Anonymous
12/07/2025 12:49
Subject: Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:One of the most surprising things for me about these threads is how strongly people defend every little thing that is reported about Baldoni or Heath. It is unfortunate that so many still see sexist behavior by men as appropriate for the workplace and see Jenny Slate and Blake and other women involved as whiners who need to just sit down, shut up, not complain and take whatever comes their way.
Still trying to make fetch happen. If sexist behavior in the workplace had occurred then yes, it is not acceptable. Your argument doesn't work because it did not happen.
I guess for me it did. For example Jenny reported that he had called her sexy and made her uncomfortable. Yet all the responses to that were blaming women. To me, that is sexist behavior in the workplace. I don't feel my colleagues should be able to call me hot or sexy and that I am supposed to take that as a compliment and just accept it. There are multiple reports from a quite a few women about being uncomfortable on the set due to behaviour from Jamey and Justin and yet that the blame for that is all on the women who need to just not be so sensitive.
Anonymous
12/07/2025 12:44
Subject: Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2
Anonymous wrote:One of the most surprising things for me about these threads is how strongly people defend every little thing that is reported about Baldoni or Heath. It is unfortunate that so many still see sexist behavior by men as appropriate for the workplace and see Jenny Slate and Blake and other women involved as whiners who need to just sit down, shut up, not complain and take whatever comes their way.
Still trying to make fetch happen. If sexist behavior in the workplace had occurred then yes, it is not acceptable. Your argument doesn't work because it did not happen.
Anonymous
12/07/2025 12:36
Subject: Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2
One of the most surprising things for me about these threads is how strongly people defend every little thing that is reported about Baldoni or Heath. It is unfortunate that so many still see sexist behavior by men as appropriate for the workplace and see Jenny Slate and Blake and other women involved as whiners who need to just sit down, shut up, not complain and take whatever comes their way.
Anonymous
12/07/2025 09:45
Subject: Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'm curious why Blake is only just now bringing up that circumcision discussion (that she likely instigated).
Was she fishing around in her memory for anything potentially inappropriate that she could raise for PR brownie points?
It was always vaguely there since the first complaint... there was something about him "describing his genitalia," we just didn't know what it meant until now.
My question still stands though. Why get specific about it now?
You seem confused about how news from the case is coming out.
The reason people are talking about the circumcision discussion is because Baldoni discussed it in his deposition, which was recently unsealed. The depositions include way more detail than any of the early filings could, because depositions allow parties to explore questions in an exploratory way and to ask questions that wouldn't be permitted in court (leading questions, answers that include hearsay and opinion, etc.). So there are little details about the case that are being revealed in the depositions and getting picked over online. These details could not have been included in the complaint because these depositions had not yet taken place, which means Blake could not have quoted Alex Sak's description of her lunch meeting with Jenny Slate, or Baldoni's description of what happened during the circumcision conversation.
Discovery is when things get specific. This is how court cases work.
Anonymous
12/07/2025 07:53
Subject: Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'm curious why Blake is only just now bringing up that circumcision discussion (that she likely instigated).
Was she fishing around in her memory for anything potentially inappropriate that she could raise for PR brownie points?
It was always vaguely there since the first complaint... there was something about him "describing his genitalia," we just didn't know what it meant until now.
My question still stands though. Why get specific about it now?
Because they have nothing and it’s very clear, they needed to generate a list and never intended to get this far in a lawsuit. When they had this conversation Blake was not yet employed. Justin was over at her apartment in December 2022 - Blake signed on December 31, and I love the detail about two nannies and an assistant and housekeeper being there because Blake and Ryan love to talk about how they don’t use nannies. By the way, I think it is great for a mom to have nannies and other help but again I’m not the one going off every chance I get about how I don’t use nannies.
Anyhoo… she was like eight months pregnant at that time and they were probably discussing having her first boy after having three girls. Justin has a son. It just doesn’t seem odd to me that circumcision would come up and she very well could have asked him how they made that decision - it was something with three girls they never had to think about before.
This got me thinking about many conversations I’ve had with male colleagues at work that could easily be twisted later. for example, I was sitting with some colleagues and one of them was asking about people tattoos..if we had them etc. It was very innocuous and this guy is as unproblematic as you could be, but I could see Blake running to lawyers and saying “he was asking invasive questions about my body!”
I think Justin is weird and I don’t think I would like him. He probably needs some training about how to work with others. But nothing described looks like SH and a $400 million lawsuit. This has gone way too far.
Anonymous
12/07/2025 07:33
Subject: Re:Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2
Play got two female A.D. fired that she has a pattern of getting people fired and almost every job that she’s had has several years since marrying Ryan.
Going against Julia’s credentials are ridiculous, she’s a 30 year veteran of the industry to say that she was not prepared to do this little $6 million budget film is insane.
To the poster that said we have no proof that she asked Taylor to delete texts, what exactly do you think happened ? They’ve been friends for a decade. Taylor is godmother to Blakes three daughters. Just before this happened Blake was one of Taylor’s four or five friends allowed in the Super Bowl suite - they were clearly very close then all of a sudden Blake goes through this and nothing.
It is quite possible that Taylor’s team told her to lay low with public support and that’s fine. But then it is pretty clear that at some point something existential happened. Taylor completely dropped her -otherwise Travis would not have unfollowed Ryan and Taylor would not have made that statement that she didn’t even see the movie till weeks after etc.
It’s Baldoni‘s team that wants her to testify not Blake. You would think Blake would want her to testify since they were best friends. You would think you would want her to share info that Blake was distressed during the filming, but because it would not support Blake’s claims of SH. Taylor has a huge fan base. Why would Baldoni‘s team go after Taylor if they didn’t think that she had information that would help them? They wouldn’t want her anywhere near this case if they thought that she could support Blake.
Taylor tends to be loyal to her friends. She has many from decades ago but not Blake - something big happened and I do think blake must have threatened Taylor with something. Its pretty clear that the song canceled is Taylor’s way of saying she stands by her friends when they get canceled, she herself has been canceled, so the fact that she’s not standing by Blake, it’s not because the public has turned against her, but because Blake has done something to end the friendship.
Going against Julia’s credentials are ridiculous, she’s a 30 year veteran of the industry to say that she was not prepared to do this little $6 million budget film is insane.
To the poster that said we have no proof that she asked Taylor to delete texts, what exactly do you think happened ? They’ve been friends for a decade. Taylor is godmother to Blakes three daughters. Just before this happened Blake was one of Taylor’s four or five friends allowed in the Super Bowl suite - they were clearly very close then all of a sudden Blake goes through this and nothing.
It is quite possible that Taylor’s team told her to lay low with public support and that’s fine. But then it is pretty clear that at some point something existential happened. Taylor completely dropped her -otherwise Travis would not have unfollowed Ryan and Taylor would not have made that statement that she didn’t even see the movie till weeks after etc.
It’s Baldoni‘s team that wants her to testify not Blake. You would think Blake would want her to testify since they were best friends. You would think you would want her to share info that Blake was distressed during the filming, but because it would not support Blake’s claims of SH. Taylor has a huge fan base. Why would Baldoni‘s team go after Taylor if they didn’t think that she had information that would help them? They wouldn’t want her anywhere near this case if they thought that she could support Blake.
Taylor tends to be loyal to her friends. She has many from decades ago but not Blake - something big happened and I do think blake must have threatened Taylor with something. Its pretty clear that the song canceled is Taylor’s way of saying she stands by her friends when they get canceled, she herself has been canceled, so the fact that she’s not standing by Blake, it’s not because the public has turned against her, but because Blake has done something to end the friendship.
Anonymous
12/07/2025 01:52
Subject: Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:According to IMDB Julie Bloom seemed to move very slowly through the ranks.
She has been a 2nd AD since 1986 but didn't get a 1st AD role until 2000 on a TV series. She then worked as a 1st AD on small budget films. She had her first 1st AD for larger film in 2002 for Men in Black - for a unit only and then didn't get that position again until 2013 for The Wolf on Wall Street and Annie in 2014 (both for a unit). In between she worked more TV shows and small films. Since then she has again been working TV shows and small films. It seems she does well on a specific type of set but isn't getting promoted or rehired easily after working on bigger sets
+1, she's a role player and has a good long resume and is clearly well liked by those she works with because she gets rehired.
1st AD is a huge role. On a major film, it's a massive undertaking -- it is how many directors get their start. It is the one person who interacts with nearly everyone on set, because they are the liaison between the director and all department heads, plus they work closely with actors and producers as well. Everyone leans on the 1st AD. If you've ever worked on a major theater production, it's akin to the stage manager -- their job is to know everything, to keep everyone on schedule, and to make sure everyone has what they need to do their job. They have to manage up and down well and have exceptional attention to detail.
Also, having seen IEWU, there are a lot of components that would have made the 1st AD role more important and challenging. Specifically, there are number of big crowd scenes, both indoors and outdoors, on location, shot from multiple angles with multiple elements. For a non-action film, that's about as tough as it gets because of the moving parts involved, having to wrangle the extras, and dealing with the difficulty of shooting indoors on location for a move that has a pretty stylized look, which requires a lot of work from the production design teams and crew to get it to look how you want on camera. It can be tough to keep scenes like that on schedule due to the technical requirements, but also the schedule is critical because the more cast you have in a scene, the less of a window you have (you must always be aware of turn around time for main cast, as well as potential cost overruns associated with keeping extras late to finish a crowd scene).
Also compounding this is the fact that Baldoni was a green director. Yes he had two features under his belt but much smaller movies -- tiny budgets with limited sets/locations (one was just filmed and and around a hospital, yes?) and much smaller casts. Making the leap from that sort of movie to something with this budget and a lot more complications, he needed someone with a lot of experience making specifically this kind of movie. I totally get why Bloom wasn't a good fit. And that's not a knock on Bloom. I just think she was an odd choice for 1st AD for the specific circumstances of this movie.
lol, more blather from the Blake bot. All to distract from the paucity of any evidence of sexual harassment of Blake.
FWIW, your attempts to discredit Bloom’s work history are pathetic. So much for support women.
+ 1 million
Anonymous
12/07/2025 01:51
Subject: Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'm curious why Blake is only just now bringing up that circumcision discussion (that she likely instigated).
Was she fishing around in her memory for anything potentially inappropriate that she could raise for PR brownie points?
It was always vaguely there since the first complaint... there was something about him "describing his genitalia," we just didn't know what it meant until now.
My question still stands though. Why get specific about it now?
Anonymous
12/06/2025 22:35
Subject: Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I really don't care about the credentials of Julie Bloom. This is just another one of those "organic" instances where the Baldoni fans pick up on the Easter egg dropped for them: "Blake got a female AD fired!!" But if we should ever see any testimony from Bloom where she complains about Baldoni's anger issues or inappropriate comments, watch how fast she'll be villified.
It doesn't sound like Blake got her fired. Other testimonies speak to the fact that she was struggling and wasnt a good fit. The combination of her as a 'green' 1st AD on a bigger film (beyond a unit), and having a 'green' director in Baldoni and a 'green' production company in Wayfarer led to a mess and they weren't going to fire themselves so she had to go to make it work.
It’s like Blake bot parody at this point. Here’s a hint: the more you make baseless attacks on Bloom, the worse you look.
I am not a Blake Bot nor am I making any attacks on Bloom. I have barely posted in this thread but in reading the last few pages, you seem to be the one actign like the Baldoni Fan Club #1 Fan and you sound a little unhinged with all your repeated posts.
“I have barely posted in this thread.” You’ve been a regular since day one and your writing style is very easy to identify. BTW, you are responding to multiple posters, not one.
You are welcome to get that checked out but no. The Julie Bloom posts are the first time I have posted in this thread in the last few months and I was responding to another poster also posting about Julie Bloom.
Anonymous
12/06/2025 22:31
Subject: Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I really don't care about the credentials of Julie Bloom. This is just another one of those "organic" instances where the Baldoni fans pick up on the Easter egg dropped for them: "Blake got a female AD fired!!" But if we should ever see any testimony from Bloom where she complains about Baldoni's anger issues or inappropriate comments, watch how fast she'll be villified.
It doesn't sound like Blake got her fired. Other testimonies speak to the fact that she was struggling and wasnt a good fit. The combination of her as a 'green' 1st AD on a bigger film (beyond a unit), and having a 'green' director in Baldoni and a 'green' production company in Wayfarer led to a mess and they weren't going to fire themselves so she had to go to make it work.
It’s like Blake bot parody at this point. Here’s a hint: the more you make baseless attacks on Bloom, the worse you look.
I am not a Blake Bot nor am I making any attacks on Bloom. I have barely posted in this thread but in reading the last few pages, you seem to be the one actign like the Baldoni Fan Club #1 Fan and you sound a little unhinged with all your repeated posts.
“I have barely posted in this thread.” You’ve been a regular since day one and your writing style is very easy to identify. BTW, you are responding to multiple posters, not one.
Anonymous
12/06/2025 22:20
Subject: Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I really don't care about the credentials of Julie Bloom. This is just another one of those "organic" instances where the Baldoni fans pick up on the Easter egg dropped for them: "Blake got a female AD fired!!" But if we should ever see any testimony from Bloom where she complains about Baldoni's anger issues or inappropriate comments, watch how fast she'll be villified.
It doesn't sound like Blake got her fired. Other testimonies speak to the fact that she was struggling and wasnt a good fit. The combination of her as a 'green' 1st AD on a bigger film (beyond a unit), and having a 'green' director in Baldoni and a 'green' production company in Wayfarer led to a mess and they weren't going to fire themselves so she had to go to make it work.
It’s like Blake bot parody at this point. Here’s a hint: the more you make baseless attacks on Bloom, the worse you look.
I am not a Blake Bot nor am I making any attacks on Bloom. I have barely posted in this thread but in reading the last few pages, you seem to be the one actign like the Baldoni Fan Club #1 Fan and you sound a little unhinged with all your repeated posts.
Anonymous
12/06/2025 21:53
Subject: Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I really don't care about the credentials of Julie Bloom. This is just another one of those "organic" instances where the Baldoni fans pick up on the Easter egg dropped for them: "Blake got a female AD fired!!" But if we should ever see any testimony from Bloom where she complains about Baldoni's anger issues or inappropriate comments, watch how fast she'll be villified.
Actually Blake had two female ADs fired.
Because Baldoni said so?
Anonymous
12/06/2025 21:43
Subject: Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I really don't care about the credentials of Julie Bloom. This is just another one of those "organic" instances where the Baldoni fans pick up on the Easter egg dropped for them: "Blake got a female AD fired!!" But if we should ever see any testimony from Bloom where she complains about Baldoni's anger issues or inappropriate comments, watch how fast she'll be villified.
Actually Blake had two female ADs fired.
Yup.
Anonymous
12/06/2025 21:42
Subject: Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I really don't care about the credentials of Julie Bloom. This is just another one of those "organic" instances where the Baldoni fans pick up on the Easter egg dropped for them: "Blake got a female AD fired!!" But if we should ever see any testimony from Bloom where she complains about Baldoni's anger issues or inappropriate comments, watch how fast she'll be villified.
It doesn't sound like Blake got her fired. Other testimonies speak to the fact that she was struggling and wasnt a good fit. The combination of her as a 'green' 1st AD on a bigger film (beyond a unit), and having a 'green' director in Baldoni and a 'green' production company in Wayfarer led to a mess and they weren't going to fire themselves so she had to go to make it work.
It’s like Blake bot parody at this point. Here’s a hint: the more you make baseless attacks on Bloom, the worse you look.
Anonymous
12/06/2025 21:40
Subject: Lively/Baldoni Lawsuit Part 2
Anonymous wrote:I really don't care about the credentials of Julie Bloom. This is just another one of those "organic" instances where the Baldoni fans pick up on the Easter egg dropped for them: "Blake got a female AD fired!!" But if we should ever see any testimony from Bloom where she complains about Baldoni's anger issues or inappropriate comments, watch how fast she'll be villified.
It doesn't sound like Blake got her fired. Other testimonies speak to the fact that she was struggling and wasnt a good fit. The combination of her as a 'green' 1st AD on a bigger film (beyond a unit), and having a 'green' director in Baldoni and a 'green' production company in Wayfarer led to a mess and they weren't going to fire themselves so she had to go to make it work.