Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims

[Anonymous]

On the extortion, Ryan and Blake have done this before. The Director of the first Deadpool was pushed out by Ryan and the comic book author was sidelined at the premiere. Last fall when Blake’s camp was smearing Baldoni, they also leaked to the press that Ryan wanted to buy the movie from Baldoni so she could continue the franchise without him, as they’d clashed. The problem with narcissists is they always tell on themselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You all are really naive thinking intimacy coordinators and standards and protocols are going to solve these kind of issues. Maybe they will minimize them but the industry is full of people who purposely didn’t go to the law firms and corporate or federal government jobs with functioning HR departments that we work in.

This is a bunch of people who think they are artists. For every actor who wants an IC on set there’s an actor who thinks is they kill their artistic freedom. Jennifer Aniston refused to work with one on the morning show and said she didn’t understand them. She got a lot of pushback for that because she’s in a very privileged position likely not to be a victim. But Andrew Garfield and Florence Pugh did an an interview that their intimate scene got totally out of hand and they totally missed the director saying cut and took it way too far. Obviously they were not interested in having a scripted choreographed scene with an IC.

Of course you should have standards and some attempt to make people feel comfortable obviously, but it’s just so much hard harder than in a normal workplace because of the nature of the job and the people. Sets are so different than our jobs. It’s incredibly high-pressure, big egos being paid ridiculous sums of money, ultra focused on looks and chemistry, and people are together for weeks at a time in locations far from their homes and families and routines.

Justin is getting a lot of criticism for running a chaotic set, but I don’t think it’s totally his fault and I think his job is probably very hard. I think it’s also why Blake is being picked on for not setting clear boundaries. I’m very confused as to why, after the fat shaming and some of the problematic behaviors like the dancing scene and maybe the birth scene that happened in pre production and in May, it was June 2 when she invited him to run lines in her trailer while she was pumping. Pumping or not why would she want to be alone in a trailer with him?

Thats another difference, in all the places I’ve worked there’s not a lot of privacy, it’s a lot of glass meeting rooms and open floor plans. Just weird that she picked such a private space to be alone with him and it is telling that he didn’t end up meeting with her and said he’d catch up with her later, maybe he was trying to put up a boundary to protect himself there.

Is it me or does the job of unteach coordinator sound percy? There is no way a normal perso. signs up for that. I feel like it could be an SNL skit.

[Anonymous]

intimacy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:On the extortion, Ryan and Blake have done this before. The Director of the first Deadpool was pushed out by Ryan and the comic book author was sidelined at the premiere. Last fall when Blake’s camp was smearing Baldoni, they also leaked to the press that Ryan wanted to buy the movie from Baldoni so she could continue the franchise without him, as they’d clashed. The problem with narcissists is they always tell on themselves.

What a weird amalgam of truth, rumor, and flat out lies.

The comic book author was sidelined by Marvel/Disney, not Reynolds (he wasn't involved with that at all). This is a longstanding issue between comic book authors and Marvel and Disney. Authors of these stories are unique because they are generally hired to tell stories about existing characters and universes, which means they never own the copyright on what they produce. I have also heard authors who have written parts of the extended Star Wars universe that have found their way into the newer films talk about this. It's just a challenge of working in that genre on existing IP and has absolutely zero to do with Ryan Reynolds or Blake Lively.

The rumors that Reynolds or Lively were trying to get the rights to the sequel have never been substantiated. It's never clear where those "leaks" came from or what they were based on. Though on their face, offering to buy the rights from Baldoni is not "extortion." It's legal and find to offer to pay for the rights to an IP property.

I didn't follow the thing with Reynolds and the original director of Deadpool that closely but it just sounded like creative differences. Again, not extortion -- it's not like Reynolds tried to extort that director. They disagreed over the direction of the second movie, and Miller decided to quit. It's just a reality that when you have a franchise like that, the "face" of the franchise often has more power than the director of the movie because it's easier to replace a director (most movie watchers will never know the difference) than to replace the actor who stars as the lead character. I guess even in Deadpool where he wears the mask all the time this is true. I don't know. I'm sure Miller has what he feels are legitimate gripes with Reynolds over what happened there, but notice he didn't sue Reynolds for extortion. Because it's not extortion to flex the power you have on a film set to try and control the direction of the movie. It's how the movie business works. It's a tough business!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You all are really naive thinking intimacy coordinators and standards and protocols are going to solve these kind of issues. Maybe they will minimize them but the industry is full of people who purposely didn’t go to the law firms and corporate or federal government jobs with functioning HR departments that we work in.

This is a bunch of people who think they are artists. For every actor who wants an IC on set there’s an actor who thinks is they kill their artistic freedom. Jennifer Aniston refused to work with one on the morning show and said she didn’t understand them. She got a lot of pushback for that because she’s in a very privileged position likely not to be a victim. But Andrew Garfield and Florence Pugh did an an interview that their intimate scene got totally out of hand and they totally missed the director saying cut and took it way too far. Obviously they were not interested in having a scripted choreographed scene with an IC.

Of course you should have standards and some attempt to make people feel comfortable obviously, but it’s just so much hard harder than in a normal workplace because of the nature of the job and the people. Sets are so different than our jobs. It’s incredibly high-pressure, big egos being paid ridiculous sums of money, ultra focused on looks and chemistry, and people are together for weeks at a time in locations far from their homes and families and routines.

Justin is getting a lot of criticism for running a chaotic set, but I don’t think it’s totally his fault and I think his job is probably very hard. I think it’s also why Blake is being picked on for not setting clear boundaries. I’m very confused as to why, after the fat shaming and some of the problematic behaviors like the dancing scene and maybe the birth scene that happened in pre production and in May, it was June 2 when she invited him to run lines in her trailer while she was pumping. Pumping or not why would she want to be alone in a trailer with him?

Thats another difference, in all the places I’ve worked there’s not a lot of privacy, it’s a lot of glass meeting rooms and open floor plans. Just weird that she picked such a private space to be alone with him and it is telling that he didn’t end up meeting with her and said he’d catch up with her later, maybe he was trying to put up a boundary to protect himself there.

Is it me or does the job of unteach coordinator sound percy? There is no way a normal perso. signs up for that. I feel like it could be an SNL skit.

I don't see how being an intimacy coordinator is any weirder or abnormal than being an actor who plays a character who gets intimate, or being a director who films an intimate scene, or being a screenwriter who writes the scene. If anything, the intimacy coordinator's job is to make the situation less weird and uncomfortable for everyone else, but professionalizing it and making sure there's good communication.

Like unless you just think there should be no intimate scenes in film or television at all, I don't get how an IC is any weirder than anyone else involved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You all are really naive thinking intimacy coordinators and standards and protocols are going to solve these kind of issues. Maybe they will minimize them but the industry is full of people who purposely didn’t go to the law firms and corporate or federal government jobs with functioning HR departments that we work in.

This is a bunch of people who think they are artists. For every actor who wants an IC on set there’s an actor who thinks is they kill their artistic freedom. Jennifer Aniston refused to work with one on the morning show and said she didn’t understand them. She got a lot of pushback for that because she’s in a very privileged position likely not to be a victim. But Andrew Garfield and Florence Pugh did an an interview that their intimate scene got totally out of hand and they totally missed the director saying cut and took it way too far. Obviously they were not interested in having a scripted choreographed scene with an IC.

Of course you should have standards and some attempt to make people feel comfortable obviously, but it’s just so much hard harder than in a normal workplace because of the nature of the job and the people. Sets are so different than our jobs. It’s incredibly high-pressure, big egos being paid ridiculous sums of money, ultra focused on looks and chemistry, and people are together for weeks at a time in locations far from their homes and families and routines.

Justin is getting a lot of criticism for running a chaotic set, but I don’t think it’s totally his fault and I think his job is probably very hard. I think it’s also why Blake is being picked on for not setting clear boundaries. I’m very confused as to why, after the fat shaming and some of the problematic behaviors like the dancing scene and maybe the birth scene that happened in pre production and in May, it was June 2 when she invited him to run lines in her trailer while she was pumping. Pumping or not why would she want to be alone in a trailer with him?

Thats another difference, in all the places I’ve worked there’s not a lot of privacy, it’s a lot of glass meeting rooms and open floor plans. Just weird that she picked such a private space to be alone with him and it is telling that he didn’t end up meeting with her and said he’d catch up with her later, maybe he was trying to put up a boundary to protect himself there.

Is it me or does the job of unteach coordinator sound percy? There is no way a normal perso. signs up for that. I feel like it could be an SNL skit.

I don't see how being an intimacy coordinator is any weirder or abnormal than being an actor who plays a character who gets intimate, or being a director who films an intimate scene, or being a screenwriter who writes the scene. If anything, the intimacy coordinator's job is to make the situation less weird and uncomfortable for everyone else, but professionalizing it and making sure there's good communication.

Like unless you just think there should be no intimate scenes in film or television at all, I don't get how an IC is any weirder than anyone else involved.

The only reason we need ICs is because we live in such a litigious society. Unfortunately, SH can occur, people sometimes lie or exaggerate, or they have beliefs not based in reality. An IC can be that neutral set of eyes and protection for all parties involved. It is ridiculous that grown adults would need such a thing though.

[Anonymous]

Gone for a week and this thread has once again gone south.

Do some of you all not have jobs? Working with annoying people comes with the territory, regardless of profession. Being annoying or as some of you put it, unprofessional, is not actionable as sexual harassment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On the extortion, Ryan and Blake have done this before. The Director of the first Deadpool was pushed out by Ryan and the comic book author was sidelined at the premiere. Last fall when Blake’s camp was smearing Baldoni, they also leaked to the press that Ryan wanted to buy the movie from Baldoni so she could continue the franchise without him, as they’d clashed. The problem with narcissists is they always tell on themselves.

What a weird amalgam of truth, rumor, and flat out lies.

The comic book author was sidelined by Marvel/Disney, not Reynolds (he wasn't involved with that at all). This is a longstanding issue between comic book authors and Marvel and Disney. Authors of these stories are unique because they are generally hired to tell stories about existing characters and universes, which means they never own the copyright on what they produce. I have also heard authors who have written parts of the extended Star Wars universe that have found their way into the newer films talk about this. It's just a challenge of working in that genre on existing IP and has absolutely zero to do with Ryan Reynolds or Blake Lively.

The rumors that Reynolds or Lively were trying to get the rights to the sequel have never been substantiated. It's never clear where those "leaks" came from or what they were based on. Though on their face, offering to buy the rights from Baldoni is not "extortion." It's legal and find to offer to pay for the rights to an IP property.

I didn't follow the thing with Reynolds and the original director of Deadpool that closely but it just sounded like creative differences. Again, not extortion -- it's not like Reynolds tried to extort that director. They disagreed over the direction of the second movie, and Miller decided to quit. It's just a reality that when you have a franchise like that, the "face" of the franchise often has more power than the director of the movie because it's easier to replace a director (most movie watchers will never know the difference) than to replace the actor who stars as the lead character. I guess even in Deadpool where he wears the mask all the time this is true. I don't know. I'm sure Miller has what he feels are legitimate gripes with Reynolds over what happened there, but notice he didn't sue Reynolds for extortion. Because it's not extortion to flex the power you have on a film set to try and control the direction of the movie. It's how the movie business works. It's a tough business!

Miller didn’t sue because Ryan pushed him out the old fashioned way. With iewu, Blake pushed Baldoni out by falsely accusing him of SH and leaking these things to the public. The point about buying the movie is they were making their intentions clear. Put enough pressure on Baldoni reputation wise so he’d be compelled to sell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Gone for a week and this thread has once again gone south.

Do some of you all not have jobs? Working with annoying people comes with the territory, regardless of profession. Being annoying or as some of you put it, unprofessional, is not actionable as sexual harassment.

The princess types will always find something to complain about. They find certain innocuous men too creepy to work with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Gone for a week and this thread has once again gone south.

Do some of you all not have jobs? Working with annoying people comes with the territory, regardless of profession. Being annoying or as some of you put it, unprofessional, is not actionable as sexual harassment.

And being outwitted strategically is not extortion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gone for a week and this thread has once again gone south.

Do some of you all not have jobs? Working with annoying people comes with the territory, regardless of profession. Being annoying or as some of you put it, unprofessional, is not actionable as sexual harassment.

And being outwitted strategically is not extortion.

Are you implying that Blake alone outwitted Baldoni?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gone for a week and this thread has once again gone south.

Do some of you all not have jobs? Working with annoying people comes with the territory, regardless of profession. Being annoying or as some of you put it, unprofessional, is not actionable as sexual harassment.

And being outwitted strategically is not extortion.

Are you implying that Blake alone outwitted Baldoni?!

No, I believe both Ryan and Blake are both being sued for that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You all are really naive thinking intimacy coordinators and standards and protocols are going to solve these kind of issues. Maybe they will minimize them but the industry is full of people who purposely didn’t go to the law firms and corporate or federal government jobs with functioning HR departments that we work in.

This is a bunch of people who think they are artists. For every actor who wants an IC on set there’s an actor who thinks is they kill their artistic freedom. Jennifer Aniston refused to work with one on the morning show and said she didn’t understand them. She got a lot of pushback for that because she’s in a very privileged position likely not to be a victim. But Andrew Garfield and Florence Pugh did an an interview that their intimate scene got totally out of hand and they totally missed the director saying cut and took it way too far. Obviously they were not interested in having a scripted choreographed scene with an IC.

Of course you should have standards and some attempt to make people feel comfortable obviously, but it’s just so much hard harder than in a normal workplace because of the nature of the job and the people. Sets are so different than our jobs. It’s incredibly high-pressure, big egos being paid ridiculous sums of money, ultra focused on looks and chemistry, and people are together for weeks at a time in locations far from their homes and families and routines.

Justin is getting a lot of criticism for running a chaotic set, but I don’t think it’s totally his fault and I think his job is probably very hard. I think it’s also why Blake is being picked on for not setting clear boundaries. I’m very confused as to why, after the fat shaming and some of the problematic behaviors like the dancing scene and maybe the birth scene that happened in pre production and in May, it was June 2 when she invited him to run lines in her trailer while she was pumping. Pumping or not why would she want to be alone in a trailer with him?

Thats another difference, in all the places I’ve worked there’s not a lot of privacy, it’s a lot of glass meeting rooms and open floor plans. Just weird that she picked such a private space to be alone with him and it is telling that he didn’t end up meeting with her and said he’d catch up with her later, maybe he was trying to put up a boundary to protect himself there.

Is it me or does the job of unteach coordinator sound percy? There is no way a normal perso. signs up for that. I feel like it could be an SNL skit.

Also, the fact is, ICs are human beings, and it’s only a matter of time before someone complains with the IC creeps them out or crossed a line. They didn’t like questions being asked about what they were not comfortable with. They felt like they had to reveal personal information about their own experience with intimacy, etc.

Movie sets are just a weird line of work that most of us will never even come close to understanding. Things like looks, sexuality, weight really matter - it’s often why people are hired for the job and silly to pretend otherwise. And yes you have to simulate s-x with someone you just met at times.

It’s really tough to navigate and an uphill climb for women who feel uncomfortable. I don’t really believe Blake truly experienced SH at this point, but I’ll wait for the trial. But I do feel sorry for both men and women trying to navigate this, and I think even if she had legitimate clients, it would be almost impossible in this situation unless something super egregious happened or there was full on assault. I think it’s just very hard to prove in this kind of environment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On the extortion, Ryan and Blake have done this before. The Director of the first Deadpool was pushed out by Ryan and the comic book author was sidelined at the premiere. Last fall when Blake’s camp was smearing Baldoni, they also leaked to the press that Ryan wanted to buy the movie from Baldoni so she could continue the franchise without him, as they’d clashed. The problem with narcissists is they always tell on themselves.

What a weird amalgam of truth, rumor, and flat out lies.

The comic book author was sidelined by Marvel/Disney, not Reynolds (he wasn't involved with that at all). This is a longstanding issue between comic book authors and Marvel and Disney. Authors of these stories are unique because they are generally hired to tell stories about existing characters and universes, which means they never own the copyright on what they produce. I have also heard authors who have written parts of the extended Star Wars universe that have found their way into the newer films talk about this. It's just a challenge of working in that genre on existing IP and has absolutely zero to do with Ryan Reynolds or Blake Lively.

The rumors that Reynolds or Lively were trying to get the rights to the sequel have never been substantiated. It's never clear where those "leaks" came from or what they were based on. Though on their face, offering to buy the rights from Baldoni is not "extortion." It's legal and find to offer to pay for the rights to an IP property.

I didn't follow the thing with Reynolds and the original director of Deadpool that closely but it just sounded like creative differences. Again, not extortion -- it's not like Reynolds tried to extort that director. They disagreed over the direction of the second movie, and Miller decided to quit. It's just a reality that when you have a franchise like that, the "face" of the franchise often has more power than the director of the movie because it's easier to replace a director (most movie watchers will never know the difference) than to replace the actor who stars as the lead character. I guess even in Deadpool where he wears the mask all the time this is true. I don't know. I'm sure Miller has what he feels are legitimate gripes with Reynolds over what happened there, but notice he didn't sue Reynolds for extortion. Because it's not extortion to flex the power you have on a film set to try and control the direction of the movie. It's how the movie business works. It's a tough business!

Miller didn’t sue because Ryan pushed him out the old fashioned way. With iewu, Blake pushed Baldoni out by falsely accusing him of SH and leaking these things to the public. The point about buying the movie is they were making their intentions clear. Put enough pressure on Baldoni reputation wise so he’d be compelled to sell.

1) I do not believe Lively's allegations are false.
2) Lively sued over the SH allegations in December 2024, a full 5 months after the movie was released.
3) Baldoni remained the director for the duration of the shoot and is credited as the director on the movie. He was not fired nor was he forced to quit.
4) Baldoni did his own edit of the movie and if he wants to release it, he is welcome to. Sony decided to distribute Lively's edit of the movie. It is not uncommon for a large studio serving as distributor of a movie to choose an edit other than the director's edit for distribution, and there are multiple factors that go into it.
5) Again, there is zero evidence that Lively or Reynolds ever offered to buy the rights to sequel from Baldoni, and even if they did, what is the evidence that the goal here wouldn't be just to ensure Lively could make a sequel to a popular movie she starred in without working with the director who SHed her on the set of the original movie? It seems reasonable to me that if you were SHed by a director, you wouldn't want to work with them again, and it would be a bummer if that director owned the rights to a sequel for a movie you were closely associated with.

This whole narrative about how Lively and Reynolds somehow plotted to steal the movie and the sequel rights from Baldoni by inventing sexual harassment claims and using them as leverage makes no sense. If the claims were invented, they'd be easy to disprove, so why would they work as leverage in the first place? And given their money and power, this is the weirdest possible way for Lively to gain control of a movie -- she was in talks to direct her first movie before they even shot IEWU. Why would she scheme to steal IEWU instead of just making that movie and then going on to direct her own first feature?

The hoops y'all will jump through to deny that a woman was sexually harassed, and to defend a man who is, by all accounts, kind of crappy. It's amazing. Not really surprising, but still amazing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gone for a week and this thread has once again gone south.

Do some of you all not have jobs? Working with annoying people comes with the territory, regardless of profession. Being annoying or as some of you put it, unprofessional, is not actionable as sexual harassment.

The princess types will always find something to complain about. They find certain innocuous men too creepy to work with.

Hmm, sounds like you are speaking from personal experience. Why don't you expand on this?