Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

\You know less than you think you do.

I agree and it goes both ways. Even I (generally considered pro-Lively for this forum) kind of believed Heath about the walking into her dressing room thing being more of a nothingburger where she was breastfeeding but basically covered and he briefly turned around to look at her, and I was surprised how bad it was in Baker and Carrol's description. Their depos revealed for the first time that there was a chorus of voices telling him not to enter, that she was topless and wearing just a thong while breastfeeding (with one breast uncovered), and that her body was fully visible to him in the mirror the whole time. If you are going into the unsealing looking only for things that make Lively look bad you'll find them, but there was lots that made Wayfarer look bad too.

Have you not seen other depositions of disputing this? The narrative of what happened here is totally all over the place and there is no consensus. I get Ange and Alex confused but one of them said that it was a planned meeting - Blake invited Heath invited him to her trailer - he came in but she told him not to look. that undermines the makeup artist who said he knocked and they were screaming don’t come in don’t come in and he came in. Which doesn’t sound right anyway cause why would he knock if he was just going to burst in?

The whole thing is really stupid.

Yes, I read all of them. Saks and Gianetti weren't there so they couldn't really dispute exactly what happened. It may be true that Lively and Heath arranged to meet at her trailer, but that's where she gets dressed so obviously if you knock on the door and they say not to come in, you use common sense and wait. There was a time crunch because Lively's contract mandates her hours, so Heath pressured her and she agreed to let him stay if he wouldn't look, then (she claims) she realized he had been looking at her in the mirror. Heath claims he knocked and they told him to come in, but the other three people who were actually there (Lively, Carrol, and Baker) say they didn't say that, and specifically told him not to come in (although Lively agreed he could stay after he entered). To me, that means Heath is the one that is lying, but maybe the jury will see it otherwise or find it doesn't matter. That's why it's still an open issue (and in my opinion, one that looks bad for Wayfarer).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

\You know less than you think you do.

I agree and it goes both ways. Even I (generally considered pro-Lively for this forum) kind of believed Heath about the walking into her dressing room thing being more of a nothingburger where she was breastfeeding but basically covered and he briefly turned around to look at her, and I was surprised how bad it was in Baker and Carrol's description. Their depos revealed for the first time that there was a chorus of voices telling him not to enter, that she was topless and wearing just a thong while breastfeeding (with one breast uncovered), and that her body was fully visible to him in the mirror the whole time. If you are going into the unsealing looking only for things that make Lively look bad you'll find them, but there was lots that made Wayfarer look bad too.

Have you not seen other depositions of disputing this? The narrative of what happened here is totally all over the place and there is no consensus. I get Ange and Alex confused but one of them said that it was a planned meeting - Blake invited Heath invited him to her trailer - he came in but she told him not to look. that undermines the makeup artist who said he knocked and they were screaming don’t come in don’t come in and he came in. Which doesn’t sound right anyway cause why would he knock if he was just going to burst in?

The whole thing is really stupid.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think people don't realize how much of the key depositions are still under seal. Huge portions of Heath's, Baldoni's, and Lively's depos still under seal, including most of the discussion of the birthing scene. We don't have Baldoni's or Lively's account of the January 17th meeting, only Heath and Ange Giannetti (and their accounts conflict directly, especially on the reading of the 17 point list and how it was phrase and what issues were covered).

What we do have really makes it a toss up. A lot of Heath's deposition is problematic in that he admits to knowing about most of Lively's complaints dating back to May of 2023, and also appears to understand that these complaints should have been referred to HR but were not.

The conflicts between Heath's depo and Alex Sach's depo are very problematic. Alex alleges that Heath not only knew there were allegations from multiple women but that he expressly declined to open an HR investigation even after she used it because he didn't want it written down. Heath denies that but it's just her word against his.

Meanwhile, on the retaliation, Melissa Nathan was caught in multiple lies in her deposition, and had to backtrack when emails with Katie case were produced showing she lied. This is more relevant to the Jonesworks v. Abel case but could absolutely become relevant in Lively's case.

It's possible the judge is going to dismiss it all due to Blake being an independent contractor or say CA law doesn't apply which would remove several claims. However, I think based on the last hearing that even if he does this, he will allow the contract claims to proceed. This is still very problematic for Wayfarer because I do think Blake will pursue the contract claims to trial even if it's all she has left, which would still pull in all the stuff with the birth scene (violation of nudity rider), changes to script to add intimacy (violation of work agreement and Lively's approval of shooting script without those changes), and all the retaliation claims (because Wayfarer signed the 17 point list which included a promise not to retaliate against Lively for any of this). It doesn't go away, even if they get rid of the SH claims.

I think those of you who think all the evidence is out (it's definitely not) or that Lively has already lost (she hasn't) are going to once again be frustrated and disappointed when it doesn't go the way your echo chamber keeps claiming it's going to go. Remember when everyone was shocked that the Wayfarer complaint got dismissed even though many of us were pointing out the serious defects and evidentiary weaknesses for months beforehand? Or how you were all convinced they'd refile? Or appeal?

Go ahead and yell at me for my long post or tell me "all that has been debunked" (it hasn't). I'm actually trying to help y'all understand that the story you are being sold about this case is simply untrue. You know less than you think you do.

The thing is, a ton of what hasn’t been released yet is Blake’s emails and texts. And her lawyers have fought hard to keep that under seal. It seems to be in contrast to Baldoni who has t seemed to fight to keep much under seal other than the Natasha Heath birthing video for obvious privacy reasons. So I get what you’re saying, but it makes it look like lively has things that they don’t want to come out.

Having followed this for a while I don’t think there’s going to be a smoking gun that looks bad for either side, but I do think there could be more bad headlines for Blake coming if there’s more texts and emails between any famous people. The media narrative has shifted that Ryan and Blake used their powerful friends and it’s weakening Blake’s case in the public eye.

Anonymous wrote:

\You know less than you think you do.

I agree and it goes both ways. Even I (generally considered pro-Lively for this forum) kind of believed Heath about the walking into her dressing room thing being more of a nothingburger where she was breastfeeding but basically covered and he briefly turned around to look at her, and I was surprised how bad it was in Baker and Carrol's description. Their depos revealed for the first time that there was a chorus of voices telling him not to enter, that she was topless and wearing just a thong while breastfeeding (with one breast uncovered), and that her body was fully visible to him in the mirror the whole time. If you are going into the unsealing looking only for things that make Lively look bad you'll find them, but there was lots that made Wayfarer look bad too.

\You know less than you think you do.

Anonymous wrote:Based on what I’ve seen so far the sh claims seems weak but the defamation claims are stronger.

What are the contract claims?

Anonymous wrote:I think people don't realize how much of the key depositions are still under seal. Huge portions of Heath's, Baldoni's, and Lively's depos still under seal, including most of the discussion of the birthing scene. We don't have Baldoni's or Lively's account of the January 17th meeting, only Heath and Ange Giannetti (and their accounts conflict directly, especially on the reading of the 17 point list and how it was phrase and what issues were covered).

What we do have really makes it a toss up. A lot of Heath's deposition is problematic in that he admits to knowing about most of Lively's complaints dating back to May of 2023, and also appears to understand that these complaints should have been referred to HR but were not.

The conflicts between Heath's depo and Alex Sach's depo are very problematic. Alex alleges that Heath not only knew there were allegations from multiple women but that he expressly declined to open an HR investigation even after she used it because he didn't want it written down. Heath denies that but it's just her word against his.

Meanwhile, on the retaliation, Melissa Nathan was caught in multiple lies in her deposition, and had to backtrack when emails with Katie case were produced showing she lied. This is more relevant to the Jonesworks v. Abel case but could absolutely become relevant in Lively's case.

It's possible the judge is going to dismiss it all due to Blake being an independent contractor or say CA law doesn't apply which would remove several claims. However, I think based on the last hearing that even if he does this, he will allow the contract claims to proceed. This is still very problematic for Wayfarer because I do think Blake will pursue the contract claims to trial even if it's all she has left, which would still pull in all the stuff with the birth scene (violation of nudity rider), changes to script to add intimacy (violation of work agreement and Lively's approval of shooting script without those changes), and all the retaliation claims (because Wayfarer signed the 17 point list which included a promise not to retaliate against Lively for any of this). It doesn't go away, even if they get rid of the SH claims.

I think those of you who think all the evidence is out (it's definitely not) or that Lively has already lost (she hasn't) are going to once again be frustrated and disappointed when it doesn't go the way your echo chamber keeps claiming it's going to go. Remember when everyone was shocked that the Wayfarer complaint got dismissed even though many of us were pointing out the serious defects and evidentiary weaknesses for months beforehand? Or how you were all convinced they'd refile? Or appeal?

Go ahead and yell at me for my long post or tell me "all that has been debunked" (it hasn't). I'm actually trying to help y'all understand that the story you are being sold about this case is simply untrue. You know less than you think you do.

Anonymous wrote:I think people don't realize how much of the key depositions are still under seal. Huge portions of Heath's, Baldoni's, and Lively's depos still under seal, including most of the discussion of the birthing scene. We don't have Baldoni's or Lively's account of the January 17th meeting, only Heath and Ange Giannetti (and their accounts conflict directly, especially on the reading of the 17 point list and how it was phrase and what issues were covered).

What we do have really makes it a toss up. A lot of Heath's deposition is problematic in that he admits to knowing about most of Lively's complaints dating back to May of 2023, and also appears to understand that these complaints should have been referred to HR but were not.

The conflicts between Heath's depo and Alex Sach's depo are very problematic. Alex alleges that Heath not only knew there were allegations from multiple women but that he expressly declined to open an HR investigation even after she used it because he didn't want it written down. Heath denies that but it's just her word against his.

Meanwhile, on the retaliation, Melissa Nathan was caught in multiple lies in her deposition, and had to backtrack when emails with Katie case were produced showing she lied. This is more relevant to the Jonesworks v. Abel case but could absolutely become relevant in Lively's case.

It's possible the judge is going to dismiss it all due to Blake being an independent contractor or say CA law doesn't apply which would remove several claims. However, I think based on the last hearing that even if he does this, he will allow the contract claims to proceed. This is still very problematic for Wayfarer because I do think Blake will pursue the contract claims to trial even if it's all she has left, which would still pull in all the stuff with the birth scene (violation of nudity rider), changes to script to add intimacy (violation of work agreement and Lively's approval of shooting script without those changes), and all the retaliation claims (because Wayfarer signed the 17 point list which included a promise not to retaliate against Lively for any of this). It doesn't go away, even if they get rid of the SH claims.

I think those of you who think all the evidence is out (it's definitely not) or that Lively has already lost (she hasn't) are going to once again be frustrated and disappointed when it doesn't go the way your echo chamber keeps claiming it's going to go. Remember when everyone was shocked that the Wayfarer complaint got dismissed even though many of us were pointing out the serious defects and evidentiary weaknesses for months beforehand? Or how you were all convinced they'd refile? Or appeal?

Go ahead and yell at me for my long post or tell me "all that has been debunked" (it hasn't). I'm actually trying to help y'all understand that the story you are being sold about this case is simply untrue. You know less than you think you do.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re: Baldoni's career, I find him to be creepy and a jerk but in the context of Hollywood, I don't think what he did was *that* terrible.

The irony though is HE is the one who built his persona around this feminism crap. He's the one who said he would be man enough to listen to women when they call him out, but instead he gets huffy when they don't want to hug, or jokes "I must have missed the HR training" when he's told they don't want to be called sexy, and opens up with incredibly weird comments about consent in his personal sex life. That's 100% on him. He was the one who made that important. Wayfarer is the one that marketed itself as having a higher calling, making movies for the greater good... and then you have Baldoni and Heath running around like asses (which multiple people confirm) and Sarowitz saying he wants to destroy people, as Israel did to Hamas. Baldoni wanting to use DV as the marketing plan to make himself look good, even discussing lifting "survivor content" from his DMs. This is all a problem they created, they are hypocrites, and it came out. It's not unlike the argument that Lively has always been a bully and difficult and it just came out, "organically."

I don't see what is sympathetic about the Wayfarer guys, they don't practice what they preach, and they are the ones who promoted themselves as being better than everybody else. I would not be surprised at all to hear Directors making comments about actresses being sexy (and much, much worse) or Hollywood financiers comparing themself to Israel against Hamas... but they marketed themselves as not being the typical Hollywood studio. They obviously believed that this stuff about Baldoni and Heath coming out would hurt their reputation (IMO, it's why they hired Wallace) because they chose to build their reputation on this higher calling. It's what makes them so distasteful to me.

Oh please. They were making a crappy Colleen Hoover book into a movie. If you believed they’re trying to answer to a higher calling through moviemaking that’s on you. Everything I know everybody in this industry is total BS and branding.

I just don’t think anything he did on that side went against feminism. Give me a break. It’s a Hollywood set and all these people are terrible.

I didn't believe anything about them before the case. Never heard of them except for Baldoni being in Jane the Virgin. Hearing he was a "male feminist" immediately made me suspicious.

That’s fine, but it’s troubling that you think this amount of bullying and power-play was deserved by anyone. so he claims he was a feminist and it out he’s not that much of a feminist. Though it’s interesting that Liz Plank who has made her whole platform being a feminist was fooled by it for three years and 124 podcast episodes wouldn’t you say? He must’ve had something to say for her to work with him like that.

Either way, he didn’t deserve to have his life destroyed and people calling him a predator. Ryan texting influential people in the industry that he should be in jail? Blake lying about what happened on set.

I just don’t get how anyone can justify this. He may not be a good guy, but it really seems like harassment and defamation on Blake and Ryan’s part.

Look, did he tell an actress he wanted her to do a birth seen nude because "it's not normal" for women to wear clothes during childbirth, or not? Without advance warning or involving the intimacy coordinator. We still don't actually have the answer to these questions. Yes, we know she wound up wearing some clothes (though as a woman I would argue that if you thought a scene was going to be filmed above the waist and clothed, finding out at the last minute you would be wearing a modesty garment and filmed below the waist with the intention of making you appear nude below the waist on screen would not be an exciting reveal at the last minute -- Blake should have had a heads up about that and should have had a nudity rider in place, IMO, if you want to be totally on the up-and-up with something like this) but we still haven't seen the testimony from Blake, Justin, or Jamey about what happened that day. And we know the IC wasn't there.

I'm sorry but until I get more information on that, I am not going to feel sorry for this guy. Also, if that incident went down as Blake describes (and again, Justin has not responded to the allegation that he pressured her to be nude or that he said those things to her), I personally don't have a problem with Ryan calling Justin names like "predator" to other people in the industry. In fact I wish more people would speak out against that kind of behavior on sets and I would comment Ryan for sticking up for his wife.

We truly do not know. People act like they have every piece of information they need to make a decision here, and there are lawyers and PR people on both sides working hard to convince us all of that because they are trying to force a favorable settlement for their client. But we dont' actually know. I personally would like to hear testimony on the birth scene and a few of the other allegations and I'm tired of being told "Blake lied" when we don't actually know that to be the case and we actually have not heard Baldoni et al even deny some of these allegations.

She had a nudity rider. It was very clear, what she was willing to do and not do. Also, it was a PG-13 movie. No one else ever gonna get blake full frontal. It’s ridiculous that we’re even debating that.

Also, she wasn’t pregnant. They were filming her giving birth. How do you think nudity would’ve worked?

She did not have a signed nudity rider before the birth scene was filmed. There were no nudity or intimate scenes scheduled during the first part of filming so there had been no effort to get it signed. The IC testified that nudity riders are not uncommonly negotiated right up to when the applicable scenes are filmed and can even be signed on set the day of the scene, so this wasn't unusual EXCEPT that then they were pushing for nudity in the birth scene even though they had not flagged it as a scene with nudity and had no nudity rider in place. Blake alleges that she pushed back on that pressure but says they used what I personally consider to be inappropriate means to pressure her, including Justin telling her that "it's not normal" for a woman to wear a hospital gown during childbirth (this is blatantly untrue and also a weird shaming effort to get a mother of four to do nudity in your film when you didn't negotiate it ahead of time). Justin has yet to fully address that allegation (or if it was discussed in his deposition, that has not been unredacted yet).

The IC also testified that what appeared on screen in the birth scene could be considered "high hip line" nudity where the actor appears nude below the waist and is wearing a special garment (not regular underwear) in order to create the illusion of nudity onscreen. This is a scenario that would be covered by a nudity rider for many actors. But again, there was not one in place. And according to Blake's complaint, she only agreed to this level of exposure because of the pressure exerted to get the scene shot that day. This is exactly why actors are supposed to be given warning before filming nude scenes -- to avoid a scenario where an actor feels like they have to do previously undisclosed nudity or intimacy in order to keep filming on track, without being given a chance to negotiate the circumstances under which it happens.

I know I'm going to get yelled at for writing too much on this topic and to be honest I don't know why I bother because the pro-baldoni people on this thread either do not understand the actual allegation regarding this scene or refuse to understand it. But this has not been addressed in the evidence we currently have. Was Blake pressured to be nude in this scene, without advanced warning and without an IC or nudity rider in place? How exactly did the negotiation over what she was wearing in the scene occur? This matters.

No one is talking about "full frontal" nudity, it's not even at issue in this case or this movie so I don't know why you keep bringing it up. Actors should not be pressured to do unscripted nudity, and using gendered and shaming language to try and convince an actress to do onscreen nudity is totally out of bound IMO. I'd like to actually hear/see the evidence regarding that allegation before I draw conclusions about this case.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re: Baldoni's career, I find him to be creepy and a jerk but in the context of Hollywood, I don't think what he did was *that* terrible.

The irony though is HE is the one who built his persona around this feminism crap. He's the one who said he would be man enough to listen to women when they call him out, but instead he gets huffy when they don't want to hug, or jokes "I must have missed the HR training" when he's told they don't want to be called sexy, and opens up with incredibly weird comments about consent in his personal sex life. That's 100% on him. He was the one who made that important. Wayfarer is the one that marketed itself as having a higher calling, making movies for the greater good... and then you have Baldoni and Heath running around like asses (which multiple people confirm) and Sarowitz saying he wants to destroy people, as Israel did to Hamas. Baldoni wanting to use DV as the marketing plan to make himself look good, even discussing lifting "survivor content" from his DMs. This is all a problem they created, they are hypocrites, and it came out. It's not unlike the argument that Lively has always been a bully and difficult and it just came out, "organically."

I don't see what is sympathetic about the Wayfarer guys, they don't practice what they preach, and they are the ones who promoted themselves as being better than everybody else. I would not be surprised at all to hear Directors making comments about actresses being sexy (and much, much worse) or Hollywood financiers comparing themself to Israel against Hamas... but they marketed themselves as not being the typical Hollywood studio. They obviously believed that this stuff about Baldoni and Heath coming out would hurt their reputation (IMO, it's why they hired Wallace) because they chose to build their reputation on this higher calling. It's what makes them so distasteful to me.

Oh please. They were making a crappy Colleen Hoover book into a movie. If you believed they’re trying to answer to a higher calling through moviemaking that’s on you. Everything I know everybody in this industry is total BS and branding.

I just don’t think anything he did on that side went against feminism. Give me a break. It’s a Hollywood set and all these people are terrible.

I didn't believe anything about them before the case. Never heard of them except for Baldoni being in Jane the Virgin. Hearing he was a "male feminist" immediately made me suspicious.

That’s fine, but it’s troubling that you think this amount of bullying and power-play was deserved by anyone. so he claims he was a feminist and it out he’s not that much of a feminist. Though it’s interesting that Liz Plank who has made her whole platform being a feminist was fooled by it for three years and 124 podcast episodes wouldn’t you say? He must’ve had something to say for her to work with him like that.

Either way, he didn’t deserve to have his life destroyed and people calling him a predator. Ryan texting influential people in the industry that he should be in jail? Blake lying about what happened on set.

I just don’t get how anyone can justify this. He may not be a good guy, but it really seems like harassment and defamation on Blake and Ryan’s part.

Look, did he tell an actress he wanted her to do a birth seen nude because "it's not normal" for women to wear clothes during childbirth, or not? Without advance warning or involving the intimacy coordinator. We still don't actually have the answer to these questions. Yes, we know she wound up wearing some clothes (though as a woman I would argue that if you thought a scene was going to be filmed above the waist and clothed, finding out at the last minute you would be wearing a modesty garment and filmed below the waist with the intention of making you appear nude below the waist on screen would not be an exciting reveal at the last minute -- Blake should have had a heads up about that and should have had a nudity rider in place, IMO, if you want to be totally on the up-and-up with something like this) but we still haven't seen the testimony from Blake, Justin, or Jamey about what happened that day. And we know the IC wasn't there.

I'm sorry but until I get more information on that, I am not going to feel sorry for this guy. Also, if that incident went down as Blake describes (and again, Justin has not responded to the allegation that he pressured her to be nude or that he said those things to her), I personally don't have a problem with Ryan calling Justin names like "predator" to other people in the industry. In fact I wish more people would speak out against that kind of behavior on sets and I would comment Ryan for sticking up for his wife.

We truly do not know. People act like they have every piece of information they need to make a decision here, and there are lawyers and PR people on both sides working hard to convince us all of that because they are trying to force a favorable settlement for their client. But we dont' actually know. I personally would like to hear testimony on the birth scene and a few of the other allegations and I'm tired of being told "Blake lied" when we don't actually know that to be the case and we actually have not heard Baldoni et al even deny some of these allegations.

She had a nudity rider. It was very clear, what she was willing to do and not do. Also, it was a PG-13 movie. No one else ever gonna get blake full frontal. It’s ridiculous that we’re even debating that.

Also, she wasn’t pregnant. They were filming her giving birth. How do you think nudity would’ve worked?

She did not have a signed nudity rider before the birth scene was filmed. There were no nudity or intimate scenes scheduled during the first part of filming so there had been no effort to get it signed. The IC testified that nudity riders are not uncommonly negotiated right up to when the applicable scenes are filmed and can even be signed on set the day of the scene, so this wasn't unusual EXCEPT that then they were pushing for nudity in the birth scene even though they had not flagged it as a scene with nudity and had no nudity rider in place. Blake alleges that she pushed back on that pressure but says they used what I personally consider to be inappropriate means to pressure her, including Justin telling her that "it's not normal" for a woman to wear a hospital gown during childbirth (this is blatantly untrue and also a weird shaming effort to get a mother of four to do nudity in your film when you didn't negotiate it ahead of time). Justin has yet to fully address that allegation (or if it was discussed in his deposition, that has not been unredacted yet).

The IC also testified that what appeared on screen in the birth scene could be considered "high hip line" nudity where the actor appears nude below the waist and is wearing a special garment (not regular underwear) in order to create the illusion of nudity onscreen. This is a scenario that would be covered by a nudity rider for many actors. But again, there was not one in place. And according to Blake's complaint, she only agreed to this level of exposure because of the pressure exerted to get the scene shot that day. This is exactly why actors are supposed to be given warning before filming nude scenes -- to avoid a scenario where an actor feels like they have to do previously undisclosed nudity or intimacy in order to keep filming on track, without being given a chance to negotiate the circumstances under which it happens.

I know I'm going to get yelled at for writing too much on this topic and to be honest I don't know why I bother because the pro-baldoni people on this thread either do not understand the actual allegation regarding this scene or refuse to understand it. But this has not been addressed in the evidence we currently have. Was Blake pressured to be nude in this scene, without advanced warning and without an IC or nudity rider in place? How exactly did the negotiation over what she was wearing in the scene occur? This matters.

No one is talking about "full frontal" nudity, it's not even at issue in this case or this movie so I don't know why you keep bringing it up. Actors should not be pressured to do unscripted nudity, and using gendered and shaming language to try and convince an actress to do onscreen nudity is totally out of bound IMO. I'd like to actually hear/see the evidence regarding that allegation before I draw conclusions about this case.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re: Baldoni's career, I find him to be creepy and a jerk but in the context of Hollywood, I don't think what he did was *that* terrible.

The irony though is HE is the one who built his persona around this feminism crap. He's the one who said he would be man enough to listen to women when they call him out, but instead he gets huffy when they don't want to hug, or jokes "I must have missed the HR training" when he's told they don't want to be called sexy, and opens up with incredibly weird comments about consent in his personal sex life. That's 100% on him. He was the one who made that important. Wayfarer is the one that marketed itself as having a higher calling, making movies for the greater good... and then you have Baldoni and Heath running around like asses (which multiple people confirm) and Sarowitz saying he wants to destroy people, as Israel did to Hamas. Baldoni wanting to use DV as the marketing plan to make himself look good, even discussing lifting "survivor content" from his DMs. This is all a problem they created, they are hypocrites, and it came out. It's not unlike the argument that Lively has always been a bully and difficult and it just came out, "organically."

I don't see what is sympathetic about the Wayfarer guys, they don't practice what they preach, and they are the ones who promoted themselves as being better than everybody else. I would not be surprised at all to hear Directors making comments about actresses being sexy (and much, much worse) or Hollywood financiers comparing themself to Israel against Hamas... but they marketed themselves as not being the typical Hollywood studio. They obviously believed that this stuff about Baldoni and Heath coming out would hurt their reputation (IMO, it's why they hired Wallace) because they chose to build their reputation on this higher calling. It's what makes them so distasteful to me.

Oh please. They were making a crappy Colleen Hoover book into a movie. If you believed they’re trying to answer to a higher calling through moviemaking that’s on you. Everything I know everybody in this industry is total BS and branding.

I just don’t think anything he did on that side went against feminism. Give me a break. It’s a Hollywood set and all these people are terrible.

I didn't believe anything about them before the case. Never heard of them except for Baldoni being in Jane the Virgin. Hearing he was a "male feminist" immediately made me suspicious.

That’s fine, but it’s troubling that you think this amount of bullying and power-play was deserved by anyone. so he claims he was a feminist and it out he’s not that much of a feminist. Though it’s interesting that Liz Plank who has made her whole platform being a feminist was fooled by it for three years and 124 podcast episodes wouldn’t you say? He must’ve had something to say for her to work with him like that.

Either way, he didn’t deserve to have his life destroyed and people calling him a predator. Ryan texting influential people in the industry that he should be in jail? Blake lying about what happened on set.

I just don’t get how anyone can justify this. He may not be a good guy, but it really seems like harassment and defamation on Blake and Ryan’s part.

Look, did he tell an actress he wanted her to do a birth seen nude because "it's not normal" for women to wear clothes during childbirth, or not? Without advance warning or involving the intimacy coordinator. We still don't actually have the answer to these questions. Yes, we know she wound up wearing some clothes (though as a woman I would argue that if you thought a scene was going to be filmed above the waist and clothed, finding out at the last minute you would be wearing a modesty garment and filmed below the waist with the intention of making you appear nude below the waist on screen would not be an exciting reveal at the last minute -- Blake should have had a heads up about that and should have had a nudity rider in place, IMO, if you want to be totally on the up-and-up with something like this) but we still haven't seen the testimony from Blake, Justin, or Jamey about what happened that day. And we know the IC wasn't there.

I'm sorry but until I get more information on that, I am not going to feel sorry for this guy. Also, if that incident went down as Blake describes (and again, Justin has not responded to the allegation that he pressured her to be nude or that he said those things to her), I personally don't have a problem with Ryan calling Justin names like "predator" to other people in the industry. In fact I wish more people would speak out against that kind of behavior on sets and I would comment Ryan for sticking up for his wife.

We truly do not know. People act like they have every piece of information they need to make a decision here, and there are lawyers and PR people on both sides working hard to convince us all of that because they are trying to force a favorable settlement for their client. But we dont' actually know. I personally would like to hear testimony on the birth scene and a few of the other allegations and I'm tired of being told "Blake lied" when we don't actually know that to be the case and we actually have not heard Baldoni et al even deny some of these allegations.

She had a nudity rider. It was very clear, what she was willing to do and not do. Also, it was a PG-13 movie. No one else ever gonna get blake full frontal. It’s ridiculous that we’re even debating that.

Also, she wasn’t pregnant. They were filming her giving birth. How do you think nudity would’ve worked?

She did not have a signed nudity rider before the birth scene was filmed. There were no nudity or intimate scenes scheduled during the first part of filming so there had been no effort to get it signed. The IC testified that nudity riders are not uncommonly negotiated right up to when the applicable scenes are filmed and can even be signed on set the day of the scene, so this wasn't unusual EXCEPT that then they were pushing for nudity in the birth scene even though they had not flagged it as a scene with nudity and had no nudity rider in place. Blake alleges that she pushed back on that pressure but says they used what I personally consider to be inappropriate means to pressure her, including Justin telling her that "it's not normal" for a woman to wear a hospital gown during childbirth (this is blatantly untrue and also a weird shaming effort to get a mother of four to do nudity in your film when you didn't negotiate it ahead of time). Justin has yet to fully address that allegation (or if it was discussed in his deposition, that has not been unredacted yet).

The IC also testified that what appeared on screen in the birth scene could be considered "high hip line" nudity where the actor appears nude below the waist and is wearing a special garment (not regular underwear) in order to create the illusion of nudity onscreen. This is a scenario that would be covered by a nudity rider for many actors. But again, there was not one in place. And according to Blake's complaint, she only agreed to this level of exposure because of the pressure exerted to get the scene shot that day. This is exactly why actors are supposed to be given warning before filming nude scenes -- to avoid a scenario where an actor feels like they have to do previously undisclosed nudity or intimacy in order to keep filming on track, without being given a chance to negotiate the circumstances under which it happens.

I know I'm going to get yelled at for writing too much on this topic and to be honest I don't know why I bother because the pro-baldoni people on this thread either do not understand the actual allegation regarding this scene or refuse to understand it. But this has not been addressed in the evidence we currently have. Was Blake pressured to be nude in this scene, without advanced warning and without an IC or nudity rider in place? How exactly did the negotiation over what she was wearing in the scene occur? This matters.

No one is talking about "full frontal" nudity, it's not even at issue in this case or this movie so I don't know why you keep bringing it up. Actors should not be pressured to do unscripted nudity, and using gendered and shaming language to try and convince an actress to do onscreen nudity is totally out of bound IMO. I'd like to actually hear/see the evidence regarding that allegation before I draw conclusions about this case.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Re: Baldoni's career, I find him to be creepy and a jerk but in the context of Hollywood, I don't think what he did was *that* terrible.

The irony though is HE is the one who built his persona around this feminism crap. He's the one who said he would be man enough to listen to women when they call him out, but instead he gets huffy when they don't want to hug, or jokes "I must have missed the HR training" when he's told they don't want to be called sexy, and opens up with incredibly weird comments about consent in his personal sex life. That's 100% on him. He was the one who made that important. Wayfarer is the one that marketed itself as having a higher calling, making movies for the greater good... and then you have Baldoni and Heath running around like asses (which multiple people confirm) and Sarowitz saying he wants to destroy people, as Israel did to Hamas. Baldoni wanting to use DV as the marketing plan to make himself look good, even discussing lifting "survivor content" from his DMs. This is all a problem they created, they are hypocrites, and it came out. It's not unlike the argument that Lively has always been a bully and difficult and it just came out, "organically."

I don't see what is sympathetic about the Wayfarer guys, they don't practice what they preach, and they are the ones who promoted themselves as being better than everybody else. I would not be surprised at all to hear Directors making comments about actresses being sexy (and much, much worse) or Hollywood financiers comparing themself to Israel against Hamas... but they marketed themselves as not being the typical Hollywood studio. They obviously believed that this stuff about Baldoni and Heath coming out would hurt their reputation (IMO, it's why they hired Wallace) because they chose to build their reputation on this higher calling. It's what makes them so distasteful to me.

Oh please. They were making a crappy Colleen Hoover book into a movie. If you believed they’re trying to answer to a higher calling through moviemaking that’s on you. Everything I know everybody in this industry is total BS and branding.

I just don’t think anything he did on that side went against feminism. Give me a break. It’s a Hollywood set and all these people are terrible.

I didn't believe anything about them before the case. Never heard of them except for Baldoni being in Jane the Virgin. Hearing he was a "male feminist" immediately made me suspicious.

That’s fine, but it’s troubling that you think this amount of bullying and power-play was deserved by anyone. so he claims he was a feminist and it out he’s not that much of a feminist. Though it’s interesting that Liz Plank who has made her whole platform being a feminist was fooled by it for three years and 124 podcast episodes wouldn’t you say? He must’ve had something to say for her to work with him like that.

Either way, he didn’t deserve to have his life destroyed and people calling him a predator. Ryan texting influential people in the industry that he should be in jail? Blake lying about what happened on set.

I just don’t get how anyone can justify this. He may not be a good guy, but it really seems like harassment and defamation on Blake and Ryan’s part.

Look, did he tell an actress he wanted her to do a birth seen nude because "it's not normal" for women to wear clothes during childbirth, or not? Without advance warning or involving the intimacy coordinator. We still don't actually have the answer to these questions. Yes, we know she wound up wearing some clothes (though as a woman I would argue that if you thought a scene was going to be filmed above the waist and clothed, finding out at the last minute you would be wearing a modesty garment and filmed below the waist with the intention of making you appear nude below the waist on screen would not be an exciting reveal at the last minute -- Blake should have had a heads up about that and should have had a nudity rider in place, IMO, if you want to be totally on the up-and-up with something like this) but we still haven't seen the testimony from Blake, Justin, or Jamey about what happened that day. And we know the IC wasn't there.

I'm sorry but until I get more information on that, I am not going to feel sorry for this guy. Also, if that incident went down as Blake describes (and again, Justin has not responded to the allegation that he pressured her to be nude or that he said those things to her), I personally don't have a problem with Ryan calling Justin names like "predator" to other people in the industry. In fact I wish more people would speak out against that kind of behavior on sets and I would comment Ryan for sticking up for his wife.

We truly do not know. People act like they have every piece of information they need to make a decision here, and there are lawyers and PR people on both sides working hard to convince us all of that because they are trying to force a favorable settlement for their client. But we dont' actually know. I personally would like to hear testimony on the birth scene and a few of the other allegations and I'm tired of being told "Blake lied" when we don't actually know that to be the case and we actually have not heard Baldoni et al even deny some of these allegations.

She had a nudity rider. It was very clear, what she was willing to do and not do. Also, it was a PG-13 movie. No one else ever gonna get blake full frontal. It’s ridiculous that we’re even debating that.

Also, she wasn’t pregnant. They were filming her giving birth. How do you think nudity would’ve worked?