Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The phrasing that TS and HJ will be "issued subpoenas" this week indicates to me that either the person leaking this info doesn't understand how subpoenas work or is just making it up. Or maybe has real info but is misstating or misinterpreting it.

The court issues subpoenas. It is unlikely at this stage that they are issuing a subpoena, especially for people as tangentially related to the case as TS or HJ. More likely, as part of the normal discovery process, both sides are providing lists of people from whom they plan to request documents, interrogatories (basically a list of written questions), or testimony. Many of these requests will be uncontested, and no actual subpoena will be issued -- people will just provide relevant info voluntarily.

But once you get into third parties, some people might say they dont' want to participate. They might say they can't, because they simply don't have the info desired, they may say it's overly burdensome for them to provide it, or they may argue that what they are being asked for is not relevant. I anticipate that TS and HJ are likely to fall in this category. At that point, the judge would then weigh in, and IF it is determined that the person has relevant info and it is not overly burdensome for them to provide it, THEN a subpoena might be issued.

I think it's extremely unlikely that the court is at that stage with regards to TS and HJ, especially with MTDs pending that might make any potential testimony or info from them irrelevant. Judge Liman previously expressed an interest in not going too fast with discovery when it is likely that complaints are still to be amended and claims may be dismissed or altered, because you don't want to issue discovery requests that then have to be repeated later because the issues at play have shifted with new pleadings or motions.

So while I think it's entirely likely TS and HJ are appearing on a list of people the Wayfarer parties intend to request info from, I think it's highly unlikely that they are going to be "subpoenaed" by the court *this week*.

Once again, here is what I stated:

“Reading that there may be subpoenas for TS and HJ this week. Could be conjecture, but I wonder if these two, then what about Coop & Gigi?”

Did not say one of the parties was issuing the subpoena. Did not reference at all. You assumed that I meant a party.

I state that this may be just a hunch or conjecture. Nothing wrong with that. And I did get it from a source. But I leave room for error.

You are free to state that you don’t believe this to be the case. Fine. But I stand on what I said at 15:58.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of interest regarding Baldoni's defamation suit against NYT: new jury verdict in Sarah Palin's libel case against NYT finding no defamation and a failure to meet the actual malice standard because the jury found no evidence that the NYT acted without regard for the truth.

The facts in that case are quite different than in the Baldoni suit -- the Palin case concerns an op ed submitted to the Times, not a reported piece by the Times. And unlike with Baldoni, the Times admitted that the op ed included false statements, however the paper quickly issued a retraction and correction when it became aware of the error.

https://www.mediaite.com/politics/just-in-jury-finds-new-york-times-did-not-libel-sarah-palin/

Dp. The facts here are different obviously and in certain ways, much more damaging to the NYT. I’ll note that Palins extremely thin case survived a MTD and a summary judgement motion (at least initially) and went to trial. And that judge did almost everything to tip the scales to the NYT. Im fascinated to see how Baldonis defamation suit against the NYT plays out. I’m alone here in thinking it will survive a MTD.

I tend to think it will be dismissed but curious on your thoughts. Do you think it will all survive or just parts? The part I can possibly see surviving is where they call it a smear campaign in the video but I believe that anything quoted from the CRD or the texts will not be deemed defamatory, ie I don't believe the judge will accept the arguments about context.

Yes, I think parts will survive. I don’t have time to do a complete analysis but I don’t think it will be dismissed in full. But with litigation, you never know. That judge in Palin kept trying to get rid of that case, but it kept coming back

The Palin case does seem weak especially for an op ed making a vague correlation. I'm kind of curious now to read the procedural history.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of interest regarding Baldoni's defamation suit against NYT: new jury verdict in Sarah Palin's libel case against NYT finding no defamation and a failure to meet the actual malice standard because the jury found no evidence that the NYT acted without regard for the truth.

The facts in that case are quite different than in the Baldoni suit -- the Palin case concerns an op ed submitted to the Times, not a reported piece by the Times. And unlike with Baldoni, the Times admitted that the op ed included false statements, however the paper quickly issued a retraction and correction when it became aware of the error.

https://www.mediaite.com/politics/just-in-jury-finds-new-york-times-did-not-libel-sarah-palin/

Dp. The facts here are different obviously and in certain ways, much more damaging to the NYT. I’ll note that Palins extremely thin case survived a MTD and a summary judgement motion (at least initially) and went to trial. And that judge did almost everything to tip the scales to the NYT. Im fascinated to see how Baldonis defamation suit against the NYT plays out. I’m alone here in thinking it will survive a MTD.

I tend to think it will be dismissed but curious on your thoughts. Do you think it will all survive or just parts? The part I can possibly see surviving is where they call it a smear campaign in the video but I believe that anything quoted from the CRD or the texts will not be deemed defamatory, ie I don't believe the judge will accept the arguments about context.

Yes, I think parts will survive. I don’t have time to do a complete analysis but I don’t think it will be dismissed in full. But with litigation, you never know. That judge in Palin kept trying to get rid of that case, but it kept coming back

The Palin case does seem weak especially for an op ed making a vague correlation. I'm kind of curious now to read the procedural history.

Yeah, putting aside fair report which I think is a fairly weak defense here, this case is much stronger than Palins case. Palin was an op Ed, she wasn’t harmed, they corrected and apologized right away etc. Baldoni et al suffered real harm and this was very much a one sided hit piece. No other way to say it.

NYT kinda arrogantly double downed here too. It’s just a weird situation. And since they don’t settle, and Baldoni seems to have $ to take this far, I am VERY curious to see how this plays out. Even if BL settles her case with justin, which I suspect she will, this case could against the NYT could continue and the trial would be nuts I’d think

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The phrasing that TS and HJ will be "issued subpoenas" this week indicates to me that either the person leaking this info doesn't understand how subpoenas work or is just making it up. Or maybe has real info but is misstating or misinterpreting it.

The court issues subpoenas. It is unlikely at this stage that they are issuing a subpoena, especially for people as tangentially related to the case as TS or HJ. More likely, as part of the normal discovery process, both sides are providing lists of people from whom they plan to request documents, interrogatories (basically a list of written questions), or testimony. Many of these requests will be uncontested, and no actual subpoena will be issued -- people will just provide relevant info voluntarily.

But once you get into third parties, some people might say they dont' want to participate. They might say they can't, because they simply don't have the info desired, they may say it's overly burdensome for them to provide it, or they may argue that what they are being asked for is not relevant. I anticipate that TS and HJ are likely to fall in this category. At that point, the judge would then weigh in, and IF it is determined that the person has relevant info and it is not overly burdensome for them to provide it, THEN a subpoena might be issued.

I think it's extremely unlikely that the court is at that stage with regards to TS and HJ, especially with MTDs pending that might make any potential testimony or info from them irrelevant. Judge Liman previously expressed an interest in not going too fast with discovery when it is likely that complaints are still to be amended and claims may be dismissed or altered, because you don't want to issue discovery requests that then have to be repeated later because the issues at play have shifted with new pleadings or motions.

So while I think it's entirely likely TS and HJ are appearing on a list of people the Wayfarer parties intend to request info from, I think it's highly unlikely that they are going to be "subpoenaed" by the court *this week*.

Once again, here is what I stated:

“Reading that there may be subpoenas for TS and HJ this week. Could be conjecture, but I wonder if these two, then what about Coop & Gigi?”

Did not say one of the parties was issuing the subpoena. Did not reference at all. You assumed that I meant a party.

I state that this may be just a hunch or conjecture. Nothing wrong with that. And I did get it from a source. But I leave room for error.

You are free to state that you don’t believe this to be the case. Fine. But I stand on what I said at 15:58.

Why do you keep replying to posts that are not directed at you as though they were? You are not the only person talking about this issue. No one misquoted you or misinterpreted your statements. This post is obviously a response to the news reports that an "insider" has said TS and HJ will be subpoenaed soon. Are you the insider? If not, chill.

[Anonymous]

I must admit I'm curious whether this insider is personal to PP or like a social media person we can all look up.

[Anonymous]

I very much enjoyed this little video of how Blake lively and her team tried like hell to get her for Barbie and failed miserably. And Margot Robbie handled it like a true pro without any war in the press…just quietly worked to ensure Blake didn’t ruin the project.

Apparently, Blake’s team lodged a full campaign starting in 2020 about how she should play Barbie, dressing her in pink, and how they wanted a more family friendly version for the big screen, and paying certain influencers to continue to spread on social, calling her Barbie, trying to drum up support online.


https://www.instagram.com/reel/DIzNigusbDZ/?igsh=MWFiZ2t3anVyOW5xdA==

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I very much enjoyed this little video of how Blake lively and her team tried like hell to get her for Barbie and failed miserably. And Margot Robbie handled it like a true pro without any war in the press…just quietly worked to ensure Blake didn’t ruin the project.

Apparently, Blake’s team lodged a full campaign starting in 2020 about how she should play Barbie, dressing her in pink, and how they wanted a more family friendly version for the big screen, and paying certain influencers to continue to spread on social, calling her Barbie, trying to drum up support online.


https://www.instagram.com/reel/DIzNigusbDZ/?igsh=MWFiZ2t3anVyOW5xdA==

Omg I didn’t know about this but I am not surprised.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I very much enjoyed this little video of how Blake lively and her team tried like hell to get her for Barbie and failed miserably. And Margot Robbie handled it like a true pro without any war in the press…just quietly worked to ensure Blake didn’t ruin the project.

Apparently, Blake’s team lodged a full campaign starting in 2020 about how she should play Barbie, dressing her in pink, and how they wanted a more family friendly version for the big screen, and paying certain influencers to continue to spread on social, calling her Barbie, trying to drum up support online.


https://www.instagram.com/reel/DIzNigusbDZ/?igsh=MWFiZ2t3anVyOW5xdA==

Ugh, I hate defending Blake Lively but this video is dumb because:

(1) It's fine and normal for a working actress to be angling to try to get a big role. That's not trying to steal a job, it's literally just trying to get a job. Every actor does this, including stuff like dressing publicly or doing photo shoots that might make producers/directors think of them for desirable roles. If you are going to criticize Blake for this, you might as well just write off all of Hollywood.

(2) In order to try and make their point seem more convincing, they did a bizarre thing where they put a pink filter on all the photos/footage of Blake in her 2022 Met Gala dress, to make it seem like this is an event where Blake "dressed like Barbie" to try and get the role. The problem is that the dress was NOT pink, and lots of people know this because it's one of the most famous things she's ever worn. The dress was inspired by the Statue of Liberty, which is made of copper that has oxidized to its iconic green color. Blake's dress was that copper but had a huge train that was pinned up and then released on the steps to reveal fabric in the same green as the SoL, to mimic the process of the statue oxidizing. It was designed by Versace and is a truly stunning dress and was a terrific concept for that year's theme. It was not pink and had nothing to do with the Barbie movie, sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I very much enjoyed this little video of how Blake lively and her team tried like hell to get her for Barbie and failed miserably. And Margot Robbie handled it like a true pro without any war in the press…just quietly worked to ensure Blake didn’t ruin the project.

Apparently, Blake’s team lodged a full campaign starting in 2020 about how she should play Barbie, dressing her in pink, and how they wanted a more family friendly version for the big screen, and paying certain influencers to continue to spread on social, calling her Barbie, trying to drum up support online.


https://www.instagram.com/reel/DIzNigusbDZ/?igsh=MWFiZ2t3anVyOW5xdA==

Ugh, I hate defending Blake Lively but this video is dumb because:

(1) It's fine and normal for a working actress to be angling to try to get a big role. That's not trying to steal a job, it's literally just trying to get a job. Every actor does this, including stuff like dressing publicly or doing photo shoots that might make producers/directors think of them for desirable roles. If you are going to criticize Blake for this, you might as well just write off all of Hollywood.

(2) In order to try and make their point seem more convincing, they did a bizarre thing where they put a pink filter on all the photos/footage of Blake in her 2022 Met Gala dress, to make it seem like this is an event where Blake "dressed like Barbie" to try and get the role. The problem is that the dress was NOT pink, and lots of people know this because it's one of the most famous things she's ever worn. The dress was inspired by the Statue of Liberty, which is made of copper that has oxidized to its iconic green color. Blake's dress was that copper but had a huge train that was pinned up and then released on the steps to reveal fabric in the same green as the SoL, to mimic the process of the statue oxidizing. It was designed by Versace and is a truly stunning dress and was a terrific concept for that year's theme. It was not pink and had nothing to do with the Barbie movie, sorry.

We know it’s you…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I very much enjoyed this little video of how Blake lively and her team tried like hell to get her for Barbie and failed miserably. And Margot Robbie handled it like a true pro without any war in the press…just quietly worked to ensure Blake didn’t ruin the project.

Apparently, Blake’s team lodged a full campaign starting in 2020 about how she should play Barbie, dressing her in pink, and how they wanted a more family friendly version for the big screen, and paying certain influencers to continue to spread on social, calling her Barbie, trying to drum up support online.


https://www.instagram.com/reel/DIzNigusbDZ/?igsh=MWFiZ2t3anVyOW5xdA==

Ugh, I hate defending Blake Lively but this video is dumb because:

(1) It's fine and normal for a working actress to be angling to try to get a big role. That's not trying to steal a job, it's literally just trying to get a job. Every actor does this, including stuff like dressing publicly or doing photo shoots that might make producers/directors think of them for desirable roles. If you are going to criticize Blake for this, you might as well just write off all of Hollywood.

(2) In order to try and make their point seem more convincing, they did a bizarre thing where they put a pink filter on all the photos/footage of Blake in her 2022 Met Gala dress, to make it seem like this is an event where Blake "dressed like Barbie" to try and get the role. The problem is that the dress was NOT pink, and lots of people know this because it's one of the most famous things she's ever worn. The dress was inspired by the Statue of Liberty, which is made of copper that has oxidized to its iconic green color. Blake's dress was that copper but had a huge train that was pinned up and then released on the steps to reveal fabric in the same green as the SoL, to mimic the process of the statue oxidizing. It was designed by Versace and is a truly stunning dress and was a terrific concept for that year's theme. It was not pink and had nothing to do with the Barbie movie, sorry.

We know it’s you…

It's so funny to me that you think there is exactly 1 BL supporter on here and, in attributing all BL-favorable posts as being one person, you have created an imaginary rivalry with an invented person.

Delulu.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I very much enjoyed this little video of how Blake lively and her team tried like hell to get her for Barbie and failed miserably. And Margot Robbie handled it like a true pro without any war in the press…just quietly worked to ensure Blake didn’t ruin the project.

Apparently, Blake’s team lodged a full campaign starting in 2020 about how she should play Barbie, dressing her in pink, and how they wanted a more family friendly version for the big screen, and paying certain influencers to continue to spread on social, calling her Barbie, trying to drum up support online.


https://www.instagram.com/reel/DIzNigusbDZ/?igsh=MWFiZ2t3anVyOW5xdA==

Ugh, I hate defending Blake Lively but this video is dumb because:

(1) It's fine and normal for a working actress to be angling to try to get a big role. That's not trying to steal a job, it's literally just trying to get a job. Every actor does this, including stuff like dressing publicly or doing photo shoots that might make producers/directors think of them for desirable roles. If you are going to criticize Blake for this, you might as well just write off all of Hollywood.

(2) In order to try and make their point seem more convincing, they did a bizarre thing where they put a pink filter on all the photos/footage of Blake in her 2022 Met Gala dress, to make it seem like this is an event where Blake "dressed like Barbie" to try and get the role. The problem is that the dress was NOT pink, and lots of people know this because it's one of the most famous things she's ever worn. The dress was inspired by the Statue of Liberty, which is made of copper that has oxidized to its iconic green color. Blake's dress was that copper but had a huge train that was pinned up and then released on the steps to reveal fabric in the same green as the SoL, to mimic the process of the statue oxidizing. It was designed by Versace and is a truly stunning dress and was a terrific concept for that year's theme. It was not pink and had nothing to do with the Barbie movie, sorry.

It’s not normal at all. Barbie was $1 billion franchise. Are you seriously telling me you think Blake lively could have fronted $1 billion film with her vision? Give me a freaking break. You are beyond delusional.

As the video pointed out, Blake just wanted to play dress up. Margo actually had a vision for the film that she worked for years to develop with her team, and it worked out to be a huge global phenomenon. Blake could have never pulled off.

Last you forget, she would literally have no career if she hadn’t stumbled onto marrying Ryan Reynolds. She can’t really act and she is responsible for the biggest bomb in cinematic history with the rhythm section. I also just discovered another bomb movie of hers called all I see is you. She has a history of unprecedented and massive failures at the box office.

Sony was courting Ryan Reynolds because they are on the verge of bankruptcy. They are the only one in the industry that does not have a streaming service and they are really feeling it. They wanted to get him attached to some projects so they agreed to give her a part in a Colleen Hoover movie, which was a slam dunk. Blake lively had nothing to do with the success of the film. It was all Colleen’s audience. The movie succeeded despite Blakely not because of.

You are so transparent it’s ridiculous and no one‘s buying it. Blake‘s career is over and it should’ve ended a long time ago has she not married well and very likely slept her way into parts. She should be nowhere near Barbie - her failed lifestyle brand proving that she doesn’t really have an audience or a vision. She has an embarrassing list of failed box office and failed businesses.

Thankfully, I doubt we’ll be hearing from her much longer now that she has burned so many bridges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I very much enjoyed this little video of how Blake lively and her team tried like hell to get her for Barbie and failed miserably. And Margot Robbie handled it like a true pro without any war in the press…just quietly worked to ensure Blake didn’t ruin the project.

Apparently, Blake’s team lodged a full campaign starting in 2020 about how she should play Barbie, dressing her in pink, and how they wanted a more family friendly version for the big screen, and paying certain influencers to continue to spread on social, calling her Barbie, trying to drum up support online.


https://www.instagram.com/reel/DIzNigusbDZ/?igsh=MWFiZ2t3anVyOW5xdA==

Ugh, I hate defending Blake Lively but this video is dumb because:

(1) It's fine and normal for a working actress to be angling to try to get a big role. That's not trying to steal a job, it's literally just trying to get a job. Every actor does this, including stuff like dressing publicly or doing photo shoots that might make producers/directors think of them for desirable roles. If you are going to criticize Blake for this, you might as well just write off all of Hollywood.

(2) In order to try and make their point seem more convincing, they did a bizarre thing where they put a pink filter on all the photos/footage of Blake in her 2022 Met Gala dress, to make it seem like this is an event where Blake "dressed like Barbie" to try and get the role. The problem is that the dress was NOT pink, and lots of people know this because it's one of the most famous things she's ever worn. The dress was inspired by the Statue of Liberty, which is made of copper that has oxidized to its iconic green color. Blake's dress was that copper but had a huge train that was pinned up and then released on the steps to reveal fabric in the same green as the SoL, to mimic the process of the statue oxidizing. It was designed by Versace and is a truly stunning dress and was a terrific concept for that year's theme. It was not pink and had nothing to do with the Barbie movie, sorry.

It’s not normal at all. Barbie was $1 billion franchise. Are you seriously telling me you think Blake lively could have fronted $1 billion film with her vision? Give me a freaking break. You are beyond delusional.

As the video pointed out, Blake just wanted to play dress up. Margo actually had a vision for the film that she worked for years to develop with her team, and it worked out to be a huge global phenomenon. Blake could have never pulled off.

Last you forget, she would literally have no career if she hadn’t stumbled onto marrying Ryan Reynolds. She can’t really act and she is responsible for the biggest bomb in cinematic history with the rhythm section. I also just discovered another bomb movie of hers called all I see is you. She has a history of unprecedented and massive failures at the box office.

Sony was courting Ryan Reynolds because they are on the verge of bankruptcy. They are the only one in the industry that does not have a streaming service and they are really feeling it. They wanted to get him attached to some projects so they agreed to give her a part in a Colleen Hoover movie, which was a slam dunk. Blake lively had nothing to do with the success of the film. It was all Colleen’s audience. The movie succeeded despite Blakely not because of.

You are so transparent it’s ridiculous and no one‘s buying it. Blake‘s career is over and it should’ve ended a long time ago has she not married well and very likely slept her way into parts. She should be nowhere near Barbie - her failed lifestyle brand proving that she doesn’t really have an audience or a vision. She has an embarrassing list of failed box office and failed businesses.

Thankfully, I doubt we’ll be hearing from her much longer now that she has burned so many bridges.

PP here. I agree Margo was a better choice for the role. She was also producing the movie so it's actually weird to me they ever considered anyone else for the role (but actually they had three other actresses attached or in talks at various points, which is kind of wild).

I'm just saying there is nothing wrong with an actor wanting a very coveted role. You can't get mad at someone for wanting a job they ultimately didn't get? I don't even like Blake Lively and don't see her movies because I don't like her as an actress, and even I think this criticism is a bit much. That's all.

And that the Statue of Liberty dress was not pink. Because it wasn't! It's a famous dress, it's just weird to imply that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I very much enjoyed this little video of how Blake lively and her team tried like hell to get her for Barbie and failed miserably. And Margot Robbie handled it like a true pro without any war in the press…just quietly worked to ensure Blake didn’t ruin the project.

Apparently, Blake’s team lodged a full campaign starting in 2020 about how she should play Barbie, dressing her in pink, and how they wanted a more family friendly version for the big screen, and paying certain influencers to continue to spread on social, calling her Barbie, trying to drum up support online.


https://www.instagram.com/reel/DIzNigusbDZ/?igsh=MWFiZ2t3anVyOW5xdA==

Ugh, I hate defending Blake Lively but this video is dumb because:

(1) It's fine and normal for a working actress to be angling to try to get a big role. That's not trying to steal a job, it's literally just trying to get a job. Every actor does this, including stuff like dressing publicly or doing photo shoots that might make producers/directors think of them for desirable roles. If you are going to criticize Blake for this, you might as well just write off all of Hollywood.

(2) In order to try and make their point seem more convincing, they did a bizarre thing where they put a pink filter on all the photos/footage of Blake in her 2022 Met Gala dress, to make it seem like this is an event where Blake "dressed like Barbie" to try and get the role. The problem is that the dress was NOT pink, and lots of people know this because it's one of the most famous things she's ever worn. The dress was inspired by the Statue of Liberty, which is made of copper that has oxidized to its iconic green color. Blake's dress was that copper but had a huge train that was pinned up and then released on the steps to reveal fabric in the same green as the SoL, to mimic the process of the statue oxidizing. It was designed by Versace and is a truly stunning dress and was a terrific concept for that year's theme. It was not pink and had nothing to do with the Barbie movie, sorry.

It’s not normal at all. Barbie was $1 billion franchise. Are you seriously telling me you think Blake lively could have fronted $1 billion film with her vision? Give me a freaking break. You are beyond delusional.

As the video pointed out, Blake just wanted to play dress up. Margo actually had a vision for the film that she worked for years to develop with her team, and it worked out to be a huge global phenomenon. Blake could have never pulled off.

Last you forget, she would literally have no career if she hadn’t stumbled onto marrying Ryan Reynolds. She can’t really act and she is responsible for the biggest bomb in cinematic history with the rhythm section. I also just discovered another bomb movie of hers called all I see is you. She has a history of unprecedented and massive failures at the box office.

Sony was courting Ryan Reynolds because they are on the verge of bankruptcy. They are the only one in the industry that does not have a streaming service and they are really feeling it. They wanted to get him attached to some projects so they agreed to give her a part in a Colleen Hoover movie, which was a slam dunk. Blake lively had nothing to do with the success of the film. It was all Colleen’s audience. The movie succeeded despite Blakely not because of.

You are so transparent it’s ridiculous and no one‘s buying it. Blake‘s career is over and it should’ve ended a long time ago has she not married well and very likely slept her way into parts. She should be nowhere near Barbie - her failed lifestyle brand proving that she doesn’t really have an audience or a vision. She has an embarrassing list of failed box office and failed businesses.

Thankfully, I doubt we’ll be hearing from her much longer now that she has burned so many bridges.

PP here. I agree Margo was a better choice for the role. She was also producing the movie so it's actually weird to me they ever considered anyone else for the role (but actually they had three other actresses attached or in talks at various points, which is kind of wild).

I'm just saying there is nothing wrong with an actor wanting a very coveted role. You can't get mad at someone for wanting a job they ultimately didn't get? I don't even like Blake Lively and don't see her movies because I don't like her as an actress, and even I think this criticism is a bit much. That's all.

And that the Statue of Liberty dress was not pink. Because it wasn't! It's a famous dress, it's just weird to imply that.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I very much enjoyed this little video of how Blake lively and her team tried like hell to get her for Barbie and failed miserably. And Margot Robbie handled it like a true pro without any war in the press…just quietly worked to ensure Blake didn’t ruin the project.

Apparently, Blake’s team lodged a full campaign starting in 2020 about how she should play Barbie, dressing her in pink, and how they wanted a more family friendly version for the big screen, and paying certain influencers to continue to spread on social, calling her Barbie, trying to drum up support online.


https://www.instagram.com/reel/DIzNigusbDZ/?igsh=MWFiZ2t3anVyOW5xdA==

Ugh, I hate defending Blake Lively but this video is dumb because:

(1) It's fine and normal for a working actress to be angling to try to get a big role. That's not trying to steal a job, it's literally just trying to get a job. Every actor does this, including stuff like dressing publicly or doing photo shoots that might make producers/directors think of them for desirable roles. If you are going to criticize Blake for this, you might as well just write off all of Hollywood.

(2) In order to try and make their point seem more convincing, they did a bizarre thing where they put a pink filter on all the photos/footage of Blake in her 2022 Met Gala dress, to make it seem like this is an event where Blake "dressed like Barbie" to try and get the role. The problem is that the dress was NOT pink, and lots of people know this because it's one of the most famous things she's ever worn. The dress was inspired by the Statue of Liberty, which is made of copper that has oxidized to its iconic green color. Blake's dress was that copper but had a huge train that was pinned up and then released on the steps to reveal fabric in the same green as the SoL, to mimic the process of the statue oxidizing. It was designed by Versace and is a truly stunning dress and was a terrific concept for that year's theme. It was not pink and had nothing to do with the Barbie movie, sorry.

It’s not normal at all. Barbie was $1 billion franchise. Are you seriously telling me you think Blake lively could have fronted $1 billion film with her vision? Give me a freaking break. You are beyond delusional.

As the video pointed out, Blake just wanted to play dress up. Margo actually had a vision for the film that she worked for years to develop with her team, and it worked out to be a huge global phenomenon. Blake could have never pulled off.

Last you forget, she would literally have no career if she hadn’t stumbled onto marrying Ryan Reynolds. She can’t really act and she is responsible for the biggest bomb in cinematic history with the rhythm section. I also just discovered another bomb movie of hers called all I see is you. She has a history of unprecedented and massive failures at the box office.

Sony was courting Ryan Reynolds because they are on the verge of bankruptcy. They are the only one in the industry that does not have a streaming service and they are really feeling it. They wanted to get him attached to some projects so they agreed to give her a part in a Colleen Hoover movie, which was a slam dunk. Blake lively had nothing to do with the success of the film. It was all Colleen’s audience. The movie succeeded despite Blakely not because of.

You are so transparent it’s ridiculous and no one‘s buying it. Blake‘s career is over and it should’ve ended a long time ago has she not married well and very likely slept her way into parts. She should be nowhere near Barbie - her failed lifestyle brand proving that she doesn’t really have an audience or a vision. She has an embarrassing list of failed box office and failed businesses.

Thankfully, I doubt we’ll be hearing from her much longer now that she has burned so many bridges.

PP here. I agree Margo was a better choice for the role. She was also producing the movie so it's actually weird to me they ever considered anyone else for the role (but actually they had three other actresses attached or in talks at various points, which is kind of wild).

I'm just saying there is nothing wrong with an actor wanting a very coveted role. You can't get mad at someone for wanting a job they ultimately didn't get? I don't even like Blake Lively and don't see her movies because I don't like her as an actress, and even I think this criticism is a bit much. That's all.

And that the Statue of Liberty dress was not pink. Because it wasn't! It's a famous dress, it's just weird to imply that.

Did you not watch the videos on the Instagram? Fine if you didn’t, but I don’t think anyone has a problem with Blake wanting the role of Barbie. A four year campaign that finally ended with Mattel basically sending a cease and desist that her team couldn’t launch a lifestyle brand based on Barbie is well beyond simply coveting a role.

Also, did you miss the part where they were trying to literally sabotage the film and all of Margo‘s and the other producers vision? They were going to toe and trying to sabotage what they were doing and muddy things in the press. Sorry that doesn’t seem normal.

This went on well into 2024 after Barbie was shot! She knew she hadn’t gotten the role yet She was still trying to launch some sort of life style brand called dream house or whatever. I don’t know. I didn’t follow the whole thing it was so stupid but if you saw both of the Instagram videos, it’s pretty clear. She didn’t just want the role. Her team launched a full scale campaign complete with bots and paid influencers to sprinkle social media to get people to start calling Blake Barbie and for her to start looking the role. And then when it was well beyond the fact that she wasn’t going to get the role, because the movie had already been shot, she was still trying to leverage a lifestyle brand.

They are power hungry, and unhinged and it’s finally catching up to them.

[Anonymous]

Maybe I missed this in the thread, does the new info about the vanzan lawsuit make things worse for the New York Times?

I don’t understand how this didn’t come up in their due diligence. They saw that the subpoena was a doe lawsuit and that didn’t raise any red flags? Can someone please tell me why a journalist would see that and think, oh this is fine. Honestly, I understand that people have said the New York Times will be fine because the bar is so high, but does this change anything? It seems like they ignored a major red.