashion that comes out of London/Paris/Copenhagen. European fashion is not low key at all. Sophistication is in the eye of the beholder.
Europeans in general are not wearing avant garde high fashion couture on the daily.
You are really missing the point. It doesn't matter what Europeans wear daily. The point is that Lively will get quite a bit of press in Europe by showing up to events there and wearing designers like Stella McCartney and Tamara Ralph. Her outfit for the London premier got a ton of play in the fashion/celebrity press both in the UK/EU and in the US because it was eye popping and beautiful -- it made for a very pretty picture which makes it easy for photo editors to grab it and use it because it will attract eyeballs.
I'm sure there are plenty of Europeans who would roll their eyes at it and never wear anything like it (or the oversized white McCartney suit she wore as well) and find it tacky. I find it tacky! But Lively understands the fashion world and the fashion press and she definitely worked that knowledge to the best of her ability to sell this movie, which might be why it over performed at the box office so much.
Blake needs a stylist asap, but her bad sense of style is a type of karma, so just let it go.
Not that I understand fashion but what on earth does the bolder mean?
Is anything really bad taste anymore? In RL for sure but celebrities and pop musicians get away with some really bizarre outfits.
She was fat in her SNL corset, and all the slap and veneers and piles of jewelry make it all worse.
Not a BL fan but she looked pretty. I could also see her staying a little bigger to help her case ie that she was fat shamed. Keep in mind what looks bigger on camera would be considered super skinny in the real world. We should all like to look like her.
Are you serious? OMG, just no.
DP. Blake’s pretty. Silly to say otherwise just because she’s ugly on the inside.
I don’t want to make this about looks but for the record, please look at Blake’s before, and I mean before before, and after pics. Just do that and you’ll feel better about yourself. Just know that she has had TONS $$$ of more work done than anyone you’ll ever know. That’s not how she really looks.
Was all this work done prior to Gossip Girl?
No, some, most likely at least one rhinoplasty for GG and maybe tooth veneers at some point. Not sure when the breast implants, lip fillers, bleph?, hair extensions happened. She’s had a ton of work done if you look at her pics as a teen.
She would look like Edie Falco right if not for the plastic surgeries. No offense to Edie.
Anonymous wrote:I’m really curious how this movie made so much money. It’s currently grossed over $350 million, which is a crazy amount for a domestic violence film. Baldwin has come nowhere close to these numbers — Five Feet Apart grossed 45 million but Clouds grossed far less, I can’t even find real numbers but maybe only $2 million? Lively’s A Simple Favor (I) with Kendrick grossed about $100 million. I don’t think Hoover’s ever come close to this before. Was the success in fact from all the controversy? Was Reynold’s promotion firm really successful here? $350 million is a lot of viewers.
Maybe this was the plan all along, sort of reverse psychology. Even negative attention is better than no attention.
No,no. You guys are missing that Colleen Hoover‘s book was hugely popular. People have been waiting for this movie to be made for years and there was a lot of attention on it as soon as it was announced. She has a ginormous fan base. Another one of her books, verity, is being made with Anne Hathaway, Josh Hartnett, and Dakota Johnson.
I personally don’t understand the popularity of the books, but she is a huge deal. This was a really covered role that Blake scored.
Sorry, should say coveted role.
I mean, okay, but Come. On. Three past Hoover books have been made into movies: Ugly Love, Confess, and Maybe Someday, and none of them have made anywhere near this much money. I don't think I've heard of them, even. Not that fans may not have been looking out for this one, particularly, but are you really saying that would get the movie to $350M? I think It Ends With Us sold one or two million last year - that's not really getting into the half-of-a-Marvel-movie where the film's gross wound up, as far as I'm aware.
Anne Hathaway is an Oscar winner. SHe has her pick of any roles. The fact that she’s doing verity means these movies are going to be seen. I think you are really over estimating Blake here and really underestimating the machine that is Colleen Hoover.
It's being made by Amazon studios, though, and it's not yet clear if it's getting a theater release. It may be streaming only. Hathaway's last movie (The Idea of You) was a streaming-only feature on Prime, and she also was one of the big names who did an episode of their Modern Love series a few years ago (Tina Fey also did an episode, there were other A-list type people in it). She also starred in that WeCrashed series about the WeWork people -- I don't think that was Amazon though, maybe Max? Still a streaming product.
Streaming makes it much harder to evaluate the market for actor's box office power these days. Lots of big stars do streaming-only movies and limited series these days, and the streamers spend HUGE money on those productions right now, so it can be quite lucrative for the creators involved. But unlike a film with a theater release, you never get the kind of clear numbers with streaming products -- the streamers don't even release a transparent list of top streamed shows or movies (they release these partial lists but it's often not even clear what they represent because there are lots of ways to count something as "viewed" that don't necessarily equate to a ticket sale in a movie theater).
All of which is not to say that Colleen Hoover is not a lucrative product right now -- obviously she's having a moment and studios like that her book adaptations have a build in audience. In fact the success of IEWU actually makes it more likely that Verity will get a theater release of some kind. But I also think you can argue that IEWU outperformed expectations even knowing it was a popular Hoover book with a decent following. One thing I will note is that international box office accounted for over 200m of its box office -- that's huge. I think Hoover might have a decent following in Europe, but also Lively went out of her way to go promote the film in London (attended the London premiere in person and paid for Ferrer to accompany her to it on Lively's own dime -- not sure if Lively also paid for her own travel/lodging for that premiere as well). I think you can argue that Lively played an important role in the success of the movie given it's international success, because of her willingness to go the extra mile on the promotional tour and also because of her recognizability to an international audience thanks to both Gossip Girl and her association with Reynolds. She's also a fashion darling and may receive more pressing Europe because of that -- her relationship with Vogue and certain designers (including Versace who did a lot of her clothes for the promotional tour for IEWU) is pretty well known among people interested in fashion.
She’s a fashion nightmare but ok
PP here and I personally don't like her style but that's beside the point. She's got good relationships with designers and fashion editors including a really good relationship with Vogue. She did the Vogue cover in September to coincide with the release of IEWU (the September issue comes out in August, and also is considered the most important issue of the year so the cover is a big get). She's hosted the Met Gala more than once and tends to be more involved and get better reviews than most celebrity hosts. She is a frequent front row guest at both Paris and New York fashion weeks and has attended Paris FW with Anna Wintour which is a weird special honor that tends to go to this very small group of actresses who Wintour dotes on (Emma Stone would be another actress in this group).
I find her personal fashion kind of obvious BUT it's true she famously does not work with a stylist and that she generally looks great on red carpets, which means she does know something because that's really hard to do -- not just because it requires understanding what looks good and how to put the whole look together, but it's also a logistics challenge because it means she has to have the relationships directly with designers and know how to manage the kind of political/interpersonal aspect of it which is more complicated than you might realize.
All of which is to say that Lively has some special attributes as an actress that would make her especially appealing from a box office standpoint for a movie with a primarily female audience in the 18-35 and 35-50 demographics -- those overlap perfectly with the audience for fashion content whether you are talking about Vogue magazine or In Style or just people who pay close attention to fashion blogs and red carpet events. And given IEWU's international box office, I would bet that her willingness to go abroad to promote the movie, to wear big name fashion and do red carpet events in London where it's going to get picked up by European fashion press who are already very familiar with her, translates to actual money for the studio in a very real way. Ever magazine article, blog post, and social media photo of Lively wearing big name fashion on a red carpet while promoting the movie is worth a lot of exposure that it could be hard to get with another actress. It's real value she brings to the project.
I mean, sure if you like tons of gaudy bangles and large chunky earrings, and colorful mismatched prints. It’s trying a little too hard and outdated but whatever floats your boat. With the huge hair, huge white teeth, huge silicone breasts…less is probably more. She’s like her bff TS, far from a style icon. This is partly why I fail to see Europeans following her, as they tend to have more sophisticated low key style generally.
Lol to the idea that Europeans as a group have "sophisticated, low key" style. American fashion is much more stripped down and low key when compared to what comes out of Europe, with the excess of the couture houses as well as all the avant garde fashion that comes out of London/Paris/Copenhagen. European fashion is not low key at all. Sophistication is in the eye of the beholder.
Europeans in general are not wearing avant garde high fashion couture on the daily.
You are really missing the point. It doesn't matter what Europeans wear daily. The point is that Lively will get quite a bit of press in Europe by showing up to events there and wearing designers like Stella McCartney and Tamara Ralph. Her outfit for the London premier got a ton of play in the fashion/celebrity press both in the UK/EU and in the US because it was eye popping and beautiful -- it made for a very pretty picture which makes it easy for photo editors to grab it and use it because it will attract eyeballs.
I'm sure there are plenty of Europeans who would roll their eyes at it and never wear anything like it (or the oversized white McCartney suit she wore as well) and find it tacky. I find it tacky! But Lively understands the fashion world and the fashion press and she definitely worked that knowledge to the best of her ability to sell this movie, which might be why it over performed at the box office so much.
Blake needs a stylist asap, but her bad sense of style is a type of karma, so just let it go.
Not that I understand fashion but what on earth does the bolder mean?
Is anything really bad taste anymore? In RL for sure but celebrities and pop musicians get away with some really bizarre outfits.
She was fat in her SNL corset, and all the slap and veneers and piles of jewelry make it all worse.
Not a BL fan but she looked pretty. I could also see her staying a little bigger to help her case ie that she was fat shamed. Keep in mind what looks bigger on camera would be considered super skinny in the real world. We should all like to look like her.
Are you serious? OMG, just no.
DP. Blake’s pretty. Silly to say otherwise just because she’s ugly on the inside.
I don’t want to make this about looks but for the record, please look at Blake’s before, and I mean before before, and after pics. Just do that and you’ll feel better about yourself. Just know that she has had TONS $$$ of more work done than anyone you’ll ever know. That’s not how she really looks.
Was all this work done prior to Gossip Girl?
She looked very Jewish before Gossip Girl. But her appearance evolved a great deal before, during and after GG.
Anonymous wrote:I’m really curious how this movie made so much money. It’s currently grossed over $350 million, which is a crazy amount for a domestic violence film. Baldwin has come nowhere close to these numbers — Five Feet Apart grossed 45 million but Clouds grossed far less, I can’t even find real numbers but maybe only $2 million? Lively’s A Simple Favor (I) with Kendrick grossed about $100 million. I don’t think Hoover’s ever come close to this before. Was the success in fact from all the controversy? Was Reynold’s promotion firm really successful here? $350 million is a lot of viewers.
Maybe this was the plan all along, sort of reverse psychology. Even negative attention is better than no attention.
No,no. You guys are missing that Colleen Hoover‘s book was hugely popular. People have been waiting for this movie to be made for years and there was a lot of attention on it as soon as it was announced. She has a ginormous fan base. Another one of her books, verity, is being made with Anne Hathaway, Josh Hartnett, and Dakota Johnson.
I personally don’t understand the popularity of the books, but she is a huge deal. This was a really covered role that Blake scored.
Sorry, should say coveted role.
I mean, okay, but Come. On. Three past Hoover books have been made into movies: Ugly Love, Confess, and Maybe Someday, and none of them have made anywhere near this much money. I don't think I've heard of them, even. Not that fans may not have been looking out for this one, particularly, but are you really saying that would get the movie to $350M? I think It Ends With Us sold one or two million last year - that's not really getting into the half-of-a-Marvel-movie where the film's gross wound up, as far as I'm aware.
Anne Hathaway is an Oscar winner. SHe has her pick of any roles. The fact that she’s doing verity means these movies are going to be seen. I think you are really over estimating Blake here and really underestimating the machine that is Colleen Hoover.
It's being made by Amazon studios, though, and it's not yet clear if it's getting a theater release. It may be streaming only. Hathaway's last movie (The Idea of You) was a streaming-only feature on Prime, and she also was one of the big names who did an episode of their Modern Love series a few years ago (Tina Fey also did an episode, there were other A-list type people in it). She also starred in that WeCrashed series about the WeWork people -- I don't think that was Amazon though, maybe Max? Still a streaming product.
Streaming makes it much harder to evaluate the market for actor's box office power these days. Lots of big stars do streaming-only movies and limited series these days, and the streamers spend HUGE money on those productions right now, so it can be quite lucrative for the creators involved. But unlike a film with a theater release, you never get the kind of clear numbers with streaming products -- the streamers don't even release a transparent list of top streamed shows or movies (they release these partial lists but it's often not even clear what they represent because there are lots of ways to count something as "viewed" that don't necessarily equate to a ticket sale in a movie theater).
All of which is not to say that Colleen Hoover is not a lucrative product right now -- obviously she's having a moment and studios like that her book adaptations have a build in audience. In fact the success of IEWU actually makes it more likely that Verity will get a theater release of some kind. But I also think you can argue that IEWU outperformed expectations even knowing it was a popular Hoover book with a decent following. One thing I will note is that international box office accounted for over 200m of its box office -- that's huge. I think Hoover might have a decent following in Europe, but also Lively went out of her way to go promote the film in London (attended the London premiere in person and paid for Ferrer to accompany her to it on Lively's own dime -- not sure if Lively also paid for her own travel/lodging for that premiere as well). I think you can argue that Lively played an important role in the success of the movie given it's international success, because of her willingness to go the extra mile on the promotional tour and also because of her recognizability to an international audience thanks to both Gossip Girl and her association with Reynolds. She's also a fashion darling and may receive more pressing Europe because of that -- her relationship with Vogue and certain designers (including Versace who did a lot of her clothes for the promotional tour for IEWU) is pretty well known among people interested in fashion.
She’s a fashion nightmare but ok
PP here and I personally don't like her style but that's beside the point. She's got good relationships with designers and fashion editors including a really good relationship with Vogue. She did the Vogue cover in September to coincide with the release of IEWU (the September issue comes out in August, and also is considered the most important issue of the year so the cover is a big get). She's hosted the Met Gala more than once and tends to be more involved and get better reviews than most celebrity hosts. She is a frequent front row guest at both Paris and New York fashion weeks and has attended Paris FW with Anna Wintour which is a weird special honor that tends to go to this very small group of actresses who Wintour dotes on (Emma Stone would be another actress in this group).
I find her personal fashion kind of obvious BUT it's true she famously does not work with a stylist and that she generally looks great on red carpets, which means she does know something because that's really hard to do -- not just because it requires understanding what looks good and how to put the whole look together, but it's also a logistics challenge because it means she has to have the relationships directly with designers and know how to manage the kind of political/interpersonal aspect of it which is more complicated than you might realize.
All of which is to say that Lively has some special attributes as an actress that would make her especially appealing from a box office standpoint for a movie with a primarily female audience in the 18-35 and 35-50 demographics -- those overlap perfectly with the audience for fashion content whether you are talking about Vogue magazine or In Style or just people who pay close attention to fashion blogs and red carpet events. And given IEWU's international box office, I would bet that her willingness to go abroad to promote the movie, to wear big name fashion and do red carpet events in London where it's going to get picked up by European fashion press who are already very familiar with her, translates to actual money for the studio in a very real way. Ever magazine article, blog post, and social media photo of Lively wearing big name fashion on a red carpet while promoting the movie is worth a lot of exposure that it could be hard to get with another actress. It's real value she brings to the project.
I mean, sure if you like tons of gaudy bangles and large chunky earrings, and colorful mismatched prints. It’s trying a little too hard and outdated but whatever floats your boat. With the huge hair, huge white teeth, huge silicone breasts…less is probably more. She’s like her bff TS, far from a style icon. This is partly why I fail to see Europeans following her, as they tend to have more sophisticated low key style generally.
Lol to the idea that Europeans as a group have "sophisticated, low key" style. American fashion is much more stripped down and low key when compared to what comes out of Europe, with the excess of the couture houses as well as all the avant garde fashion that comes out of London/Paris/Copenhagen. European fashion is not low key at all. Sophistication is in the eye of the beholder.
Europeans in general are not wearing avant garde high fashion couture on the daily.
You are really missing the point. It doesn't matter what Europeans wear daily. The point is that Lively will get quite a bit of press in Europe by showing up to events there and wearing designers like Stella McCartney and Tamara Ralph. Her outfit for the London premier got a ton of play in the fashion/celebrity press both in the UK/EU and in the US because it was eye popping and beautiful -- it made for a very pretty picture which makes it easy for photo editors to grab it and use it because it will attract eyeballs.
I'm sure there are plenty of Europeans who would roll their eyes at it and never wear anything like it (or the oversized white McCartney suit she wore as well) and find it tacky. I find it tacky! But Lively understands the fashion world and the fashion press and she definitely worked that knowledge to the best of her ability to sell this movie, which might be why it over performed at the box office so much.
Blake needs a stylist asap, but her bad sense of style is a type of karma, so just let it go.
Not that I understand fashion but what on earth does the bolder mean?
Is anything really bad taste anymore? In RL for sure but celebrities and pop musicians get away with some really bizarre outfits.
She was fat in her SNL corset, and all the slap and veneers and piles of jewelry make it all worse.
Not a BL fan but she looked pretty. I could also see her staying a little bigger to help her case ie that she was fat shamed. Keep in mind what looks bigger on camera would be considered super skinny in the real world. We should all like to look like her.
Are you serious? OMG, just no.
DP. Blake’s pretty. Silly to say otherwise just because she’s ugly on the inside.
DP, can you knock it off? It’s legitimately okay for people to not find any one person pretty.
I will say that Blake is interesting and a little cute by Hollywoods standards. But for her height and size, i would look to a few other ladies as style icons.
She’s a mom of 4, etc, etc. Melanie has a great stylist. Always nails it. And she’s a mom. So is Ivanka. Mom of 3 and looks classy . And no I am not Maga.
Rihanna is tall and about Blake’s age. Mom of 2 toddlers. Rich and dresses cool as heck. Has her own brand. Rihanna rocks Hollywood cool and sexy and all of that. And she does prints the right way!
Laura Dern, Brooke and many more.
I think the challenge that I have with Blake’s style it’s all over the place. Just not very sophisticated overall. But hey, that’s her thing.
Anonymous wrote:I’m really curious how this movie made so much money. It’s currently grossed over $350 million, which is a crazy amount for a domestic violence film. Baldwin has come nowhere close to these numbers — Five Feet Apart grossed 45 million but Clouds grossed far less, I can’t even find real numbers but maybe only $2 million? Lively’s A Simple Favor (I) with Kendrick grossed about $100 million. I don’t think Hoover’s ever come close to this before. Was the success in fact from all the controversy? Was Reynold’s promotion firm really successful here? $350 million is a lot of viewers.
Maybe this was the plan all along, sort of reverse psychology. Even negative attention is better than no attention.
No,no. You guys are missing that Colleen Hoover‘s book was hugely popular. People have been waiting for this movie to be made for years and there was a lot of attention on it as soon as it was announced. She has a ginormous fan base. Another one of her books, verity, is being made with Anne Hathaway, Josh Hartnett, and Dakota Johnson.
I personally don’t understand the popularity of the books, but she is a huge deal. This was a really covered role that Blake scored.
Sorry, should say coveted role.
I mean, okay, but Come. On. Three past Hoover books have been made into movies: Ugly Love, Confess, and Maybe Someday, and none of them have made anywhere near this much money. I don't think I've heard of them, even. Not that fans may not have been looking out for this one, particularly, but are you really saying that would get the movie to $350M? I think It Ends With Us sold one or two million last year - that's not really getting into the half-of-a-Marvel-movie where the film's gross wound up, as far as I'm aware.
Anne Hathaway is an Oscar winner. SHe has her pick of any roles. The fact that she’s doing verity means these movies are going to be seen. I think you are really over estimating Blake here and really underestimating the machine that is Colleen Hoover.
It's being made by Amazon studios, though, and it's not yet clear if it's getting a theater release. It may be streaming only. Hathaway's last movie (The Idea of You) was a streaming-only feature on Prime, and she also was one of the big names who did an episode of their Modern Love series a few years ago (Tina Fey also did an episode, there were other A-list type people in it). She also starred in that WeCrashed series about the WeWork people -- I don't think that was Amazon though, maybe Max? Still a streaming product.
Streaming makes it much harder to evaluate the market for actor's box office power these days. Lots of big stars do streaming-only movies and limited series these days, and the streamers spend HUGE money on those productions right now, so it can be quite lucrative for the creators involved. But unlike a film with a theater release, you never get the kind of clear numbers with streaming products -- the streamers don't even release a transparent list of top streamed shows or movies (they release these partial lists but it's often not even clear what they represent because there are lots of ways to count something as "viewed" that don't necessarily equate to a ticket sale in a movie theater).
All of which is not to say that Colleen Hoover is not a lucrative product right now -- obviously she's having a moment and studios like that her book adaptations have a build in audience. In fact the success of IEWU actually makes it more likely that Verity will get a theater release of some kind. But I also think you can argue that IEWU outperformed expectations even knowing it was a popular Hoover book with a decent following. One thing I will note is that international box office accounted for over 200m of its box office -- that's huge. I think Hoover might have a decent following in Europe, but also Lively went out of her way to go promote the film in London (attended the London premiere in person and paid for Ferrer to accompany her to it on Lively's own dime -- not sure if Lively also paid for her own travel/lodging for that premiere as well). I think you can argue that Lively played an important role in the success of the movie given it's international success, because of her willingness to go the extra mile on the promotional tour and also because of her recognizability to an international audience thanks to both Gossip Girl and her association with Reynolds. She's also a fashion darling and may receive more pressing Europe because of that -- her relationship with Vogue and certain designers (including Versace who did a lot of her clothes for the promotional tour for IEWU) is pretty well known among people interested in fashion.
She’s a fashion nightmare but ok
PP here and I personally don't like her style but that's beside the point. She's got good relationships with designers and fashion editors including a really good relationship with Vogue. She did the Vogue cover in September to coincide with the release of IEWU (the September issue comes out in August, and also is considered the most important issue of the year so the cover is a big get). She's hosted the Met Gala more than once and tends to be more involved and get better reviews than most celebrity hosts. She is a frequent front row guest at both Paris and New York fashion weeks and has attended Paris FW with Anna Wintour which is a weird special honor that tends to go to this very small group of actresses who Wintour dotes on (Emma Stone would be another actress in this group).
I find her personal fashion kind of obvious BUT it's true she famously does not work with a stylist and that she generally looks great on red carpets, which means she does know something because that's really hard to do -- not just because it requires understanding what looks good and how to put the whole look together, but it's also a logistics challenge because it means she has to have the relationships directly with designers and know how to manage the kind of political/interpersonal aspect of it which is more complicated than you might realize.
All of which is to say that Lively has some special attributes as an actress that would make her especially appealing from a box office standpoint for a movie with a primarily female audience in the 18-35 and 35-50 demographics -- those overlap perfectly with the audience for fashion content whether you are talking about Vogue magazine or In Style or just people who pay close attention to fashion blogs and red carpet events. And given IEWU's international box office, I would bet that her willingness to go abroad to promote the movie, to wear big name fashion and do red carpet events in London where it's going to get picked up by European fashion press who are already very familiar with her, translates to actual money for the studio in a very real way. Ever magazine article, blog post, and social media photo of Lively wearing big name fashion on a red carpet while promoting the movie is worth a lot of exposure that it could be hard to get with another actress. It's real value she brings to the project.
I mean, sure if you like tons of gaudy bangles and large chunky earrings, and colorful mismatched prints. It’s trying a little too hard and outdated but whatever floats your boat. With the huge hair, huge white teeth, huge silicone breasts…less is probably more. She’s like her bff TS, far from a style icon. This is partly why I fail to see Europeans following her, as they tend to have more sophisticated low key style generally.
Lol to the idea that Europeans as a group have "sophisticated, low key" style. American fashion is much more stripped down and low key when compared to what comes out of Europe, with the excess of the couture houses as well as all the avant garde fashion that comes out of London/Paris/Copenhagen. European fashion is not low key at all. Sophistication is in the eye of the beholder.
Europeans in general are not wearing avant garde high fashion couture on the daily.
You are really missing the point. It doesn't matter what Europeans wear daily. The point is that Lively will get quite a bit of press in Europe by showing up to events there and wearing designers like Stella McCartney and Tamara Ralph. Her outfit for the London premier got a ton of play in the fashion/celebrity press both in the UK/EU and in the US because it was eye popping and beautiful -- it made for a very pretty picture which makes it easy for photo editors to grab it and use it because it will attract eyeballs.
I'm sure there are plenty of Europeans who would roll their eyes at it and never wear anything like it (or the oversized white McCartney suit she wore as well) and find it tacky. I find it tacky! But Lively understands the fashion world and the fashion press and she definitely worked that knowledge to the best of her ability to sell this movie, which might be why it over performed at the box office so much.
Blake needs a stylist asap, but her bad sense of style is a type of karma, so just let it go.
Not that I understand fashion but what on earth does the bolder mean?
Is anything really bad taste anymore? In RL for sure but celebrities and pop musicians get away with some really bizarre outfits.
She was fat in her SNL corset, and all the slap and veneers and piles of jewelry make it all worse.
Not a BL fan but she looked pretty. I could also see her staying a little bigger to help her case ie that she was fat shamed. Keep in mind what looks bigger on camera would be considered super skinny in the real world. We should all like to look like her.
Are you serious? OMG, just no.
DP. Blake’s pretty. Silly to say otherwise just because she’s ugly on the inside.
I don’t want to make this about looks but for the record, please look at Blake’s before, and I mean before before, and after pics. Just do that and you’ll feel better about yourself. Just know that she has had TONS $$$ of more work done than anyone you’ll ever know. That’s not how she really looks.
Was all this work done prior to Gossip Girl?
She looked very Jewish before Gossip Girl. But her appearance evolved a great deal before, during and after GG.
No she looks just like her dad with long blonde hair.
Anonymous wrote:Just watched a YouTube video that called out something really interesting in Leslie Sloane’s filing. She includes text messages between she and Ryan where he’s explicitly telling her not to smear Justin. However, the problem is she starts the text “Hi, it’s Les” even though she’s been his PR for a decade. No one starts a text like that with someone they know (her number should be in his phone and if it wasn’t he wouldn’t have responded without verifying). Dead give away that they were creating a paper trail for their alibi. The rest of it reads very much like an alibi. Fascinating.
This is a legit good catch. Color me impressed.
Except it’s built on sketchy assumption - I send messages all the time to good friends saying Hi It’s (insert nick name) - that did not look fishy to me at all
We obviously need more evidence (like everything in this case) but it doesn’t look great. Context will be the give away. Was it a new number, was it someone else’s phone and she jumped on? They’ll find out in discovery, but if none of those things are true it looks crazy. The overall thread reads like an alibi. Ryan says something like “remember I also told you in Denmark not to say anything” and she says something like “I haven’t per your instructions”. I’m paraphrasing but that’s the gist. Let’s hope the trial is televised lol lol
I mean i give them some credit for having a few brain cells between them unlike Nathan and Abel texting about how they can't put anything in writing! These people are all so dumb RR must be the genius mastermind.
The bigger issue to me is some of the texts were screenshots and others were written out. Makes the written out ones look made up or altered.
Anonymous wrote:Just watched a YouTube video that called out something really interesting in Leslie Sloane’s filing. She includes text messages between she and Ryan where he’s explicitly telling her not to smear Justin. However, the problem is she starts the text “Hi, it’s Les” even though she’s been his PR for a decade. No one starts a text like that with someone they know (her number should be in his phone and if it wasn’t he wouldn’t have responded without verifying). Dead give away that they were creating a paper trail for their alibi. The rest of it reads very much like an alibi. Fascinating.
This is a legit good catch. Color me impressed.
Except it’s built on sketchy assumption - I send messages all the time to good friends saying Hi It’s (insert nick name) - that did not look fishy to me at all
We obviously need more evidence (like everything in this case) but it doesn’t look great. Context will be the give away. Was it a new number, was it someone else’s phone and she jumped on? They’ll find out in discovery, but if none of those things are true it looks crazy. The overall thread reads like an alibi. Ryan says something like “remember I also told you in Denmark not to say anything” and she says something like “I haven’t per your instructions”. I’m paraphrasing but that’s the gist. Let’s hope the trial is televised lol lol
I mean i give them some credit for having a few brain cells between them unlike Nathan and Abel texting about how they can't put anything in writing! These people are all so dumb RR must be the genius mastermind.
The bigger issue to me is some of the texts were screenshots and others were written out. Makes the written out ones look made up or altered.
Blake's amended complaint does a lot of that and then states whoever was on the text agreed with her.
Anonymous wrote:Just watched a YouTube video that called out something really interesting in Leslie Sloane’s filing. She includes text messages between she and Ryan where he’s explicitly telling her not to smear Justin. However, the problem is she starts the text “Hi, it’s Les” even though she’s been his PR for a decade. No one starts a text like that with someone they know (her number should be in his phone and if it wasn’t he wouldn’t have responded without verifying). Dead give away that they were creating a paper trail for their alibi. The rest of it reads very much like an alibi. Fascinating.
You are nuts. If I haven’t texted someone in a while and I know they text a lot of people I start with a “hi it’s [my name]. Especially not crazy where as here it’s Ryan Reynolds.
Agree it's a huge leap.
Also having known fame-adjacent people, I would not be surprised at all if they use multiple phones or often have an assistant handling their phone. If this was mid-August, it would have been right in the midst of Reynolds doing press with Lively for IEWU plus continuing to promote Deadpool, plus Welcome to Wrexham was nominated for an Emmy right around that time as well. Ryan Reynolds was not sitting in his office checking texts between reading emails and working on a document. He was traveling constantly promoting multiple projects. It is entirely reasonable that anyone who works with him is in the habit of identifying themselves when texting, sorry.
You know how a lot of people don't believe Lively because they feel she doesn't have enough "hard evidence" of inappopriate things happening on set? Well speculation like this is NOT hard evidence. It's flimsy sht. Come on.
Just checked and the screenshots appear to be from Ryan’s phone and the contact is labeled Leslie.
That her number is programmed into this phone now doesn’t mean it was programmed in then when the text was made (unless it was a photo of the text taken back in August? Which would seem weird to me and suggest maybe they were creating some story).
But in any case, SHE doesn’t necessarily know if her number is programmed into his phone. This whole thing is just a super big stretch to make something normal seem fishy. You guys take the smallest thing and turn it into a circus. This level of crazy makes the rest of your arguments suspect.
Anonymous wrote:I’m really curious how this movie made so much money. It’s currently grossed over $350 million, which is a crazy amount for a domestic violence film. Baldwin has come nowhere close to these numbers — Five Feet Apart grossed 45 million but Clouds grossed far less, I can’t even find real numbers but maybe only $2 million? Lively’s A Simple Favor (I) with Kendrick grossed about $100 million. I don’t think Hoover’s ever come close to this before. Was the success in fact from all the controversy? Was Reynold’s promotion firm really successful here? $350 million is a lot of viewers.
Maybe this was the plan all along, sort of reverse psychology. Even negative attention is better than no attention.
No,no. You guys are missing that Colleen Hoover‘s book was hugely popular. People have been waiting for this movie to be made for years and there was a lot of attention on it as soon as it was announced. She has a ginormous fan base. Another one of her books, verity, is being made with Anne Hathaway, Josh Hartnett, and Dakota Johnson.
I personally don’t understand the popularity of the books, but she is a huge deal. This was a really covered role that Blake scored.
Sorry, should say coveted role.
I mean, okay, but Come. On. Three past Hoover books have been made into movies: Ugly Love, Confess, and Maybe Someday, and none of them have made anywhere near this much money. I don't think I've heard of them, even. Not that fans may not have been looking out for this one, particularly, but are you really saying that would get the movie to $350M? I think It Ends With Us sold one or two million last year - that's not really getting into the half-of-a-Marvel-movie where the film's gross wound up, as far as I'm aware.
Anne Hathaway is an Oscar winner. SHe has her pick of any roles. The fact that she’s doing verity means these movies are going to be seen. I think you are really over estimating Blake here and really underestimating the machine that is Colleen Hoover.
It's being made by Amazon studios, though, and it's not yet clear if it's getting a theater release. It may be streaming only. Hathaway's last movie (The Idea of You) was a streaming-only feature on Prime, and she also was one of the big names who did an episode of their Modern Love series a few years ago (Tina Fey also did an episode, there were other A-list type people in it). She also starred in that WeCrashed series about the WeWork people -- I don't think that was Amazon though, maybe Max? Still a streaming product.
Streaming makes it much harder to evaluate the market for actor's box office power these days. Lots of big stars do streaming-only movies and limited series these days, and the streamers spend HUGE money on those productions right now, so it can be quite lucrative for the creators involved. But unlike a film with a theater release, you never get the kind of clear numbers with streaming products -- the streamers don't even release a transparent list of top streamed shows or movies (they release these partial lists but it's often not even clear what they represent because there are lots of ways to count something as "viewed" that don't necessarily equate to a ticket sale in a movie theater).
All of which is not to say that Colleen Hoover is not a lucrative product right now -- obviously she's having a moment and studios like that her book adaptations have a build in audience. In fact the success of IEWU actually makes it more likely that Verity will get a theater release of some kind. But I also think you can argue that IEWU outperformed expectations even knowing it was a popular Hoover book with a decent following. One thing I will note is that international box office accounted for over 200m of its box office -- that's huge. I think Hoover might have a decent following in Europe, but also Lively went out of her way to go promote the film in London (attended the London premiere in person and paid for Ferrer to accompany her to it on Lively's own dime -- not sure if Lively also paid for her own travel/lodging for that premiere as well). I think you can argue that Lively played an important role in the success of the movie given it's international success, because of her willingness to go the extra mile on the promotional tour and also because of her recognizability to an international audience thanks to both Gossip Girl and her association with Reynolds. She's also a fashion darling and may receive more pressing Europe because of that -- her relationship with Vogue and certain designers (including Versace who did a lot of her clothes for the promotional tour for IEWU) is pretty well known among people interested in fashion.
She’s a fashion nightmare but ok
PP here and I personally don't like her style but that's beside the point. She's got good relationships with designers and fashion editors including a really good relationship with Vogue. She did the Vogue cover in September to coincide with the release of IEWU (the September issue comes out in August, and also is considered the most important issue of the year so the cover is a big get). She's hosted the Met Gala more than once and tends to be more involved and get better reviews than most celebrity hosts. She is a frequent front row guest at both Paris and New York fashion weeks and has attended Paris FW with Anna Wintour which is a weird special honor that tends to go to this very small group of actresses who Wintour dotes on (Emma Stone would be another actress in this group).
I find her personal fashion kind of obvious BUT it's true she famously does not work with a stylist and that she generally looks great on red carpets, which means she does know something because that's really hard to do -- not just because it requires understanding what looks good and how to put the whole look together, but it's also a logistics challenge because it means she has to have the relationships directly with designers and know how to manage the kind of political/interpersonal aspect of it which is more complicated than you might realize.
All of which is to say that Lively has some special attributes as an actress that would make her especially appealing from a box office standpoint for a movie with a primarily female audience in the 18-35 and 35-50 demographics -- those overlap perfectly with the audience for fashion content whether you are talking about Vogue magazine or In Style or just people who pay close attention to fashion blogs and red carpet events. And given IEWU's international box office, I would bet that her willingness to go abroad to promote the movie, to wear big name fashion and do red carpet events in London where it's going to get picked up by European fashion press who are already very familiar with her, translates to actual money for the studio in a very real way. Ever magazine article, blog post, and social media photo of Lively wearing big name fashion on a red carpet while promoting the movie is worth a lot of exposure that it could be hard to get with another actress. It's real value she brings to the project.
I mean, sure if you like tons of gaudy bangles and large chunky earrings, and colorful mismatched prints. It’s trying a little too hard and outdated but whatever floats your boat. With the huge hair, huge white teeth, huge silicone breasts…less is probably more. She’s like her bff TS, far from a style icon. This is partly why I fail to see Europeans following her, as they tend to have more sophisticated low key style generally.
Lol to the idea that Europeans as a group have "sophisticated, low key" style. American fashion is much more stripped down and low key when compared to what comes out of Europe, with the excess of the couture houses as well as all the avant garde fashion that comes out of London/Paris/Copenhagen. European fashion is not low key at all. Sophistication is in the eye of the beholder.
Europeans in general are not wearing avant garde high fashion couture on the daily.
You are really missing the point. It doesn't matter what Europeans wear daily. The point is that Lively will get quite a bit of press in Europe by showing up to events there and wearing designers like Stella McCartney and Tamara Ralph. Her outfit for the London premier got a ton of play in the fashion/celebrity press both in the UK/EU and in the US because it was eye popping and beautiful -- it made for a very pretty picture which makes it easy for photo editors to grab it and use it because it will attract eyeballs.
I'm sure there are plenty of Europeans who would roll their eyes at it and never wear anything like it (or the oversized white McCartney suit she wore as well) and find it tacky. I find it tacky! But Lively understands the fashion world and the fashion press and she definitely worked that knowledge to the best of her ability to sell this movie, which might be why it over performed at the box office so much.
Blake needs a stylist asap, but her bad sense of style is a type of karma, so just let it go.
Not that I understand fashion but what on earth does the bolder mean?
Is anything really bad taste anymore? In RL for sure but celebrities and pop musicians get away with some really bizarre outfits.
She was fat in her SNL corset, and all the slap and veneers and piles of jewelry make it all worse.
Not a BL fan but she looked pretty. I could also see her staying a little bigger to help her case ie that she was fat shamed. Keep in mind what looks bigger on camera would be considered super skinny in the real world. We should all like to look like her.
Are you serious? OMG, just no.
DP. Blake’s pretty. Silly to say otherwise just because she’s ugly on the inside.
DP, can you knock it off? It’s legitimately okay for people to not find any one person pretty.
I will say that Blake is interesting and a little cute by Hollywoods standards. But for her height and size, i would look to a few other ladies as style icons.
She’s a mom of 4, etc, etc. Melanie has a great stylist. Always nails it. And she’s a mom. So is Ivanka. Mom of 3 and looks classy . And no I am not Maga.
Rihanna is tall and about Blake’s age. Mom of 2 toddlers. Rich and dresses cool as heck. Has her own brand. Rihanna rocks Hollywood cool and sexy and all of that. And she does prints the right way!
Laura Dern, Brooke and many more.
I think the challenge that I have with Blake’s style it’s all over the place. Just not very sophisticated overall. But hey, that’s her thing.
Forgot Margot, Charlize, Emma, Cate… Julia and Angelina with more weight.
I guess Blake is okay, but IMO, there are so many other tall, sort of bigger women that carry style really well. Maybe they work with stylists, or maybe they just have great fashion sense. Dunno, but it works.
Anonymous wrote:Just watched a YouTube video that called out something really interesting in Leslie Sloane’s filing. She includes text messages between she and Ryan where he’s explicitly telling her not to smear Justin. However, the problem is she starts the text “Hi, it’s Les” even though she’s been his PR for a decade. No one starts a text like that with someone they know (her number should be in his phone and if it wasn’t he wouldn’t have responded without verifying). Dead give away that they were creating a paper trail for their alibi. The rest of it reads very much like an alibi. Fascinating.
You are nuts. If I haven’t texted someone in a while and I know they text a lot of people I start with a “hi it’s [my name]. Especially not crazy where as here it’s Ryan Reynolds.
Agree it's a huge leap.
Also having known fame-adjacent people, I would not be surprised at all if they use multiple phones or often have an assistant handling their phone. If this was mid-August, it would have been right in the midst of Reynolds doing press with Lively for IEWU plus continuing to promote Deadpool, plus Welcome to Wrexham was nominated for an Emmy right around that time as well. Ryan Reynolds was not sitting in his office checking texts between reading emails and working on a document. He was traveling constantly promoting multiple projects. It is entirely reasonable that anyone who works with him is in the habit of identifying themselves when texting, sorry.
You know how a lot of people don't believe Lively because they feel she doesn't have enough "hard evidence" of inappopriate things happening on set? Well speculation like this is NOT hard evidence. It's flimsy sht. Come on.
Just checked and the screenshots appear to be from Ryan’s phone and the contact is labeled Leslie.
That her number is programmed into this phone now doesn’t mean it was programmed in then when the text was made (unless it was a photo of the text taken back in August? Which would seem weird to me and suggest maybe they were creating some story).
But in any case, SHE doesn’t necessarily know if her number is programmed into his phone. This whole thing is just a super big stretch to make something normal seem fishy. You guys take the smallest thing and turn it into a circus. This level of crazy makes the rest of your arguments suspect.
The other PP also had a good point about him asking and her confirming per his instructions. It's a strange cadence for sure.
Anonymous wrote:I’m really curious how this movie made so much money. It’s currently grossed over $350 million, which is a crazy amount for a domestic violence film. Baldwin has come nowhere close to these numbers — Five Feet Apart grossed 45 million but Clouds grossed far less, I can’t even find real numbers but maybe only $2 million? Lively’s A Simple Favor (I) with Kendrick grossed about $100 million. I don’t think Hoover’s ever come close to this before. Was the success in fact from all the controversy? Was Reynold’s promotion firm really successful here? $350 million is a lot of viewers.
Maybe this was the plan all along, sort of reverse psychology. Even negative attention is better than no attention.
No,no. You guys are missing that Colleen Hoover‘s book was hugely popular. People have been waiting for this movie to be made for years and there was a lot of attention on it as soon as it was announced. She has a ginormous fan base. Another one of her books, verity, is being made with Anne Hathaway, Josh Hartnett, and Dakota Johnson.
I personally don’t understand the popularity of the books, but she is a huge deal. This was a really covered role that Blake scored.
Sorry, should say coveted role.
I mean, okay, but Come. On. Three past Hoover books have been made into movies: Ugly Love, Confess, and Maybe Someday, and none of them have made anywhere near this much money. I don't think I've heard of them, even. Not that fans may not have been looking out for this one, particularly, but are you really saying that would get the movie to $350M? I think It Ends With Us sold one or two million last year - that's not really getting into the half-of-a-Marvel-movie where the film's gross wound up, as far as I'm aware.
Anne Hathaway is an Oscar winner. SHe has her pick of any roles. The fact that she’s doing verity means these movies are going to be seen. I think you are really over estimating Blake here and really underestimating the machine that is Colleen Hoover.
It's being made by Amazon studios, though, and it's not yet clear if it's getting a theater release. It may be streaming only. Hathaway's last movie (The Idea of You) was a streaming-only feature on Prime, and she also was one of the big names who did an episode of their Modern Love series a few years ago (Tina Fey also did an episode, there were other A-list type people in it). She also starred in that WeCrashed series about the WeWork people -- I don't think that was Amazon though, maybe Max? Still a streaming product.
Streaming makes it much harder to evaluate the market for actor's box office power these days. Lots of big stars do streaming-only movies and limited series these days, and the streamers spend HUGE money on those productions right now, so it can be quite lucrative for the creators involved. But unlike a film with a theater release, you never get the kind of clear numbers with streaming products -- the streamers don't even release a transparent list of top streamed shows or movies (they release these partial lists but it's often not even clear what they represent because there are lots of ways to count something as "viewed" that don't necessarily equate to a ticket sale in a movie theater).
All of which is not to say that Colleen Hoover is not a lucrative product right now -- obviously she's having a moment and studios like that her book adaptations have a build in audience. In fact the success of IEWU actually makes it more likely that Verity will get a theater release of some kind. But I also think you can argue that IEWU outperformed expectations even knowing it was a popular Hoover book with a decent following. One thing I will note is that international box office accounted for over 200m of its box office -- that's huge. I think Hoover might have a decent following in Europe, but also Lively went out of her way to go promote the film in London (attended the London premiere in person and paid for Ferrer to accompany her to it on Lively's own dime -- not sure if Lively also paid for her own travel/lodging for that premiere as well). I think you can argue that Lively played an important role in the success of the movie given it's international success, because of her willingness to go the extra mile on the promotional tour and also because of her recognizability to an international audience thanks to both Gossip Girl and her association with Reynolds. She's also a fashion darling and may receive more pressing Europe because of that -- her relationship with Vogue and certain designers (including Versace who did a lot of her clothes for the promotional tour for IEWU) is pretty well known among people interested in fashion.
She’s a fashion nightmare but ok
PP here and I personally don't like her style but that's beside the point. She's got good relationships with designers and fashion editors including a really good relationship with Vogue. She did the Vogue cover in September to coincide with the release of IEWU (the September issue comes out in August, and also is considered the most important issue of the year so the cover is a big get). She's hosted the Met Gala more than once and tends to be more involved and get better reviews than most celebrity hosts. She is a frequent front row guest at both Paris and New York fashion weeks and has attended Paris FW with Anna Wintour which is a weird special honor that tends to go to this very small group of actresses who Wintour dotes on (Emma Stone would be another actress in this group).
I find her personal fashion kind of obvious BUT it's true she famously does not work with a stylist and that she generally looks great on red carpets, which means she does know something because that's really hard to do -- not just because it requires understanding what looks good and how to put the whole look together, but it's also a logistics challenge because it means she has to have the relationships directly with designers and know how to manage the kind of political/interpersonal aspect of it which is more complicated than you might realize.
All of which is to say that Lively has some special attributes as an actress that would make her especially appealing from a box office standpoint for a movie with a primarily female audience in the 18-35 and 35-50 demographics -- those overlap perfectly with the audience for fashion content whether you are talking about Vogue magazine or In Style or just people who pay close attention to fashion blogs and red carpet events. And given IEWU's international box office, I would bet that her willingness to go abroad to promote the movie, to wear big name fashion and do red carpet events in London where it's going to get picked up by European fashion press who are already very familiar with her, translates to actual money for the studio in a very real way. Ever magazine article, blog post, and social media photo of Lively wearing big name fashion on a red carpet while promoting the movie is worth a lot of exposure that it could be hard to get with another actress. It's real value she brings to the project.
I mean, sure if you like tons of gaudy bangles and large chunky earrings, and colorful mismatched prints. It’s trying a little too hard and outdated but whatever floats your boat. With the huge hair, huge white teeth, huge silicone breasts…less is probably more. She’s like her bff TS, far from a style icon. This is partly why I fail to see Europeans following her, as they tend to have more sophisticated low key style generally.
Lol to the idea that Europeans as a group have "sophisticated, low key" style. American fashion is much more stripped down and low key when compared to what comes out of Europe, with the excess of the couture houses as well as all the avant garde fashion that comes out of London/Paris/Copenhagen. European fashion is not low key at all. Sophistication is in the eye of the beholder.
Europeans in general are not wearing avant garde high fashion couture on the daily.
You are really missing the point. It doesn't matter what Europeans wear daily. The point is that Lively will get quite a bit of press in Europe by showing up to events there and wearing designers like Stella McCartney and Tamara Ralph. Her outfit for the London premier got a ton of play in the fashion/celebrity press both in the UK/EU and in the US because it was eye popping and beautiful -- it made for a very pretty picture which makes it easy for photo editors to grab it and use it because it will attract eyeballs.
I'm sure there are plenty of Europeans who would roll their eyes at it and never wear anything like it (or the oversized white McCartney suit she wore as well) and find it tacky. I find it tacky! But Lively understands the fashion world and the fashion press and she definitely worked that knowledge to the best of her ability to sell this movie, which might be why it over performed at the box office so much.
Blake needs a stylist asap, but her bad sense of style is a type of karma, so just let it go.
Not that I understand fashion but what on earth does the bolder mean?
Is anything really bad taste anymore? In RL for sure but celebrities and pop musicians get away with some really bizarre outfits.
She was fat in her SNL corset, and all the slap and veneers and piles of jewelry make it all worse.
Not a BL fan but she looked pretty. I could also see her staying a little bigger to help her case ie that she was fat shamed. Keep in mind what looks bigger on camera would be considered super skinny in the real world. We should all like to look like her.
Are you serious? OMG, just no.
DP. Blake’s pretty. Silly to say otherwise just because she’s ugly on the inside.
DP, can you knock it off? It’s legitimately okay for people to not find any one person pretty.
I will say that Blake is interesting and a little cute by Hollywoods standards. But for her height and size, i would look to a few other ladies as style icons.
She’s a mom of 4, etc, etc. Melanie has a great stylist. Always nails it. And she’s a mom. So is Ivanka. Mom of 3 and looks classy . And no I am not Maga.
Rihanna is tall and about Blake’s age. Mom of 2 toddlers. Rich and dresses cool as heck. Has her own brand. Rihanna rocks Hollywood cool and sexy and all of that. And she does prints the right way!
Laura Dern, Brooke and many more.
I think the challenge that I have with Blake’s style it’s all over the place. Just not very sophisticated overall. But hey, that’s her thing.
Forgot Margot, Charlize, Emma, Cate… Julia and Angelina with more weight.
I guess Blake is okay, but IMO, there are so many other tall, sort of bigger women that carry style really well. Maybe they work with stylists, or maybe they just have great fashion sense. Dunno, but it works.
Anonymous wrote:Just watched a YouTube video that called out something really interesting in Leslie Sloane’s filing. She includes text messages between she and Ryan where he’s explicitly telling her not to smear Justin. However, the problem is she starts the text “Hi, it’s Les” even though she’s been his PR for a decade. No one starts a text like that with someone they know (her number should be in his phone and if it wasn’t he wouldn’t have responded without verifying). Dead give away that they were creating a paper trail for their alibi. The rest of it reads very much like an alibi. Fascinating.
You are nuts. If I haven’t texted someone in a while and I know they text a lot of people I start with a “hi it’s [my name]. Especially not crazy where as here it’s Ryan Reynolds.
Agree it's a huge leap.
Also having known fame-adjacent people, I would not be surprised at all if they use multiple phones or often have an assistant handling their phone. If this was mid-August, it would have been right in the midst of Reynolds doing press with Lively for IEWU plus continuing to promote Deadpool, plus Welcome to Wrexham was nominated for an Emmy right around that time as well. Ryan Reynolds was not sitting in his office checking texts between reading emails and working on a document. He was traveling constantly promoting multiple projects. It is entirely reasonable that anyone who works with him is in the habit of identifying themselves when texting, sorry.
You know how a lot of people don't believe Lively because they feel she doesn't have enough "hard evidence" of inappopriate things happening on set? Well speculation like this is NOT hard evidence. It's flimsy sht. Come on.
Just checked and the screenshots appear to be from Ryan’s phone and the contact is labeled Leslie.
That her number is programmed into this phone now doesn’t mean it was programmed in then when the text was made (unless it was a photo of the text taken back in August? Which would seem weird to me and suggest maybe they were creating some story).
But in any case, SHE doesn’t necessarily know if her number is programmed into his phone. This whole thing is just a super big stretch to make something normal seem fishy. You guys take the smallest thing and turn it into a circus. This level of crazy makes the rest of your arguments suspect.
But again, if it was her phone (as opposed to someone else’s) and her number wasn’t in his phone at the time, wouldn’t he verify first, no? What celebrity texts back and forth with a random unknown number.
I really don't think the text thing matters. Is there any evidence that what is in those messages isn't true? They don't seem to have any evidence that Sloane planted stories about Baldoni, leaked negative or false stories about him, etc. Not even examples of stories that they are accusing her of planting.
In light of that, even if the text conversation was planned to "create a paper trail" -- isn't it also true? It looks like they did not plant any negative stories about Baldoni. Isn't that the relevant issue?
Anonymous wrote:I’m really curious how this movie made so much money. It’s currently grossed over $350 million, which is a crazy amount for a domestic violence film. Baldwin has come nowhere close to these numbers — Five Feet Apart grossed 45 million but Clouds grossed far less, I can’t even find real numbers but maybe only $2 million? Lively’s A Simple Favor (I) with Kendrick grossed about $100 million. I don’t think Hoover’s ever come close to this before. Was the success in fact from all the controversy? Was Reynold’s promotion firm really successful here? $350 million is a lot of viewers.
Maybe this was the plan all along, sort of reverse psychology. Even negative attention is better than no attention.
No,no. You guys are missing that Colleen Hoover‘s book was hugely popular. People have been waiting for this movie to be made for years and there was a lot of attention on it as soon as it was announced. She has a ginormous fan base. Another one of her books, verity, is being made with Anne Hathaway, Josh Hartnett, and Dakota Johnson.
I personally don’t understand the popularity of the books, but she is a huge deal. This was a really covered role that Blake scored.
Sorry, should say coveted role.
I mean, okay, but Come. On. Three past Hoover books have been made into movies: Ugly Love, Confess, and Maybe Someday, and none of them have made anywhere near this much money. I don't think I've heard of them, even. Not that fans may not have been looking out for this one, particularly, but are you really saying that would get the movie to $350M? I think It Ends With Us sold one or two million last year - that's not really getting into the half-of-a-Marvel-movie where the film's gross wound up, as far as I'm aware.
Anne Hathaway is an Oscar winner. SHe has her pick of any roles. The fact that she’s doing verity means these movies are going to be seen. I think you are really over estimating Blake here and really underestimating the machine that is Colleen Hoover.
It's being made by Amazon studios, though, and it's not yet clear if it's getting a theater release. It may be streaming only. Hathaway's last movie (The Idea of You) was a streaming-only feature on Prime, and she also was one of the big names who did an episode of their Modern Love series a few years ago (Tina Fey also did an episode, there were other A-list type people in it). She also starred in that WeCrashed series about the WeWork people -- I don't think that was Amazon though, maybe Max? Still a streaming product.
Streaming makes it much harder to evaluate the market for actor's box office power these days. Lots of big stars do streaming-only movies and limited series these days, and the streamers spend HUGE money on those productions right now, so it can be quite lucrative for the creators involved. But unlike a film with a theater release, you never get the kind of clear numbers with streaming products -- the streamers don't even release a transparent list of top streamed shows or movies (they release these partial lists but it's often not even clear what they represent because there are lots of ways to count something as "viewed" that don't necessarily equate to a ticket sale in a movie theater).
All of which is not to say that Colleen Hoover is not a lucrative product right now -- obviously she's having a moment and studios like that her book adaptations have a build in audience. In fact the success of IEWU actually makes it more likely that Verity will get a theater release of some kind. But I also think you can argue that IEWU outperformed expectations even knowing it was a popular Hoover book with a decent following. One thing I will note is that international box office accounted for over 200m of its box office -- that's huge. I think Hoover might have a decent following in Europe, but also Lively went out of her way to go promote the film in London (attended the London premiere in person and paid for Ferrer to accompany her to it on Lively's own dime -- not sure if Lively also paid for her own travel/lodging for that premiere as well). I think you can argue that Lively played an important role in the success of the movie given it's international success, because of her willingness to go the extra mile on the promotional tour and also because of her recognizability to an international audience thanks to both Gossip Girl and her association with Reynolds. She's also a fashion darling and may receive more pressing Europe because of that -- her relationship with Vogue and certain designers (including Versace who did a lot of her clothes for the promotional tour for IEWU) is pretty well known among people interested in fashion.
She’s a fashion nightmare but ok
PP here and I personally don't like her style but that's beside the point. She's got good relationships with designers and fashion editors including a really good relationship with Vogue. She did the Vogue cover in September to coincide with the release of IEWU (the September issue comes out in August, and also is considered the most important issue of the year so the cover is a big get). She's hosted the Met Gala more than once and tends to be more involved and get better reviews than most celebrity hosts. She is a frequent front row guest at both Paris and New York fashion weeks and has attended Paris FW with Anna Wintour which is a weird special honor that tends to go to this very small group of actresses who Wintour dotes on (Emma Stone would be another actress in this group).
I find her personal fashion kind of obvious BUT it's true she famously does not work with a stylist and that she generally looks great on red carpets, which means she does know something because that's really hard to do -- not just because it requires understanding what looks good and how to put the whole look together, but it's also a logistics challenge because it means she has to have the relationships directly with designers and know how to manage the kind of political/interpersonal aspect of it which is more complicated than you might realize.
All of which is to say that Lively has some special attributes as an actress that would make her especially appealing from a box office standpoint for a movie with a primarily female audience in the 18-35 and 35-50 demographics -- those overlap perfectly with the audience for fashion content whether you are talking about Vogue magazine or In Style or just people who pay close attention to fashion blogs and red carpet events. And given IEWU's international box office, I would bet that her willingness to go abroad to promote the movie, to wear big name fashion and do red carpet events in London where it's going to get picked up by European fashion press who are already very familiar with her, translates to actual money for the studio in a very real way. Ever magazine article, blog post, and social media photo of Lively wearing big name fashion on a red carpet while promoting the movie is worth a lot of exposure that it could be hard to get with another actress. It's real value she brings to the project.
I mean, sure if you like tons of gaudy bangles and large chunky earrings, and colorful mismatched prints. It’s trying a little too hard and outdated but whatever floats your boat. With the huge hair, huge white teeth, huge silicone breasts…less is probably more. She’s like her bff TS, far from a style icon. This is partly why I fail to see Europeans following her, as they tend to have more sophisticated low key style generally.
Lol to the idea that Europeans as a group have "sophisticated, low key" style. American fashion is much more stripped down and low key when compared to what comes out of Europe, with the excess of the couture houses as well as all the avant garde fashion that comes out of London/Paris/Copenhagen. European fashion is not low key at all. Sophistication is in the eye of the beholder.
Europeans in general are not wearing avant garde high fashion couture on the daily.
You are really missing the point. It doesn't matter what Europeans wear daily. The point is that Lively will get quite a bit of press in Europe by showing up to events there and wearing designers like Stella McCartney and Tamara Ralph. Her outfit for the London premier got a ton of play in the fashion/celebrity press both in the UK/EU and in the US because it was eye popping and beautiful -- it made for a very pretty picture which makes it easy for photo editors to grab it and use it because it will attract eyeballs.
I'm sure there are plenty of Europeans who would roll their eyes at it and never wear anything like it (or the oversized white McCartney suit she wore as well) and find it tacky. I find it tacky! But Lively understands the fashion world and the fashion press and she definitely worked that knowledge to the best of her ability to sell this movie, which might be why it over performed at the box office so much.
Blake needs a stylist asap, but her bad sense of style is a type of karma, so just let it go.
Not that I understand fashion but what on earth does the bolder mean?
Is anything really bad taste anymore? In RL for sure but celebrities and pop musicians get away with some really bizarre outfits.
She was fat in her SNL corset, and all the slap and veneers and piles of jewelry make it all worse.
Not a BL fan but she looked pretty. I could also see her staying a little bigger to help her case ie that she was fat shamed. Keep in mind what looks bigger on camera would be considered super skinny in the real world. We should all like to look like her.
Are you serious? OMG, just no.
DP. Blake’s pretty. Silly to say otherwise just because she’s ugly on the inside.
DP, can you knock it off? It’s legitimately okay for people to not find any one person pretty.
And it is equally legit for others to find some one pretty:
Either way her looks are not relevant to thread
The hell they aren’t. In fact, discussion of her looks are related to multiple things - the hair care line, the promo campaign for the film, her reaction to the paparazzi shots of her looking big/fat, too old, and clownish in the character costumes, and in the bullsh!t where she claims Baldoni threw an hours-long hissy delaying filming while trying to pull back on BL’s crackheaded bullheaded styling. It’s actually relevant. What’s not relevant: Amber Heard, the Ba’hai faith, or Catherine McKinnon or any employment law.
And we are very much allowed to discuss harshly and all of the complaints don’t change that.
Jenny Slate is apparently a fool and a mean piece of work. I’m surprised.
Forum Index
»
Entertainment and Pop Culture
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}