Reply to Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT

Forum Index » Entertainment and Pop Culture

Reply to "Blake Lively- Jason Baldoni and NYT - False Light claims "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]So it's okay for Justin to be railroaded for being a collaborative director who gives leeway to his actors and it means he should leave the profession altogether, but Blake is allowed to be oversensitive about every single thing, even a minor question about weight. Okay, got it.[/quote]

He is not "collaborative." He is spineless.

I am not endorsing Blake as an actor. I don't think she's particularly skilled and she sounds really hard to work with. I don't care about Blake.

But you can dislike Blake and still read all the info available about the filming of IEWU and see that it's fairly obvious Baldoni was bad at his job. He also should never have tried to direct/star/produce. I've read all his communications with Blake, his communications with producers and editors. I've also seen the communications between Heath and other producers dating all the way back to pre-production and concerns about Lively meddling too much. It is very, very obvious that Baldoni was simply incapable of saying no to her, to having that "iron fist" mentioned upthread and setting boundaries. I don't see a single text or email from him to Blake where he uses the word "no." It's his movie! That's not collaboration.

I guarantee that Blake showed up on Another Simple Favor with all her ideas and rewrites, too, and I also guarantee you that Paul Feig handled it a million times better, set boundaries, and knew when to throw her a bone too in order to keep her happy. Everything I see about that movie is that Lively had a lot of input into her character's clothes (which are ridiculous, of course, but also I guess it works for the sort of campy vibe they were going for) but that's mostly it. It looks to me like Feig knew how to play to Lively's interests and ego while also making the movie he wanted to make. That's what a leader does.

Baldoni sucks, sorry. I don't like Blake as an actor and won't see her movies and don't care if she wins or loses this case, whatever. But Baldoni is not a good director and if you are so obsessed with the he said/she said of this case that you can't see that, then I suggest you take a step back. This dude is not going to get other directing gigs with legit casts or studios and that's because it's abundantly clear he doesn't know how to do it. Maybe his studio will produce some stuff and they'll get young casts like with his first two movies, but he has no idea how to navigate a major production, with or without Blake Lively.[/quote]

I think it's disturbing that you're victim blaming Justin, and it's cute that you think we can't see through you're "I actually don't like Blake, I'm neutral" schtick, even though it's obvious you're pro-Lively. Anyways, it'd be a waste of my time to dismantle  your argument, but it's clear that you're being extremely overdramatic. Chaotic power plays happen on movie sets all the time involving inexperienced directors, but if they get another chance, they can learn from it. That Han Solo movie from a few years back was famously a disaster for the newbie directors who were attached to the point that Ron Howard stepped in, but most reasonable people don't think "these pathetic losers should never work again." They've probably learned that they shouldn't work with a conglomerate like Disney who will micromanage them every step of the way, and work on smaller-scale projects accordingly.[/quote]

On the other hand, the "micro-managing" of Disney on that Solo movie may have saved Phil Lord and Christopher Miller from a total disaster of a production that they were in no way ready for, giving them space to develop as writers and directors before taking on a major studio project that they were woefully unprepared for.

Part of what happened on IEWU, imo, is that Wayfarer was cocky because they are a small studio and Baldoni founded it, and they had easily accessible funding via Sarowitz. But they really had extremely limited experience and their biggest commercial success was the Garfield movie which they were just the money for. Then they partnered with Sony on IEWU, with Sony taking on the marketing/distribution but Wayfarer owning production. The first time they'd worked with a major studio like that. I think they were arrogant and didn't realize how different this production would be, and didn't bring in experienced producers who could shepherd the project, and also didn't listen to people at Sony who were warning them of the problems starting from pre-production.

With Solo, Disney sussed out the problems early in the process and Ron Howard took over and it was 100% the right call because it was a big movie involving major established IP, with a huge and committed and highly critical existing fan base, PLUS some big stars attached (Han was played by an up and comer but Woody Harrelson, Emilia Clarke, Paul Bettany, and Thandie Newton also starred). Howard is a pro with an established reputation who could command respect on day one, and that's what that movie needed.

Lord and Miller focused on writing, directing TV, and continued to cut their chops on still highly commercial but smaller projects. They made 21 Jump Street and the sequel, and they also helmed the Lego Movie (totally different deal directing an animated movie). And now they have a movie coming out next year with Amazon Studios starring Ryan Gosling (also Sandra Hüller who I love, so I will definitely see) -- big budget, major star, major studio. Because now they are ready for it. They weren't ready for Solo.

Wayfarer should have made the same call with Baldoni but it sounds like a studio full of yes men with no one around with the gravitas and experience to say "Hey, actually, no -- you are not ready for this. We need to bring in a more established director." Baldoni still could have starred and produced -- it seems like people were happy with his performance in the role.

This all could have been avoided.[/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