Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s neat that Hoover wanted a female director but I just did a quick Google search and only 8-16 percent of films are directed by women in any given recent year. So it’s a tall order unfortunately.

Let’s not act as if everyone is lining up to do a Colleen Hoover movie either. They have proven successful, but a lot of people feel it is beneath them. Justin is hardly a household name and Blake has not had a lot of success at the box office previously though she does have a lot of star power.

Frankly, Colleen was lucky anyone was willing to make it, and it was not a big budget film. But if she wanted more control, she could’ve taken more control. She owned the rights to the story and I feel like she just probably sold it to the highest bidder.

As noted above, this is the same person who was willing to do a coloring book off a domestic violence film so I think money is important to her and it’s pretty rich to act like she had these high standards.

Christy Hall wanted to direct the movie. She wrote the script for IEWU and had literally just filmed a movie starring Dakota Johnson and Sean Penn (Daddio) when IEWU went into pre-production. In fact I think a vague promise of letting her direct the movie was part of how they got her to do the script.

Baldoni had also said in at least one interview after acquiring the rights to the books that Wayfarer wanted a female director. I will try to find the interview -- he was asked if he planned to direct it (he may have been doing promo for Clouds in the interview) and he immediately tosses it off that of course not, they wanted a woman because of the subject matter.

So why didn’t she do it? Male politics of Hollywood and men taking over?

Hall is known as a writer has she ever directed anything before?

It’s great the people want female directors, but not every studio is willing to gamble on them. Look at Scarlett Johansson one of the most successful people in the entertainment industry and she just made her debut with an independent film with a small budget aimed at a niche audience.

Female directors are still pretty rare. Steve Sarowitz is ultimately the backer and maybe he didn’t want to gamble on one. Which sucks but not really Justin‘s fault.

And I disagree that Colleen could not have gotten a better deal. There’s tons of novelists who have had movies made who have much more control. They can come on as a producer if they want. what you said makes no sense. I think Colleen’s busy and just wanted to sell to the highest offer and that’s what she did.

She had the rights of course she could’ve had more control. Taking all agency away from Colleen makes no sense.

Colleen was an executive producer in the movie, and yes, many authors get that title in adaptations. It's a vanity title though.

You are incorrect that many writers have more control, unless by "many writers" you actually just mean J.K. Rowling.

This is simply not true. Stephen King and John Grisham and others also have a lot of creative control. Colleen Hoover is big enough that she could’ve done this. Come on. she got lazy and just wanted the money and that’s fine. You’re putting way too much integrity on the same woman who tried to monetize domestic violence via a coloring book. I’m not buying it.

I don’t pretend to be a Hollywood insider but have a friend who is a very successful romcom author with many bestsellers. It took a long time to get an offer to make a movie of one of them, but she definitely had some input.

Exactly. If it’s your first book and you were starting out, of course don’t have much to negotiate with. But Colleen Hoover is a multimillionaire. Her books are very successful and this was not the only one being talked about for an adaptation. She could’ve patiently waited for a better deal.

She seems very money hungry, given the coloring book and the fact that she asked them to make the illegal donation in her name.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s neat that Hoover wanted a female director but I just did a quick Google search and only 8-16 percent of films are directed by women in any given recent year. So it’s a tall order unfortunately.

Let’s not act as if everyone is lining up to do a Colleen Hoover movie either. They have proven successful, but a lot of people feel it is beneath them. Justin is hardly a household name and Blake has not had a lot of success at the box office previously though she does have a lot of star power.

Frankly, Colleen was lucky anyone was willing to make it, and it was not a big budget film. But if she wanted more control, she could’ve taken more control. She owned the rights to the story and I feel like she just probably sold it to the highest bidder.

As noted above, this is the same person who was willing to do a coloring book off a domestic violence film so I think money is important to her and it’s pretty rich to act like she had these high standards.

Christy Hall wanted to direct the movie. She wrote the script for IEWU and had literally just filmed a movie starring Dakota Johnson and Sean Penn (Daddio) when IEWU went into pre-production. In fact I think a vague promise of letting her direct the movie was part of how they got her to do the script.

Baldoni had also said in at least one interview after acquiring the rights to the books that Wayfarer wanted a female director. I will try to find the interview -- he was asked if he planned to direct it (he may have been doing promo for Clouds in the interview) and he immediately tosses it off that of course not, they wanted a woman because of the subject matter.

So why didn’t she do it? Male politics of Hollywood and men taking over?

Hall is known as a writer has she ever directed anything before?

It’s great the people want female directors, but not every studio is willing to gamble on them. Look at Scarlett Johansson one of the most successful people in the entertainment industry and she just made her debut with an independent film with a small budget aimed at a niche audience.

Female directors are still pretty rare. Steve Sarowitz is ultimately the backer and maybe he didn’t want to gamble on one. Which sucks but not really Justin‘s fault.

And I disagree that Colleen could not have gotten a better deal. There’s tons of novelists who have had movies made who have much more control. They can come on as a producer if they want. what you said makes no sense. I think Colleen’s busy and just wanted to sell to the highest offer and that’s what she did.

She had the rights of course she could’ve had more control. Taking all agency away from Colleen makes no sense.

Colleen was an executive producer in the movie, and yes, many authors get that title in adaptations. It's a vanity title though.

You are incorrect that many writers have more control, unless by "many writers" you actually just mean J.K. Rowling.

This is simply not true. Stephen King and John Grisham and others also have a lot of creative control. Colleen Hoover is big enough that she could’ve done this. Come on. she got lazy and just wanted the money and that’s fine. You’re putting way too much integrity on the same woman who tried to monetize domestic violence via a coloring book. I’m not buying it.

I don’t pretend to be a Hollywood insider but have a friend who is a very successful romcom author with many bestsellers. It took a long time to get an offer to make a movie of one of them, but she definitely had some input.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Livetweet: https://x.com/innercitypress/status/2014348058088046925

Sounds like a rough start for WP, unless Liman is going to be like this with both sides:

All rise!
Baldoni's lawyer Bach: This is a case about making a movie, one with highly charged romantic and sexual themes. After signing on, an intimacy coordinator was made available. The book called for sexy scenes

Judge: That doesn't mean you agree to harassment.
Baldoni's lawyer Bach: There is caselaw about discussion of oral sex in a writer's room - in a typical office setting, it's inappropriate. But Mr. Baldoni stands accused of commenting on her wardrobe

Judge Liman: Was he allowed, while dancing, to touch her wherever?
Baldoni's Bach: That's not what the facts show. There's no evidence that anyone was taking aim at Blake Livery because she was a woman. It was about making a film with a certain sexual aesthetic

Whatever happens will it all be thrown out in the end because Judge Liman is Hollywood director Doug Limon's brother? The Jason Bourne /Matt Damon director who had worked with Ryan and Blake. And Ryan and Blake both asked Matt Damon and Ben Affleck to get involved with IEWU

Reading Justin's texts, I feel sorry for him. And not for lack of trying, no real dirt on him either besides maybe saying some questionable stuff (and in the context of being the director of an R-rated movie).
https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/read-justin-baldonis-text-messages-amid-it-ends-with-us-drama/

Anonymous wrote:Livetweet: https://x.com/innercitypress/status/2014348058088046925

Sounds like a rough start for WP, unless Liman is going to be like this with both sides:

All rise!
Baldoni's lawyer Bach: This is a case about making a movie, one with highly charged romantic and sexual themes. After signing on, an intimacy coordinator was made available. The book called for sexy scenes

Judge: That doesn't mean you agree to harassment.
Baldoni's lawyer Bach: There is caselaw about discussion of oral sex in a writer's room - in a typical office setting, it's inappropriate. But Mr. Baldoni stands accused of commenting on her wardrobe

Judge Liman: Was he allowed, while dancing, to touch her wherever?
Baldoni's Bach: That's not what the facts show. There's no evidence that anyone was taking aim at Blake Livery because she was a woman. It was about making a film with a certain sexual aesthetic

Anonymous wrote:The deposition from the Sony executive about the meeting where Ryan berated Justin is chilling. Highly recommend that people find it and read it.

The Sony executive, Ange, confirmed that Todd Black the other executive said it was the worst meeting he had ever been to. Keep in mind Todd Black is 65 and I believe now retired so that is saying something.

The meeting was a total ambush. They were told they were going to talk about script. No one said that Ryan was going to be there and they were surprised. There were line producers there and they were dismissed. Blake then took out her list and started reading, and Ange said she was shocked as she had not heard any of those complaints before.

She was asked if Ryan acted aggressively or yelled at Justin and confirmed. Yes, his voice was raised.

She described Justin as “frozen.”

She said the meeting went on for five hours with no breaks.

I’m sorry, but that is completely unhinged.

I’m sure Blake defenders will be like he was standing up for his wife or whatever but in no universe is a five hour meeting where you blindside somebody acceptable or an adult way to handle. Justin should’ve had a lawyer or an HR rep available as well if they were bringing up HR issues it’s just not appropriate or professional and sounds insane.

I agree it sounds nuts. Five hours is completely bizarre -- I don't understand what was even said over that length of time.

I don't understand why no one in the room was able to diffuse the situation and say "ok, these concerns have been heard, let's stop and reconvene after people have had a chance to process." Even just to take a break for a few hours I think would have helped. Like the project manager in me just thinks this was an unproductive way to handle this.

But I hold them all responsible. Yes, Ryan sounds unhinged and Luke he wouldn't let up. I've dealt with people like that and it SUCKS. But it also sounds like Ange and Todd Black were fairly useless. Baldoni apparently just curled up into a ball and went into a fugue state. I know people think that is understandable but I actually don't. He's not a little kid. He's a man in his 40s who assigned himself the role of star/director/producer of a $30m movie. I am honestly surprised he couldn't stand up for himself or find a better way to navigate the situation than go catatonic. Of course you feel bad for the person being attacked in that meeting, but also -- Baldoni was the boss. I'm shocked he had nothing more to say for himself and that Jamey had to jump in and basically handle the whole meeting.

It adds to my perception that the movie was a rudderless ship, which does make me more sympathetic to the idea that Blake wasn't trying to "steal" the movie so much as put a hand on the till and straighten it out, even as the way she did it was pretty hamfisted.

Livetweet: https://x.com/innercitypress/status/2014348058088046925

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s neat that Hoover wanted a female director but I just did a quick Google search and only 8-16 percent of films are directed by women in any given recent year. So it’s a tall order unfortunately.

Let’s not act as if everyone is lining up to do a Colleen Hoover movie either. They have proven successful, but a lot of people feel it is beneath them. Justin is hardly a household name and Blake has not had a lot of success at the box office previously though she does have a lot of star power.

Frankly, Colleen was lucky anyone was willing to make it, and it was not a big budget film. But if she wanted more control, she could’ve taken more control. She owned the rights to the story and I feel like she just probably sold it to the highest bidder.

As noted above, this is the same person who was willing to do a coloring book off a domestic violence film so I think money is important to her and it’s pretty rich to act like she had these high standards.

Christy Hall wanted to direct the movie. She wrote the script for IEWU and had literally just filmed a movie starring Dakota Johnson and Sean Penn (Daddio) when IEWU went into pre-production. In fact I think a vague promise of letting her direct the movie was part of how they got her to do the script.

Baldoni had also said in at least one interview after acquiring the rights to the books that Wayfarer wanted a female director. I will try to find the interview -- he was asked if he planned to direct it (he may have been doing promo for Clouds in the interview) and he immediately tosses it off that of course not, they wanted a woman because of the subject matter.

So why didn’t she do it? Male politics of Hollywood and men taking over?

Hall is known as a writer has she ever directed anything before?

It’s great the people want female directors, but not every studio is willing to gamble on them. Look at Scarlett Johansson one of the most successful people in the entertainment industry and she just made her debut with an independent film with a small budget aimed at a niche audience.

Female directors are still pretty rare. Steve Sarowitz is ultimately the backer and maybe he didn’t want to gamble on one. Which sucks but not really Justin‘s fault.

And I disagree that Colleen could not have gotten a better deal. There’s tons of novelists who have had movies made who have much more control. They can come on as a producer if they want. what you said makes no sense. I think Colleen’s busy and just wanted to sell to the highest offer and that’s what she did.

She had the rights of course she could’ve had more control. Taking all agency away from Colleen makes no sense.

Christy Hall didn't direct the movie because Baldoni, who owned the rights, wanted to do it himself. She could only direct if he hired her to do so, which he didn't

And no, Colleen did not have the rights. She sold them to Wayfarer. That's how it works. Colleen Hoover is not a film studio. When you sell the rights, you relinquish control.

Wayfarer also learned this when they sold the distribution rights to Sony. Wayfarer got money for the film and a huge marketing and distribution budget and apparatus that they, a tiny studio, did not have. But they gave up certain control (choice of final cut, some casting decisions, and obviously a chunk of Amy profits).

Hollywood is a capitalist machine, not a student project. These are basic facts about the industry.

She could’ve held out for a better deal, but no one was offering. Now list you this all the time pointing out John Grisham and Stephen King. These are big names, but Colleen Hoover is pretty big.

It is ridiculous to act as if she had no agency. You are acting as of Justin held a gun to her head and took the rights. She makes a ridiculous amount of money off her movie adaptions, and she happily took it. She didn’t seem to be a bit concerned until the marketing of the movie and Blake getting her involved.

This is the same woman who also pressured wayfarer to make an illegal tax donation in her name so she could commit tax fraud. Which is something else that appears in the documents.

Lots of revisionist history going on here.

Sorry it should say she pressured wayfarer to make an illegal donation to a domestic violence charity in her name so that she could commit tax fraud.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s neat that Hoover wanted a female director but I just did a quick Google search and only 8-16 percent of films are directed by women in any given recent year. So it’s a tall order unfortunately.

Let’s not act as if everyone is lining up to do a Colleen Hoover movie either. They have proven successful, but a lot of people feel it is beneath them. Justin is hardly a household name and Blake has not had a lot of success at the box office previously though she does have a lot of star power.

Frankly, Colleen was lucky anyone was willing to make it, and it was not a big budget film. But if she wanted more control, she could’ve taken more control. She owned the rights to the story and I feel like she just probably sold it to the highest bidder.

As noted above, this is the same person who was willing to do a coloring book off a domestic violence film so I think money is important to her and it’s pretty rich to act like she had these high standards.

Christy Hall wanted to direct the movie. She wrote the script for IEWU and had literally just filmed a movie starring Dakota Johnson and Sean Penn (Daddio) when IEWU went into pre-production. In fact I think a vague promise of letting her direct the movie was part of how they got her to do the script.

Baldoni had also said in at least one interview after acquiring the rights to the books that Wayfarer wanted a female director. I will try to find the interview -- he was asked if he planned to direct it (he may have been doing promo for Clouds in the interview) and he immediately tosses it off that of course not, they wanted a woman because of the subject matter.

So why didn’t she do it? Male politics of Hollywood and men taking over?

Hall is known as a writer has she ever directed anything before?

It’s great the people want female directors, but not every studio is willing to gamble on them. Look at Scarlett Johansson one of the most successful people in the entertainment industry and she just made her debut with an independent film with a small budget aimed at a niche audience.

Female directors are still pretty rare. Steve Sarowitz is ultimately the backer and maybe he didn’t want to gamble on one. Which sucks but not really Justin‘s fault.

And I disagree that Colleen could not have gotten a better deal. There’s tons of novelists who have had movies made who have much more control. They can come on as a producer if they want. what you said makes no sense. I think Colleen’s busy and just wanted to sell to the highest offer and that’s what she did.

She had the rights of course she could’ve had more control. Taking all agency away from Colleen makes no sense.

Christy Hall didn't direct the movie because Baldoni, who owned the rights, wanted to do it himself. She could only direct if he hired her to do so, which he didn't

And no, Colleen did not have the rights. She sold them to Wayfarer. That's how it works. Colleen Hoover is not a film studio. When you sell the rights, you relinquish control.

Wayfarer also learned this when they sold the distribution rights to Sony. Wayfarer got money for the film and a huge marketing and distribution budget and apparatus that they, a tiny studio, did not have. But they gave up certain control (choice of final cut, some casting decisions, and obviously a chunk of Amy profits).

Hollywood is a capitalist machine, not a student project. These are basic facts about the industry.

She could’ve held out for a better deal, but no one was offering. Now list you this all the time pointing out John Grisham and Stephen King. These are big names, but Colleen Hoover is pretty big.

It is ridiculous to act as if she had no agency. You are acting as of Justin held a gun to her head and took the rights. She makes a ridiculous amount of money off her movie adaptions, and she happily took it. She didn’t seem to be a bit concerned until the marketing of the movie and Blake getting her involved.

This is the same woman who also pressured wayfarer to make an illegal tax donation in her name so she could commit tax fraud. Which is something else that appears in the documents.

Lots of revisionist history going on here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s neat that Hoover wanted a female director but I just did a quick Google search and only 8-16 percent of films are directed by women in any given recent year. So it’s a tall order unfortunately.

Let’s not act as if everyone is lining up to do a Colleen Hoover movie either. They have proven successful, but a lot of people feel it is beneath them. Justin is hardly a household name and Blake has not had a lot of success at the box office previously though she does have a lot of star power.

Frankly, Colleen was lucky anyone was willing to make it, and it was not a big budget film. But if she wanted more control, she could’ve taken more control. She owned the rights to the story and I feel like she just probably sold it to the highest bidder.

As noted above, this is the same person who was willing to do a coloring book off a domestic violence film so I think money is important to her and it’s pretty rich to act like she had these high standards.

Christy Hall wanted to direct the movie. She wrote the script for IEWU and had literally just filmed a movie starring Dakota Johnson and Sean Penn (Daddio) when IEWU went into pre-production. In fact I think a vague promise of letting her direct the movie was part of how they got her to do the script.

Baldoni had also said in at least one interview after acquiring the rights to the books that Wayfarer wanted a female director. I will try to find the interview -- he was asked if he planned to direct it (he may have been doing promo for Clouds in the interview) and he immediately tosses it off that of course not, they wanted a woman because of the subject matter.

So why didn’t she do it? Male politics of Hollywood and men taking over?

Hall is known as a writer has she ever directed anything before?

It’s great the people want female directors, but not every studio is willing to gamble on them. Look at Scarlett Johansson one of the most successful people in the entertainment industry and she just made her debut with an independent film with a small budget aimed at a niche audience.

Female directors are still pretty rare. Steve Sarowitz is ultimately the backer and maybe he didn’t want to gamble on one. Which sucks but not really Justin‘s fault.

And I disagree that Colleen could not have gotten a better deal. There’s tons of novelists who have had movies made who have much more control. They can come on as a producer if they want. what you said makes no sense. I think Colleen’s busy and just wanted to sell to the highest offer and that’s what she did.

She had the rights of course she could’ve had more control. Taking all agency away from Colleen makes no sense.

Colleen was an executive producer in the movie, and yes, many authors get that title in adaptations. It's a vanity title though.

You are incorrect that many writers have more control, unless by "many writers" you actually just mean J.K. Rowling.

This is simply not true. Stephen King and John Grisham and others also have a lot of creative control. Colleen Hoover is big enough that she could’ve done this. Come on. she got lazy and just wanted the money and that’s fine. You’re putting way too much integrity on the same woman who tried to monetize domestic violence via a coloring book. I’m not buying it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s neat that Hoover wanted a female director but I just did a quick Google search and only 8-16 percent of films are directed by women in any given recent year. So it’s a tall order unfortunately.

Let’s not act as if everyone is lining up to do a Colleen Hoover movie either. They have proven successful, but a lot of people feel it is beneath them. Justin is hardly a household name and Blake has not had a lot of success at the box office previously though she does have a lot of star power.

Frankly, Colleen was lucky anyone was willing to make it, and it was not a big budget film. But if she wanted more control, she could’ve taken more control. She owned the rights to the story and I feel like she just probably sold it to the highest bidder.

As noted above, this is the same person who was willing to do a coloring book off a domestic violence film so I think money is important to her and it’s pretty rich to act like she had these high standards.

Christy Hall wanted to direct the movie. She wrote the script for IEWU and had literally just filmed a movie starring Dakota Johnson and Sean Penn (Daddio) when IEWU went into pre-production. In fact I think a vague promise of letting her direct the movie was part of how they got her to do the script.

Baldoni had also said in at least one interview after acquiring the rights to the books that Wayfarer wanted a female director. I will try to find the interview -- he was asked if he planned to direct it (he may have been doing promo for Clouds in the interview) and he immediately tosses it off that of course not, they wanted a woman because of the subject matter.

So why didn’t she do it? Male politics of Hollywood and men taking over?

Hall is known as a writer has she ever directed anything before?

It’s great the people want female directors, but not every studio is willing to gamble on them. Look at Scarlett Johansson one of the most successful people in the entertainment industry and she just made her debut with an independent film with a small budget aimed at a niche audience.

Female directors are still pretty rare. Steve Sarowitz is ultimately the backer and maybe he didn’t want to gamble on one. Which sucks but not really Justin‘s fault.

And I disagree that Colleen could not have gotten a better deal. There’s tons of novelists who have had movies made who have much more control. They can come on as a producer if they want. what you said makes no sense. I think Colleen’s busy and just wanted to sell to the highest offer and that’s what she did.

She had the rights of course she could’ve had more control. Taking all agency away from Colleen makes no sense.

Christy Hall didn't direct the movie because Baldoni, who owned the rights, wanted to do it himself. She could only direct if he hired her to do so, which he didn't

And no, Colleen did not have the rights. She sold them to Wayfarer. That's how it works. Colleen Hoover is not a film studio. When you sell the rights, you relinquish control.

Wayfarer also learned this when they sold the distribution rights to Sony. Wayfarer got money for the film and a huge marketing and distribution budget and apparatus that they, a tiny studio, did not have. But they gave up certain control (choice of final cut, some casting decisions, and obviously a chunk of Amy profits).

Hollywood is a capitalist machine, not a student project. These are basic facts about the industry.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s neat that Hoover wanted a female director but I just did a quick Google search and only 8-16 percent of films are directed by women in any given recent year. So it’s a tall order unfortunately.

Let’s not act as if everyone is lining up to do a Colleen Hoover movie either. They have proven successful, but a lot of people feel it is beneath them. Justin is hardly a household name and Blake has not had a lot of success at the box office previously though she does have a lot of star power.

Frankly, Colleen was lucky anyone was willing to make it, and it was not a big budget film. But if she wanted more control, she could’ve taken more control. She owned the rights to the story and I feel like she just probably sold it to the highest bidder.

As noted above, this is the same person who was willing to do a coloring book off a domestic violence film so I think money is important to her and it’s pretty rich to act like she had these high standards.

Christy Hall wanted to direct the movie. She wrote the script for IEWU and had literally just filmed a movie starring Dakota Johnson and Sean Penn (Daddio) when IEWU went into pre-production. In fact I think a vague promise of letting her direct the movie was part of how they got her to do the script.

Baldoni had also said in at least one interview after acquiring the rights to the books that Wayfarer wanted a female director. I will try to find the interview -- he was asked if he planned to direct it (he may have been doing promo for Clouds in the interview) and he immediately tosses it off that of course not, they wanted a woman because of the subject matter.

So why didn’t she do it? Male politics of Hollywood and men taking over?

Hall is known as a writer has she ever directed anything before?

It’s great the people want female directors, but not every studio is willing to gamble on them. Look at Scarlett Johansson one of the most successful people in the entertainment industry and she just made her debut with an independent film with a small budget aimed at a niche audience.

Female directors are still pretty rare. Steve Sarowitz is ultimately the backer and maybe he didn’t want to gamble on one. Which sucks but not really Justin‘s fault.

And I disagree that Colleen could not have gotten a better deal. There’s tons of novelists who have had movies made who have much more control. They can come on as a producer if they want. what you said makes no sense. I think Colleen’s busy and just wanted to sell to the highest offer and that’s what she did.

She had the rights of course she could’ve had more control. Taking all agency away from Colleen makes no sense.

Colleen was an executive producer in the movie, and yes, many authors get that title in adaptations. It's a vanity title though.

You are incorrect that many writers have more control, unless by "many writers" you actually just mean J.K. Rowling.

The deposition from the Sony executive about the meeting where Ryan berated Justin is chilling. Highly recommend that people find it and read it.

The Sony executive, Ange, confirmed that Todd Black the other executive said it was the worst meeting he had ever been to. Keep in mind Todd Black is 65 and I believe now retired so that is saying something.

The meeting was a total ambush. They were told they were going to talk about script. No one said that Ryan was going to be there and they were surprised. There were line producers there and they were dismissed. Blake then took out her list and started reading, and Ange said she was shocked as she had not heard any of those complaints before.

She was asked if Ryan acted aggressively or yelled at Justin and confirmed. Yes, his voice was raised.

She described Justin as “frozen.”

She said the meeting went on for five hours with no breaks.

I’m sorry, but that is completely unhinged.

I’m sure Blake defenders will be like he was standing up for his wife or whatever but in no universe is a five hour meeting where you blindside somebody acceptable or an adult way to handle. Justin should’ve had a lawyer or an HR rep available as well if they were bringing up HR issues it’s just not appropriate or professional and sounds insane.

Anonymous wrote:Blake Lively, Ryan Reynolds, Taylor Swift etc etc are malignant narcissists and bullies. As are those who defend these sick, privileged, power hungry, entitled pieces of $&&$

+1. Sunshine is the best disinfectant! What’s especially hilarious is how DUMB and uneducated they all are. They are really high on their own supply, oblivious to the fact they’re just dime a dozen low watt industry plants created from thin air to make money off of.

Anonymous wrote:Why isn't the fact this was a crappy book in the first place part of the story?

This is such a good point that is being overlooked. All these women saying how they want to stand up for other women and they all were a part of this misogynist drivel.

The plot of IEWU: Lilly grew up watching her mom get abused by her dad. Her childhood friend, who was once homeless, somehow overcame that to run the hottest restaurant in Boston in his early 30s.

He’s one of the best looking men on the planet, clearly rich and successful, but doesn’t date because he’s pining for his childhood girlfriend - fortunately, just when she needs them he’s there, not dating. Even though he’s incredibly good looking rich successful and young.

This goes on over a two year period. Where he’s just seemingly waiting for her.

Makes all the sense in the world and luckily if you’re a victim of a domestic violence, you too could have a handsome rich exboyfriend to save you.

Look, I watched the movie and enjoyed it. It’s trash, but I thought Justin and Blake both did a good job. But to make all this nonsense out of this trash is absolutely ridiculous and they all should be embarrassed.