Reply to Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2

Forum Index » Entertainment and Pop Culture

Reply to "Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I'm amused at the thought that the fan group who is bombarding random actors' comment sections is the one that's NOT spiraling.[/quote]

Falsely accusing someone of SH is SO amusing! [/quote]

Baldoni did the things he is accused of doing -- he admits them, but says they weren't SH. So even if you disagree with Blake, claiming she is "falsely accusing" him makes no sense. He said he did it! If the court or the jury determines it wasn't SH, she will lose. But shes' not lying about anything he did.[/quote]

Oh, come on. The reason Blake’s support cratered is because nobody thinks that this is worth tying up the courts. The timeline has been clearly laid out. She and Jenny Slate had some complaints during the first phase of filming in May 2023and they were addressed. Then the set broke for several months for the strike and in mid November she came back with a 17 point list she demanded that they signed before she would come back to set. They were clearly told by her lawyers this is not a negotiation and they signed.

They were all set to come back on January 5 when she bombarded them with a meeting where Ryan Reynolds screamed at them for five hours. I am still not clear why if on June 5 and on November 15, things have been resolved and there had been no further incidents given that nobody was on set or even had had much contact with each other, why people were being screamed at for five hours.

But regardless, they then went on to shoot the rest of the movie and no further incident were reported

There is no reason to bring up sexual harassment a year later, except that she wanted to prove this smear campaign because she had gotten canceled, but what we have clearly seen she had canceled herself by her tone deaf interviews, offensive product launches, and targeting Justin who was very popular with the fans of the book who had been looking forward to him directing and starring in the movie.

As the Sony executives said, she brought this on herself. She thought that the times article would un cancel her and it did for about 10 days. But once Justin got his side of the story out, here we are. she’s lost 7 million followers, doesn’t have a movie in sight, her hair line has not recovered, and she appears to have lost her best friend. [/quote]

Facts you skipped:

- Lively did not leave the June 1 meeting with the feeling that the problems had been addressed, and felt Jamey and Justin has simply tried to justify their behavior without realizing why it was problematic.
- Alex Sachs encouraged Jamey Heath to open an HR investigation in Lively's and Slate's concerns, which would have provided both resolution and helped identify actions the set could take to address them, and he chose not to do so.
- AFTER the June 1 meeting, Justin continued to say inappropriate things on set, including asking Isabella and her costar if they had "practiced" for their sex scene because it was so "hot"
- AFTER the June 1 meeting, the intimacy coordinator Justin had hired continued to express concerns, privately, about Justin's behavior, and insisted on being present for a non-intimate scene with Isabella and Young Atlas in case he tried to insert intimacy into the scene
- During the hiatus, Lively became stressed that she still had to film all her love scenes with Justin, including a rape scene. Because no action had been taken to address concerns after the June 1 meeting, she expressed concerns privately, including to a costar, that she was dreading returning to set and was concerned specifically about filming intimate scenes with Justin.
- The November 15th communication via Lively's lawyers included a request for a meeting before returning to set, in which they would discuss set safety. Wayfarer took no action to schedule this meeting, which is why Lively requested they come to her apartment to have it on Jan. 4th.
- The November 15th communication, which according to Ange Giannetti was read allowed at the January 4th meeting (Jamey Heath denies it was read allowed, so this is a factual discrepancy that would have to be resolved) included a provision saying that Lively would not be retaliated against for raising these issues. Wayfarer agreed to that provision.
- In August 2024, right before the film came out, Wayfarer hired Melissa Nathan and TAG. According to contemporaneous text messages between Melissa, Jennifer Abel, and Baldoni, they were specifically looking to create an offensive against Blake Lively to discredit anything she might say about what happened on set. Additional textual evidence show the hiring of Jed Wallace, who Abel reports has successfully getting social media to focus on negative news about Lively and Ryan Reynolds.
- It is only after Lively becomes aware of these texts, in fall of 2024, and realizes they are evidence of a retaliation claim in violation of federal employment law and the agreement Wayfarer signed prior to her return to filming, that she initiated the lawsuit.

You can skip over the facts that are inconvenient for Baldoni if it makes you feel better, but should this case go to trial, Lively's lawyers will not skip over them.[/quote]

Blah blah blah this never would’ve gone to trial if Blake hadn’t used her unsigned contract for leverage to get control of the movie and then just missed out on $37 million after the film did better than anyone expected.

This is what this case is about pure and simple. Blake signed her loan out agreement, which entitled her to have 1.75 million immediately deposited in her account. Then she was eligible for a series of $250,000 bonuses based on metrics from box office revenue targets. Financial documents are coming out to show that she was paid the full amount of those bonuses so total for the film she got $3 million.

But it was her unsigned contract that entitled her to a percent of the gross of the $350 million the film ultimately earned. She did not get that and boo-hoo and that’s why we’re here.

The only thing that she was concerned about in shooting intimate scenes was how she looked as she was obsessed with her postpartum body as we’ve now seen from multiple texts and emails of her complaining to anyone who would listen, including her agent about how she was working out four hours a day and so on and so forth. Her obsession was exhausting. May 2023 stills that were coming out had fans criticizing how old she looked for lily and how her hair was unkempt and why was she wearing four pairs of pants at one time? That weighed on her heavily.

It’s just so crystal clear what this whole thing was about. Ego and money. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics