Does this mean "It Ends With Us" the new Citizen Kane of Bad Movies? Use code [LEGALEAGLE] at the link below to get an exclusive 60% off an annual Incogni plan: incogni.com/legaleagle ⚖⚖⚖ Do you need a great lawyer? I can help! legaleagle.link/eagleteam
@@Beagle_enthusiast 50+ comments 5 minutes after it was uploaded. If anything Baldoni fans are in a cult supporting him. Their new Johnny Depp. Women hate women lol
Objection. The film "It Ends With Us" is not a treasure or a masterpiece or a classic of a film that is so bad that it is good. It is just an average turgid drama which would have been seen on the afternoon movie of the week television (ask your parents or grandparents regarding "television") in the late 1970's of course minus any nudity or simulated personal contact. As a self-proclaimed judge (no CV no degrees no problem), I would add an extra charge for intolerable use of irony in adopting the book's title then entering into multiple law suits with enough "players" to make their own movie.
I have a theory that the plot twist is that it was Sony all along. They realize the movie was doomed as it was a Colleen Hoover adaptation and pitted JB and BL against each other, so the drama will have give more exposure to the movie Oh and Ryan's there too for some reason I guess idk.
The decision to have a man be an actor that has intimate contact with a woman, *and* have that man also be the director who can decide when, how many times and what is involved in that contact - is the type of decision that a producer should have been very anxious about making. Oh but - the guy who was also actor and director *also* Co-founded the production company! So he was also the person that appointed himself to both of these roles, and the person that hired the HR department that was supposed to hold him accountable! This is a masterclass of someone setting up a situation that they could abuse, and ironically Sony pictures got this studio to do a movie about abuse.
Dude. Your immediate and direct assumption that a successful, ambitious, hardworking man has Harvey Weinstein levels of intention, is utterly insane. Anytime a man does ANYTHING, you feminists have to dissect it and twist it to view it from a perspective of abuse. 🤮 Your brain has literally jumped to the conclusion (without knowing anyone involved or having anything to do with the project) that a married man who is a director, who co-founded the production company, who chose to act in his own movie (which he has every right to do) with a married woman, did so solely to abuse her. Congrats, You’re a nutcase.
@@robg738 first up - I’m not a dude. Second - the whole point of accountability is that you’re not supposed to have a situation someone who is abusive *could* exploit, whether or not an abusive person gets themselves into that position of power or not. It’s like having a night club with the fire doors sealed and full of flammable decorations. It might never catch fire for its entire lifetime - or it could catch fire and hurt way more people than it was supposed to. And this production company was that badly designed nightclub.
It's in poor taste if you ask me. Dude gets bullied out of his own movie and LE shits on him. It's like making fun of the clothing a victim of sexual harrassment was wearing.
okay but hear me out "it ends in court" sound way better and more interesting than it ends with us , i wish THEY make a movie like that lmao that would be so cool
@thenamelessdragon really then im definitely watching the fictional movie main characters end up in real life court battle man i like the intriguing idea
When someone is accused of doing something inappropriate or out-of-bounds and their immediate response is "I'm not even attracted to you", you know there is a problem. Being attracted to someone is not a requirement for sexual harassment. Such a comment demonstrates a lack of self-awareness. His reasoning is that since he isn't attracted to her, he couldn't possibly be harassing her, regardless of his actual behavior. Which is absurd. If you do the exact same thing to person A and person B, but you're only attracted to person B, does that imply no crime was committed against person A?
Almost like Blake didn't give the full context when she first filed the lawsuit or in the NYT article and now people have reason to believe she lied. Not to mention how its obvious that she wanted to take over production of the film.
It's such an irrevelant comment to the actual situation. That also intends to put down the other person and make them feel bad for standing up for themselves. So that in the future when they want to protest they feel like they would be made to feel embarassed again. Really insidious.
That statement could help someone understand that no pursuit of sexual contact is desired. In an everyday situation it would be weird. In a Hollywood movie where people are making out and touching and simulating sex after not meeting with an intimacy coordinator, it makes more sense.
Next time, just say you haven't fully read about the entire situation and you have no idea what's going on instead of what you just typed lol ...seriously.
yeah we had a cooworker like that, made crude jokes knowing very well i was in earshot and was the only woman. he makes the jokes and then follows with, "oh sorry, dont mind my joke, its just a joke". he got canned a few months later, and it wasn't even me who complained. Guess he wasnt liked very much in the office 😂
Damn the two people who replied to you were exactly the two kind of people you were talking about LMAO 😂 they defend their own idol as if they were on set with them to watch what was actually happening, calm down guys
@@areswalker5647 I *only* watch youtube vids, i dont watch movies of any kind; i just see the facts alleged and the many witnesses to one side and the complete lack of witnesses to the other side
"while we don't agree with any suggestion of bad things happening, we also realized those were some reasonable things we weren't doing yet, for some reason."
It always rubbed me the wrong way that Baldoni insisted on a nude birth scene because his wife "ripped off her clothes during labor" and it's "not normal to wear hospital gowns during birth". First of all, who decides what is "normal" during birth? Hospital gowns are always provided for a reason, mainly privacy and comfort. One woman's labor experience is not THE universal labor experience. And, what bothers me the most, it completely ignores the fact the Blake Lively has given birth to all 4* of her children and knows what labor is really like as the person who is giving birth better than Baldoni or Heath ever could.
What is normal doesn't really matter here. What matters is what looks good in a movie scene. It's not like movies depict romance and sex realistically 🤷
The "I'm not even attracted to you" is a tell tale sign that he was absolutely abusing his position, it's so insanely common for guys who are rejected to say in response.
Imo, they made a mistake when they said "but the childbirth video wasn't porn!" She didn't say she was objecting to it because it was porn. She said she just didn't want to *see* that. "But it's not porn!" is admitting that they kept trying to show her after she said stop.
I work in the industry (in another country) and it's absolutely insane if they didn't have an intimacy coordinator on set during ALL intimate scenes. Wildly unprofessional, especially for a large hollywood production
ICs are only more recently something that is pushed in U.S. productions. And you still have a lot of actors who, even when they are offered, take offense to the very idea that they are needed. (I'm not talking about Blake) And it's not just sexually intimate scenes they should be required for. It should be all simulated violence. You don't know if someone has a history of domestic violence where the wrong move in an intense fight scene causes trauma, such as a hand on someone's neck too long. ICs need to become more firmly part of the stunt/fight/movement team.
Blake lively has been in this industry for years. If she wanted an intimacy coordinator she should’ve made sure one was there. Also, she’s a married woman, she shouldn’t accept any movies that doesn’t have an intimacy coordinator onset. Especially on movies that have to do with DV.
@@shelliann9690 Did you miss the part that the lead/director would improvise said scenes? Instead of say, Lively knowing about them ahead of time and thus requesting a coordinator, or backing out prior to signing a contract?
9:00 So he admits to showing an intimate video to Blake and her assistant without appropriate consent? Did his wife consent to the video being shown around? It doesn't matter if it wasn't sexual, it's still completely inappropriate!
Also it feels weird that he's like "I want you to see this video of my wife giving birth so you can understand my vision for this birth scene" to a mother a four children that just gave birth a few months prior
it is crazy the amount of people that are able to be manipulated by a pr lawsuit. like he literally signed an agreement before any of this happened where the allegations were made and he agreed to her terms (don't talk to her, don't address her) like by signing that he also admitted to the things she accused him of lmao
Your comment is embarrassing really. Did you even bother to read the lawsuit against NYT?? There was nothing inappropriate nor sexual about the video shown. And the reason why that video was even shown to Blake was because they were discussing the birthing scene involving Blake's character. Please do your research before making silly and frankly unfounded comments like this again.
'man attempting to brand himself as a male feminist makes movie about the evils of domestic violence then launches campaign to destroy female co-star over her speaking up about sexual harassment at his hands' I feel bad for the onion
Blakely also has a history of bullying coworkers/interviewers/management/everybody as well, so who knows who’s right. Honestly, it’s like watching two “Reginas” having an argument: only entertaining for a few seconds.
I really hope this doesn't become another media circus like Heard v. Depp. Everything about that case was poisoned by the news outlets and social media piling onto it. Edit: my opinion on Depp v. Heard is this I hate every bit of celebrity press and new media that covered it and I hate every last chucklefuck for blowing this damn case out of proportion.
Tbf, both of them are just terrible at relationships. Neither of them should have been together and should have known to leave each other. The media didn’t need to do much except show what was going on the courtroom. What we all saw, was enough for most of us to make our judgments based off that.
you mean another situation where you have to hold your nose and be reminded that some youtubers and youtuber legal people are complete empty heads when it comes to celebrities and will ultimately disappoint you with their personal views and the ease at which they fall for propaganda and media lies? or even worse, another situation where legal youtubers who defintiely know better sell out their morals for money or to just go with the flow? me too. luckily devin doesn't fall for that ish.
I've heard that excuse from men & women I've worked with when they behaved inappropriately. They'll say "well, it doesn't bother me!" Yes, that's literally how harassment works. It bothers the recipient, not the harasser by definiton.
Realistically, the combo of producer, director and lead actor on a romantic drama with heavy intimate content and domestic violence, co-starrimg a famously beautiful lead actress should be a screaming red flag situation.
The whole situation already has more red flags than a communist convention before it even starts. Never have someone hold the paycheck the camera and doing the intimacy all at once, it is ripe for abuse, even if the person is great, it is really easy to abuse your position without consequences.
I don’t know about making movies, but I feel like having an intimacy coordinator should be more than standard. And, all the protections she asked for seem like they should've already been in place.
There are texts mensajes that show that BL refuse to see a intimacy coordinator before starting to film. They just, conveniently, dont show this information on the video.
I gave birth in a hospital gown. There is nothing wrong with being naked, the staff don't care at all, but I think Blake Lively knows a thing or two about child birth.
Let's also talk about someone who will never give birth was trying to explain to someone who had given birth multiple times including very recently how it's 'really' done. He can say he's a feminist, but his actions and words say otherwise.
I work in a hospital, and I can confirm. While we see naked people all the time and some patients don't wear a gown, most patients aren't going to strip down because it can be pretty uncomfortable to be naked in front of multiple strangers
One of those most wild things about this case is them claiming they showed her the photos of women giving birth to help her acting when shes literally given birth in real life several times.
I can imagine how it might be different in first person or third person, and I have heard that women sometimes don't have a perfect memory of the birth. I don't think showing her videos of women giving birth is problematic per se, but it's all about the context, and that context ain't great.
@@alex2143 again this whole mess. Isn't just about showing this piece of information. How many times have there been male managers that are too touchy with female employees. I see it too often
@@marisoldeoliveira4838 She did not say it was pornography in her complaint, she said when he first showed it to her without warning she thought it was pornography at first glance. Baldoni's team is trying to miscategorize the accusation. @UmiMajo also showing her a water birth when the scene she was filming wasn't a water birth? So weird.
if it's him hearing from others how great he is for "overcoming" misogyny or something it's a vanity thing; if it's about him owning up to things in his past without wanting any sort of praise and in fact going so far as to put people on there with him who have been victims of the things they discuss and giving them a platform, then i may be willing to consider it feminist. i haven't seen it and i never will unless someone else makes content about it, so just keep that in mind.
@@SunnyGoesIn1D I'm just always skeptical of any man with a femininist podcast, and his reaction to this suit doesn't make me think that he has done the work
10:57 feels like if the courts weren't so sexist, this one witness account would be enough to prove that she is not lying about harrassment. Other people do not suddenly say they think you should never be alone with a specifc person for no reason. The only time a near stranger gave me advice about someone like that, they turned out to be a horrible person who r*p*d a lot of people and eventually unalived a woman. I feel like that saved me, i understand this womans pain.
This is precisely why ALL claims should be investigated and not believed blindly. As specifically in this case it turns out that she Invited him to her trailer while pumping. Baldoni provided a text message too.
@@il42she allowed him on specific instances after having a conversation about those instances. That does not mean that he can barge into her trailer when she’s undressed whenever he wants without prior consent.
Setting aside the actual allegations, it always seems skeezy when writers or directors write themselves as actors into graphic sex scenes. That's already a huge red flag, in my opinion.
I'm not a Blake Lively fan by any means but really appreciate this video so much. I've seen sooo many commentary videos by other people who blindly side with Justin without understanding what's happening or simply nitpicking the information they choose acknowledge. Hopefully this clears some things up for people.
@@leila_de_hautjardin she can but she can also be intentionally misrepresenting things. That's why it's importsnt to see all the claims from both sides
@@avp6730that is what Baldoni is doing though. Lively’s side have *literal proof* of a smear campaign, his refutations don’t make those text messages look any different, other than to those that desperately want to pretend they didn’t fall for a smear campaign. Again. AGAIN.
The fact that her list of "demands" which was literally just "stop sexually harassing me" made people online think she was being a "diva" should tell you all you need to know about the general public's opinion of women in general.
@@Clark226 she also mentioned other people. Her assistant, makeup artist, actress who played young Lily. That list wasn't even about herself, she wanted normal working conditions for herself and the staff.
I'll always remember that media relations nutso in charge of the smear campaign going "It's so easy to make people hate women that I feel almost guilty lol"
It was power move to make him villain. So she could take mre control. Manipulative. Reasonable 1 on 1 convo could solve this..otherwise quit and file charges
However, Hollywood abuses actresses all the time. Wildly popular game of thrones literally water boarded a lady and no one complained not to mention all the pointless nudity those girls had to perform over and over-yet I never heard a peep from anyone.
It’s incredible to me that when the movie came out Blake was instantly billed as some airhead who didn’t understand of the gravitas of the film SHE starred in but Justin was being soooo serious and intense about it. He worked HARD to paint her as a problem because he knew what was coming.
The media didn't make her look like an airhead, she did that in the interviews. I watched them and it made me cringe. She was always deflecting when it came to the serious subject matter of the movie. Looks like most of the people in these comments never bother to watch her.
@@michellewilliams5533 you didnt bother to be informed. SONY directed the ENTIRE cast to avoid DV topics during the film promotion - which was slick of them because they knew of the Baldoni's problematic behavior. Therefore, not only Blake, everyone else adhered to SONY's promotion plan except for Baldoni because his PR team advised him to go against SONY's plan to make himself look like a saint and it will help painting Blake as the bad person.
@ld7445 so avoiding means laughing? The rest of the cast didn't do that. Everyone answered questions in a respectful way. They handled it fine. If you like Blake, just say that, but excusing her behavior makes you seem woefully biased.
So his argument against showing her a video of something she didn’t want to see is saying, “I showed it to her, but she’s totally wrong about it not being ok”???
sorry, but if you’re filming a scene and you’re trying to make your actor understand what you’re looking for, showing them a video that is in context to that scene is not harassment. That is nuts, we should all be watching Sesame Street if birthing videos are offensive.
@@shelliann9690 i def agree, though i would say he prob should've clarified with her the content of the video and asked if she wanted to view it, then respected her wishes to not go through with filming a nude scene if she wasn't comfortable regardless. it reminds me of the claim about her being "shamed" for her weight when baldoni needed the info in order to lift her safely. like it's an objectively okay thing to do if you go about it correctly, and it rlly seems a lot of these things are also removed from much-needed context. (edit: just wanted to add baldoni def did weird shit and crossed boundaries and all of this could've been prevented with an intimacy coordinator and better communication)
@ you think that’s going to stand up in court when he tries to (ahem…laugh…snort…) sue the New York Times? His company already capitulated to her on set and admitted there was a necessity to clarify that this would never happen again. The details of what he was trying to are almost irrelevant, moot, and preposterous to discuss in the light of the fact that his company did this. None of his, or his attorney’s actions, jive together to form a cohesive “case”. Also, people CAN do lots of things to research a role, or help an actor to understand a concept, but get off it. This idiot pressed the wrong person with the wrong information. They didn’t work well together. She’s difficult. He’s difficult. He misread their working relationship. That’s it.
I'll say it here and now: The Room isn't even that bad. It's pretty bad, but it's SO MUCH BETTER than truly, authentically bad movies, like Double Down (back when Neil Breen still hadn't found green screens).
@@jubuttib The Room is actually quite boring. Some scenes are funny, but most of it is also just kind of ineffective. But at least it has a main plot you can just about follow
@@jubuttib oh it's that bad. But it's so bad it borderlines sarcastic comedy. When actors try to be serious and fall flat, that's even worse because you can't even laugh at it
The fact that the bulk of Baldoni's defence isn't a typical "I didn't do these things" but rather the claim that his actions were simply mischaracterized. When it comes to harassment (verbal/physical/sexual/etc...) the important factor is how the victim felt and not what the alleged perpetrator intended. This become particularly important in a case like this where it was brought up repeatedly that she felt his behavior/actions/etc.. was inappropriate and made her uncomfortable.
But did she bring it up, the only example of her bringing it up was when there was the meeting just before shooting resumed. She says lots of other times that she didn't like things that were happening, she doesn't actually say that she said or did anything about them. Also she says that the reason that she brought the complaint was because she thought that the bad press that she was receiving was a retaliation campaign. Logic says that when you are promoting a movie it doesn't make sense to bad mouth the star as that could put people off watching the movie. Moreso it shows that she lacks introspection that the way that she was promoting the movie (and promoting her products more than the movie), along with a couple of bad interviews was actually the reason for the bad press.
@@amandamandamands Her complaint shows that she brought it up several times. She brought it up with Baldoni and with Heath. She brought it up with Sony. She brought it up with the HR team of Wayfare. She originally didn't want to submit a formal complaint, which makes sense. No one wants to be thought of as difficult. And she insisted in a meeting and would not go back to set until they agreed to make it a safe work environment. One can assume that after that meeting she felt safe and production resumed and the movie ended. Why would she need to bring it up again? She thought it was over. If Baldoni hadn't gotten paranoid and hired a PR film to ruin her reputation, none of this would have come out. Her complaint also clearly states that she was promoting the movie against the agreed marketing plan. The complaint even attaches a copy of the marketing plan. Baldoni is the one who chose to steer away from it after he saw the backlash people had for it and then tried to turn it around and pretend that it wasn't the marketing plan he originally agreed to and make it seem that she was insensitive for doing what she was told to do.
Yes, I would have to agree that there is good evidence that she was concerned and brought up those issues before promoting the movie and getting those interviews and stories conveniently pop up from years ago on the internet at the worst time possible. Sony’s response is on record prior to the movie promotion and all the current drama that’s unfolded. I think having her image damaged during the movie promotion was the last straw which is why she decided to sue. And Baldoni’s camp decided to run the smear campaign proactively in hopes of damaging her image and her credibility in case she files suit.
Baldoni's team: The text messages where we laugh about taking Blake Lively down through coordinated PR campaigns were completely taken out of context!!1! The context: "🙃" I've read both lawsuits/complaints and I'm at the point where I think any pro-Baldoni comment is either a plant or an incel exactly because he hasn't denied anything at all. There just isn't any context where any of this is ok.
I had a boss that used to ask me what my bathroom habits were (in one day he mentioned 3 times how many times I had gone to the bathroom & asked if I was "going number 2") it made me extremely uncomfortable bc as a woman working under a man asking me such invasive questions about my bathroom habits being asked "what do you do in there?" Is extremely inappropriate, I was actually on my period which is why I had to use the bathroom 4 times in an 8 hour day. There was no HR as it was a privately owned company but I sobbed the whole way home bc he literally trapped me in his office to talk about my bathroom habits until he finally conceded after I told him I was on my period & needed to change my feminine products (This was a 15 minute conversation I was trapped alone in his office for after my shift had already ended). This was on a Friday, on Monday, I told my direct coworker and my other two bosses & within a week & a half I was let go, walked into my shift & promptly fired, no notice, I believe it was bc of this. I believe Blake.
What? Are you serious? A boss asking why you are spending so much time in the bathroom during work is now sexual harassment? What if he thought you were doing drugs in there or actually had so medical problem and if he should be worried about it? BUT no you think its some sexual harassment issue? GOD. Nothing in your own comment shows anything that is sexual.
@@monotech20.14you’re being daft, professional behaviour means you handle things in a different way than what is described here! If you are concerned about someone you definitely ask in a different way. No need to defend bullies
@@monotech20.14 Can you read? Where did the OP say it was sexual harassment? She said it was extremely inappropriate, which it was. If he thought she was using drugs he could have said so, though if drugs were an issue that would have shown in her work.
@ Yes. The things she described are clear workplace sexual harassment & are too specific to be falsified, in 99% of cases. Seems like she kept a record during filming of all the instances that things happened, which is why they are so specific, and he's not denying any of them, he's just trying to defend himself, like "I showed her that birth video to show her what I wanted her to do!" "I was allowed in her trailer while she breastfed!" He kept the same details but tried to rationalize the things he did but she provided context that showed that he was in the wrong in every circumstance.
Legit I was just at the store and saw one of those tabloid magazines with Blake and Justin on the cover and thought, "you know? I don't actually know this story well. I wonder if there's a LegalEagle video about it." Lo and behold😅
This is a very bias video. It’s very weird he spends almost the entire video reviewing what Blake’s lawyers said in depth but at the very end just briefly goes over what baldoni’s lawyers said. It’s pretty clear who’s point of view he’s wanting to broadcast
@@Pringlebox Agree💯 There are at least a few of us less gullible viewers who are capable of parsing out nuance and bias 8n a v8deo such as this - who DO understand how biased (for BL) this video is! 😏
I'm astounded by the lack of care in production, it's willful negligence at this point. I do community theatre (meaning we're not paid and everyone involved are volunteers) and even we make sure to have intimacy coordinators and closed sets when rehearsing intimate scenes(for reference we do the rocky horror show every year, and have done other shows like spring awakening, rent, and Heathers, which all involve sexual material). There's no excuse for a big movie production to not take these most baseline measures with this kind of material.
They supposedly had one and according to the text messages, Blake refused to meet with them. It will be interesting to see if that's borne out. They seem to have both saved a lot of texts.
I work in production and I was saying the same thing. The fact that she has to demand a intimacy coordinator in the first place is such a red flag that it makes all her other allegations much more concerning.
@@christineherrmann205 no. that's not even what the accused claims. you literally just went further than what the accused claims to defend him. he claims she refused ti meet an IC a month before the scene. which is 1. unproven and 2. completely irrelevant he admits there was no IC present for the scene. which was his duty to organise.
@@christineherrmann205 And none of those texts even attempt a defense of him showing her sexually explicit images and videos. Please find a new line of work.
@@jurgnobs1308 blocking out the scene with the IC was something they both should have done. That's the point. And we'll probably find out whether or not that happened.
At least some these critiques of the movie are Colleen Hoover's fault. Also, Lively's abuse allegations are so, so specific in a way that feels very real. Like God. Horrifying.
it also seems like she was relentlessly collecting receipts as things were happening. And getting all the texts and emails from the PR team literally talking to eachother about how they were hired to orchestrate a smear campaign against her and how they went about it should help a lot too. But the media and internet really does hate a woman abuse victim. So its going to be ugly no matter what
"The video of the woman giving birth wasn't sexual, it was a deeply personal experience I was sharing with Blake." OK, even if that were true, DID BLAKE WANT TO SEE IT??????????? THAT'S the issue, and him trying to argue that Blake was somehow in the wrong just proves to me that he doesn't understand or doesn't care about the consent of those around him.
I kinda get what hes saying- im autistic, i know what its like to have my actions be misinterpreted. But also.... cmon, man. A BIRTHING video? That feels like its obvious
Exactly. I have no idea why this man would want to share this "deeply personal" video with someone without taking a moment to say what they're showing and getting her consent first. I had a friend want to show me her pregnancy photos and was appalled when she was naked in them and told her to stop showing me. It's fking WEIRD.
@@MadCatLady28 Thing is that when the video was shown it was in context of them deciding what the birth scene was going to look like. If you are having a difference of opinion, then showing an example of what you are talking about can be an easy way to show what it is you have in mind.
@@amandamandamands Does that make a difference? The issue is consent and respect. If it was a disagreement over a gunfight scene and the director swooped in with a graphic image of real gunshot injuries without checking beforehand that wouldn't be acceptable either.
@@amandamandamands it was in the context of him trying to convince her that the scene should be done naked which was outside of her contractual agreement. If nothing else, the guy is absolutely delulu about what is persuasive.
Showing someone a video of your wife giving birth isn’t normal. The wife giving consent doesn’t make it ok to show it to people that don’t want to see it.
It's not normal out of context. In context, these were movie professionals discussing how to film and portray a birth, and one of them pulled up a film of a birth to reference. That's perfectly understandable. What's more, the video apparently did not show anything that would warrant higher than a pg-13 rating due to lighting and angle. So you have professionals who agreed to depict a live birth on film looking at a tasteful live birth as reference. To take Blake's characterization that she thought he was just walking up and showing her hardcore porn to get off on her reaction or some such is quite a stretch to believability. It clearly was a toxic work environment, but both sides are slanting the facts pretty heavily.
@@Oops_All_Crazythat is NOT how a conversation like that takes part. Especially when a director and producer are trying to convince an actress into a scene. Or rather, it was coercion. They bullied her into it. In context of everything else that happened, it was ridiculous.
@jaybee4118 And unfortunately, we don't have any idea how that conversation happened. You sure seem to be happy to assert what happened without knowing either. We only have Blake's telling, which as I've pointed out is pretty clearly tampered with. Probably, it was a badly organized work environment but not malicious, which is pretty mundane and might or might not be liable. The trial will hopefully get it out.
Imagine being in Ms. Lively's situation, having JUST given birth, for the fourth time, being told HOW women are supposed to give birth. So disgusting. I'm also starting to believe that all of the times she was "difficult" on previous sets were just her standing up for her own dignity.
Usually the case. Look at how Weinstein tarnished the reputation of Mira Sorvino and Ashley Judd by calling them difficult to work with, only to find out that they were fighting back against his abuse the whole time and he blacklisted them. I side-eye when you hear a woman is difficult in entertainment now, because you rarely hear the same accusations against men.
I mean, the director has the right to discuss and decide what type of birth and how they wanna portrait it... No one mentioned anything about how they are supposed to give birth in real life
@@Caiosigmaringa But it wasn't agreed upon beforehand and he kept changing things from how they did it in rehearsal. It was one of the agreements that came out of the meeting they had in January before filming resumed.
I remember when suddenly I was seeing a ton of headlines about Blake Lively pop up. Yes, she had a movie coming out, but it struck me as suspicious that there was a sudden influx of negative attention on her. People were quick to turn on her because of these headlines and I just couldn’t help thinking there was some kind of organized effort behind it. People don’t often ask why they’re being shown information. Regardless of who’s ‘right’ here, I think the big lesson for the public should be to scrutinize media campaigns more carefully. Why are we being pushed to like or dislike certain people? Why are they suddenly digging up old dirt? Who are ‘anonymous sources’ and are they real or manufactured by the author? Remain critical of what narratives you’re being fed.
Exactly! I remember seeing the press coverage at the time and thinking it strange that the press was negative, but the cast and author were doing the press tour with her and not him. If she was so bad, wouldn't they have supported him publicly and left her to do the press tour alone? Yet it was the other way around? That was suspicious to me.
For real. Beyond the complaint and everything else in this video we have it IN WRITING that there are literally whole companies who are hired to place negative stories in the media and employ a bunch of trolls to make content and comment on social media and push their own constructed narratives to "bury" people.
Just watch her interviews when promoting a movie that it is about domestic violence and abuse and hiw she literally showed no respect to survivors and you will surely understand where the negativity comes from. I work with DV survivors and was so frustrated with everything she did and said during the promotion of that movie.
It was as if a positivity bubble had burst. Like blake and ryan were on best couples and nicest couples lusts for years and I genuinely believe that a percentage got tired of her so once there was blood in the water.... people pounced
I think you have confused "allegations" with "evidence". There was zero evidence brought fourth in the video, he was reading the allegations she made for her court case.
The most amazing part about this, and similar cases, is that the victim (Lively, in this case) always gives their abuser SO MANY OPPORTUNITIES TO STOP without serious repercussions.
I don’t know. I mean if multiple crew members are apparently corroborating Baldoni’s behavior and even Brandon Sklenar is publicly supporting Lively; I am leaning towards Lively’s allegations being true.
Right? He had to do press alone. People who were there are siding with her. It is possible for things to get misconstrued... But that many things? By that many people who were there? That's hard to believe..
The issue with corroborating witnesses who have material ($$) employment in the industry is that they have material motivation. Tale as old as time. If Blake is seen as the bigger player - and she might be through her paretnership with Reynolds - people may provide testimony on that basis for the future of their careers. This happened with Depp - he was the money train - and this extended into associated industries in hollywood: psychs and bealth. The same was true for Weinstein until it all just fell apart and then no one had to protect him anymore. Heard got no support because no one relied on her for $$ and she had no inluence. This trial will be about the same thing when it comes to "corroboration": who has more influence and who are people scared of more? This is not always true, but for the greater part it will be, people will corroborate if its in their interest so they can preserve their careers and their own livelihood.
I'm not taking sides, hypocrisy is something people love to do. Who's gonna support someone being accused of something like that? I'll just see what happens.
"You were ok letting people see you breastfeeding sometimes, therefore you can't complain that I decided when I could come look at you" is SUCH an abuser justification. And that's his defence, not even her accusation??? It's one of the literal textbook examples of consent training, that permission once doesn't grant permission forever.
At 11:12 you used Baldoni's name when it was actually Heath, as seen in the following screenshot where the quote is found. You do the same thing at the beginning of the video when claiming that Baldoni allegedly showed Lively videos of naked women - the only allegation of that is against Heath when he showed her the video of his wife's birth. I think a visual with the correction while you're talking would be appropriate for clarity since this will be many people's sole source of this information.
Someone on Reddit found an Access Hollywood interview Baldoni did when they were promoting the film over the summer. In it, he says that he worked really hard to get into the character of Rile and that he would try things in a scene that would make Blake react in a way he didn't see before, which would make him think "oh I went too far." Now that doesn't mean all the allegations are true, but it's not hard to see how harassment would arise from scenarios like that.
That doesn't makes it right though. If he did that he should've apologized so hard the first time it happened and worked harder to ensure that it didn’t happen again.
I feel it's surreal that Baldoni's seeming defense of some of his actions are not to deny the accusations but to state these were not inherently sexual (the birthing video being one). Whether someone is or is not sexually stimulated should not be the determination of whether it is acceptable behavior or not. Also, whether someone themselves is or is not "likable" is not something which should determine whether behavior was or was not acceptable and/or professional. Unfortunately, given the way such cases often seem to go, I don't think it's likely that any legal result will change anyone's attitudes about the individuals involved.
I’ve been searching for his response to her claims, do you know where I can find them? I don’t think she is nice, even if all the videos about her were just part of a smear campaign no one forced her to act and say what she did. But if it is really true all of that happened to her, he deserves punishment. I will wait and see the end of this.
Literally one of the first things in every corporate mandated Sexual Harassment training course ever made is "It does not matter what the intent behind the harassment was, it is how it was perceived and received by the offended party." Apparently Baldoni didn't complete that course. 🤣
So to summarize, Lively alleges that Baldoni acting as her employer behaved inappropriately toward her in a number of serious, repeated ways which multiple witnesses observed, following it up with documented libelous activities by a hired PR firm, while Baldoni alleges that she's playing comic book levels of 4D chess to ruin his movie and reputation for some reason.
She is extremely good at PR coz she manipulated everyone against him. But also terrible at PR, just look at her clothes and "wear your florals" campaign. He is male ally with deep understanding of abuse but also just a bebe with no understanding of consent and professionalism.
@@ann3923 You've put it so cleverly! Here are your flowers -> 💐! I've been trying to figure out whose side to take for the longest while because most of the videos I found about it were biased. You've put it fantastically.
@@ann3923 the "wear your florals" was in line wiith what had been agreed upon for the marketing campaign. They were, per contract, not supposed to highlight that it was a movie about abuse and keep things light and "positive" when speaking about the film, because that is what CoHo asked for with the contract the actors signed for the marketing campaign. The comment was still definitely in bad taste, but the marketing campaign as a whole was in bad taste.
No it doesn't, it shows that Blake was the more powerful person and people were scared to go against her. Blake was the one that refused to do promo with Baldoni and threatened to walk numerous times, she managed to get her edit as the one released instead of the director's. That is a person in a position of power.
@@amandamandamands They're really not doing a good job with the public relations campaign after it got exposed, huh? On every comment, on the same topics, with samey responses
It is so annoying to see the same comment from people supporting Blake. Whenever someone disagrees or shows why they think this people accuse you of being paid for some smear campaign. Omg
This is how narcissists work. As a victim of one, they turn your ENTIRE WORLD against you, make it look like your fault. This is exactly what Blake wants you to believe. But if you read about prior cast that have worked with Baldoni, they don't have this issue. In fact, one of his co-stars (Gina Rodriguez) loved him so much he officiated her wedding.
Right? From what I gather his suit against NYT is saying that it's painting him in a "false light," not alleging that any of the evidence presented is fake. Like sorry not sorry my guy what "omissions" could make what you did ok?
His attorney has said he plans on filing suit. She had not filed suit yet when he sued NYT (just a California right to sue determination). If he filed a lawsuit against her before she filed one against him, people would likely view that as further evidence of retaliation.
maybe it's because she didn't file the lawsuit until he did? she only filed a civil complaint which then conviniently leaked to NYT which he IS suing first? maybe?
Also, she was contractually obligated to talk about the movie the way she did during promotion, which was not discussed in this video. when they did their media tour she was told how to promote the movie and then those same people that told her how to promote it bashed her for it as part of that smear campaign. that way they could then discredit her if she ever came out with the sexual harassment claims. if you watch Rosanna Pansino's video she provides more of the leaked texts from the crisis management team on how they were going to destroy her.
Yes. Sony wanted the movie promoted as a story of resilience rather than victimhood, hence the lighthearted promotion of serious topics. But Baldoni went rogue and started focusing on the abuse and survivor's element of it. Then the PR team he hired used that promotion disparity to discredit Lively. It's really diabolical.
@@mithicash1444it’s free online! I read both the one from baldoni and Blake. Both available. I’m not sure who to believe but I will say Blake has a lot more evidence that baldoni doesn’t address in his lawsuit which rubs me the wrong way
that's also false - she wanted to promote it this way after she twisted the hands of both JB and Sony with threats to quit either the film or the promotion. JB always wanted to market it the way he did and he has the right as the producer owner of the production company and director.
@@soonsims Sony's directive was included as part of the lawsuit she filed against Baldoni and Heath. He still has to abide by the requirements of the studio who is funding it.
@maries1993 we were on varsity soccer together in southern Oregon. He told the coach he couldn't make it to practice one day cause he was sick. Halfway through, we notice that Justin is kicking balls around with some ladies 3 fields over during our practice. My guy, we practice the same place every day. I think he just thought he was above it even if he got caught. Always said he was going to be an actor. Got a lot of financial support from his folks to do it. Past all these allegations- I didn't ever see him be cruel. Not past what high school soccer players are like, at least.
@@davidneff7620 Not true, there is one text where she didnt feel that she had to meet them before filming. That doesn't excuse the IC not being on set when Baldoni wanted to add nudity to a scene.
Some of it. Having an intimacy coordinator wouldn't have stopped him from barging in on her when she was getting the body makeup removed. Or asking her inappropriate questions about her marriage. Or showing her the birth video without warning.
I agree that given the subject matter and his role, it was super inappropriate to have him also direct. It enables a really dangerous power imbalance. There should have been someone else directing just so there was another voice in the room.
That sexual harassment course I was required to do for work comes in handy here. Sexual harassment does NOT REQUIRE sexual attraction or interest. That was a portion of the training that was made very apparent… His excuses are hilariously sad, and have no basis anyways lol.
I don't feel like people understand that you can dislike one person's behavior off set or while doing publicity, AND hold a man accountable for being creepy onset. It's not one or the other. Being a "mean girl" is not criminal. Baldoni's alleged actions on set are.
All I know is everything I see seems to be against Blake. Thank you for clearing things up because I had no idea what was going on. Honestly I don’t really care except for the fact that if she was harassed and abused on the set, then she has a legit complaint. I don’t understand why women aren’t believed. 99% of the people that make these claims are legit. Nobody wants to be involved in something like this, if they don’t have to be.
Blake and her parents have been part of Hollywood for a long time. No one would dare mess with them or would they let anyone mess with them. In my opinion as someone who has followed Blake’s career she has always been a mean girl. She starts the drama they hides her hands behind her back. Justin defended himself however he could and will continue too like we would all do.
It's funny, everything I've seen is openly for her, including questionable statements by people you probably don't want coming to your defense. I personally can't wait for James Franco to release "The Disaster Artist Part II: It Ends Both of Our Careers"
I feel so bad for Blake. Yeah, she's been rude in the past, but that doesn't justify literal crimes being committed against her. In these situations, the woman being unlikable is always an excuse to side with the man who committed actual crimes. This has to be exhausting to deal with for her. Having a role in a Colleen Hoover book adaptation is punishment enough for being rude to an interviewer 😭
I hate big movies and my first thought when the smear campaign was going against her was 'why am I even hearing about this'. I can't say I called it with her being the victim here but I at least knew to withhold judgment when someone is being publicly smeared over undisclosed personal drama.
you know i really disagree about the whole smear campaign thing. everyone has taken what lively has said to be factual and while i understand believing the claimed victim, her attitude was very different. nobody needs to smear your name if you go on interviews and act in a disgusting manner. she kind of dug her own hole when she was rude to interviewers and insensitive to the whole point of the movie. my biggest issue is that if she’s a victim in this whole situation, why is her demeanor toward the message of the movie so indifferent? she seems to not care AT ALL about the problems presented in the movie.
@@Val-pr5xr two things can be true at once. A "mean girl" can still be a victim of sexual harassment - however she behaved during the promotion is largely irrelevant here. For my money, both of them in the bin, but for my money also - baldony gets a nastier corner.
@@Val-pr5xr She was rude to ONE (1) interview, YEARS ago, who asked invasive questions about a pregnancy that was not public yet. Could you at least question a narrative before you leap to dogpile on someone?
I’m sorry, but before all of this came out, I watch Blake lively’s interviews , and I was left scratching my head. Her nonsensical answers had nothing to do with DV. It made me wonder if it was the same ”It ends with us” book that I had read.. she did this to herself and now she’s looking for somebody to blame. Also, if you watch her interviews, she comes off as a bit of a narcissist and if anyone has ever worked with a narcissist, this is the shit they pull on you every time. Turning something that’s completely normal like a birthing video into porn. I feel sorry for Justin.
Am I missing something? Given she's got the reciepts (ie filed claims in writing), I can't see how this isnt a slam dunk in her favor? Particularly if they can get some corroborating witnesses. This guy doesnt sound like he's got the pull to end careers so hopefully that isn't hard.
It is a slam-dunk in her favor, which is why Baldoni's PR firm is all over the internet to push his side, which conveniently ignores most of the sexual harassment Lively alleges.
Well Baldoni is definitely gonna lose so he's doing his darndenest to at least make her look bad or worse by spinning everything with the PR firm. Though that's honestly also a bad idea since he and his firm can be sued for that too and while defamation is hard to prove, this doesnt feel as difficult due to the many many receipts and proven malice. So yea, in short, he's a moron.
Because he has receipts too and a lot of the stuff being claimed by BL can be subjective so we can’t be basing stuff solely on the written claims on both sides
@@catg.a9225 How much did Tag PR pay you for your comment? lol The smear campaign is ridiculous, anyone who reads the documents for themselves would not side with Baldoni
Almost like Blake didn't give the full context when she first filed the lawsuit or in the NYT article and now people have reason to believe she lied. Not to mention how its obvious that she wanted to take over production of the film.
THIS is the video ive been waiting for regarding this. So many people are just looking at a few article and hating on blake because they dont like her personality instead of explaining the actual details of the allegations… I like that you dont take sides and just report on the actual allegations and responses. The good thing about this case is that documentation will be able to either confirm or deny Blake’s allegations. Im glad you are covering it without opinions involved
Her allegations against him are weird, because individually most could be explained away. However when taken all together they show a clear pattern of harassment.
That's one reason harassment can be so hard to prosecute, or to sue over, because any single incident seems minor, trivial. Not worth making a big deal about. Maybe someone just said something in an awkward way, didn't mean anything by it, etc. Most of us give people the benefit of the doubt if something is just a one off. It's the repetition that matters. And the legal system can often focus on individual incidents, none of which rise to the level of something actionable.
Some of the incidents are accusations leveled at Heath instead of him. But...yeah, if your boss gets you alone multiple times talking about his porn habits, his sex life, asking you about your sex life... it meets the legal definition. But because her lawsuit exempted some clarifying information that made it seem to people like her team was willing to mislead people, I would hope she's going to have some people deposed. Including the intimacy coordinator. "Were you made aware that the director was adding intimate scenes to the movie and asking for nudity? Were you asked to be on set?"
A man who says they're a feminist because he "loves" women. A lot of men do this but just not on this scale. I can hear him say I'm not toxic while gaslighting those around him.
The topics listed in the protections to return to production, leaves enough for you to know what happened there. They wouldn’t have documented the required steps if they were actually following them…
there's full on text message and email evidence and Baldoni is still trying to claim he did nothing wrong that's wild tbh. also the most horrifying thing about all of this is that almost every single thing that people have been mad at Lively about in the past few months seemingly leads back to Baldoni. Like that's awful.
Gawd, I was waiting for LegalEagle to address this; FINALLY!! (Although in his intro he addressed that this has happened so many times before, he failed to address those in his video.) I'm a retired attorney living in Japan (the US is a very hostile place). I read all of Blake's initial filing which LE included only two small portions of actual collaborating evidence. The way to get around the "he said, she said" which literally goes on throughout history is to provide collaborating evidence. Blake's attorney's do this well repeatedly. I tried to read Baldoni's complaint against the NYT but it became clear very shortly that he was trying to obfuscuate. He literally doesn't address most of her complaints. He complained that she filed a discrimnatory action with the state but didn't file a lawsuit. Now we know that filing an action with the state is required before filing a lawsuit which she did a few days later. Baldoni's attorneys are looking as bad as his PR team. You should read the complaint. The text messages they got through subpeonas are extremely damning. That is something that Baldoni never addresses in his action against the NYT and can't because it is extremely hard (Immpossible) to explain away. I remember when the story first came out and I pointed things out to people about Baldoni in the complaint and it was incredible the backlash that I got of people supporting him. Even more surprising, most of the comments referred me to three months ago when the movie came out which further showed that his smear campaign was working. I pointed this out to people only to be met with more backlash. Regardless, it is sad all around. What we do know from these events is that the actors don't recover. We don't see Depp or Heard anymore, and the list from these things just goes on. Sad. I don't know Baldoni, but have seen Blake in a couple of movies before I found out who she was married to. To me this looks pretty open and shut, but the retribution will never end. This is "Hollywood" at its best.
Subpoena yes but why were they taken out of context? You also read the other lawsuit right? With the complete conversation? Because I too was appaled when the first complaint was published for the public to read (Is that even allowed? I have no idea. But you can tell us since you are a recent retired lawyer) I am not on any sides here. This whole drama and lawsuit ended up in my feed, now I have to see the end of it. As far as I know, context matters a lot. As much as evidence. Everything is tested and challenged during discoveries and examination: integrity truth, relevance.
Yeah it will hurt them both in the end. Like Depp and Heard, irrespective of the "winner" it seemingly totally damages both. Better to make sound decisions up front to stay out of court at all if possible.
because Blake really selectively chose what to put in there and Justin immediately countered with reliable evidence that she wasn't telling the whole truth and was framing the whole thing up the wazoo
No, come on, there’s no way the main female character’s name is Lily Blossom Bloom and she actually owns a flower shop?! Who writes this slop? Or better yet, who reads it, makes a film about it, and then people actually go and see it enough to make it a hit?!?
It’s incredibly unbalanced and yet the comments are going so hard about “thank you for finally presenting an unbiased” account 😂 Legal “Eagle” doesn’t even go into the evidence that contradicts Blake’s allegations. He only presents Blake’s versions. Seems like HER PR team is spamming the heck out of this video bc nowhere else have I seen such a one sided reaction to this topic.
you forgot to mention the part where all the incriminating texts between baldoni and his pr person were given willingly to lively’s legal team to use as evidence in their complaint because his former pr team was so sick of him 😭
No not because of that, the specific PR person that he was working with left and had to leave behind her work phone. The PR company is the same company that Lively and Reynolds use. None of that indicates that they were sick of him, just that there was a dispute between 2 of their talents and they went with the bigger name.
@@danniwills8739 do you really think blake’s legal team would submit fabricated evidence to the court? Really? No lawyer would do that bc it’s so easy to be proven false and they could face discipline from the board for forging evidence. Cmon I know you love baldoni but dang
Baldoni claiming he's "at the top of the totem pole" is all I needed to know to side with Blake (the most important figures are at the bottom of pole if they are used to show hierarchy)
Thank you for covering this story. Every time there is a sexual assault case around Hollywood, it always turns into these weird "pick a side" issue. And yet, time and time again it's women who are abused. I don't understand why people think that unless women are perfect they are asking for it. Men think they are entitled to women, and then when it happens to men it's treated like they should want it because men want sex. I really wish people would treat this as it is, abuse of a people not hot drama.
I’m more inclined to believe Blake than Justin at this point. What would even be her motivation to falsely accuse him? She’s an established actress, not a new up and comer, who could be motivated by fame or money
Right? It makes no sense to me at all that Lively just made up a bunch of very specific sexual harassment claims against Baldoni. What reason would she have to lie about them? She had nothing to gain and everything to lose.
People keep saying "to fix her reputation", but that makes zero sense when you think about it for more than two seconds. She and her husband are practically royalty when it comes to putting out a positive image. They both have to know damn well that suing for sexual harassment never results in a positive reputational turnaround for the claimant. Baldoni claiming that she did it for PR is like if someone told you that Michael Phelps suddenly decided to wear lead boots in the pool because he thinks it'll make him swim faster. It's just so obviously absurd, and it's baffling to see people fall for it.
Okay... So I am not a woman, I have never given birth or been involved in someone giving birth... But given when I googled if it is normal to wear a hospital gown during birth I found mostly material discussing whether to use the gown provided by the hospital or bring your own, his claim for it to be normal to be nude during birth seems... Very dubious. Any mothers, OBGYNs, nurses or hospital staff here to chime in?
Nursing student here. If you're giving birth in a hospital bed like she was in the movie, most people would be wearing a hospital gown. Patients in the birthing unit already have a lot of providers examining their intimate areas, so most people generally try to keep as much privacy as they can. Some hospitals have water pools where people can give birth, in which case the person might be naked, but in the movie, she wasn't in a water pool/bath tub. It looks like the wife had a water birth at home, where it would make sense to be naked, but why would someone need to be naked in a hospital birth? It literally makes no sense. Also, why would you try to force someone to do an unnecessary nude scene when they're clearly uncomfortable with it? It doesn't add realism. It's just unnecessary and sketchy.
I know two women who gave birth naked because they felt excessively warm and irritated by the gown. That said, it absolutely wasn't standard at the hospital I worked at.
@@TheNaldiin @glitch--gamer So what I am understanding is: It is not like a naked birth is unheard of or would be unrealistic and there are setting in which it might even be likely, but his claims of the scene being weird or unrealistic if she used a hospital gown like she wanted were wildly off... Thanks ^^
8:47 it doesn't fing matter if it's not pornographic. It's inappropriate to show stuff like that to people without their concent and then go on to say "we need to do it more like this."
Isnt it concerning how effective slapp lawsuits are at swaying public opinion? Maybe Im just some dum dum but this seems pretty clear cut that violations were made to a contract this is INSANE?
It's truly bonkers that on *this* film, with *this* subject matter, they didn't have an intimacy coordinator on set from the start. That alone seems damning.
75-80% of this was one sided and there was no mention of the text omissions made in the the NYT story that reframed the conversation and in fact reiterated said edited conversation. TF is this?
There are about 3-4 comment templates going around in the comment section here. All of them are based on saying what a fair and accurate legal analysis this is and how awful Baldoni is. It’s quite clear to anyone who has bothered to read all the filings in both cases that this video is one sided and the comment section purporting to stan the video and Blake are painfully inauthentic
@@bingleytillydid you not see his evidence? His so called evidence is not credible enough. While she has actual proof that he just says “i wasn’t doing it in that kind of way, i was just being cool”.
have you ever considered making videos about PAST events? i would love to see that, you could cover more landmark and historical events like major bills passing or being denied and even some silly stuff ?
It's wild how sets like this are still happening. So much has been done to prevent exactly this kind of thing, yet people like Baldoni keep creating these environments. The film industry needs to make examples of men like this, because they just make the job of every other director and actor harder
Does this mean "It Ends With Us" the new Citizen Kane of Bad Movies? Use code [LEGALEAGLE] at the link below to get an exclusive 60% off an annual Incogni plan: incogni.com/legaleagle ⚖⚖⚖ Do you need a great lawyer? I can help! legaleagle.link/eagleteam
3 views in 9 seconds of upload? Damn.
@@Beagle_enthusiast 50+ comments 5 minutes after it was uploaded. If anything Baldoni fans are in a cult supporting him. Their new Johnny Depp. Women hate women lol
Wow it's like the Disaster Artist with lawsuits
Objection. The film "It Ends With Us" is not a treasure or a masterpiece or a classic of a film that is so bad that it is good. It is just an average turgid drama which would have been seen on the afternoon movie of the week television (ask your parents or grandparents regarding "television") in the late 1970's of course minus any nudity or simulated personal contact. As a self-proclaimed judge (no CV no degrees no problem), I would add an extra charge for intolerable use of irony in adopting the book's title then entering into multiple law suits with enough "players" to make their own movie.
It really seems that TJ Miller was correct about Ryan Reynolds.
This is one of those movies in which the behind the scenes footage could be its own movie
Netflix will make this a documentary in 2-3 years
@@B-Ran_the_Manand get half the details wrong, by framing the victim as the aggressor.
Apparently it doesn't end with them.
Island of Dr Moreau comes to mind! Makes Apocalypse now look like the Care Bears movie behind the scenes.
I would even say the real thing seems like a fanfiction of the movie 😂
And I thought making a movie out of a Colleen Hoover book was bad enough.
Well at least it's a very fitting story.
I have a theory that the plot twist is that it was Sony all along. They realize the movie was doomed as it was a Colleen Hoover adaptation and pitted JB and BL against each other, so the drama will have give more exposure to the movie
Oh and Ryan's there too for some reason I guess idk.
Maybe Hoover wrote that novel not meant to be good at all
Hasan Minhaj appearing for a short time in a Colleen Hoover Book adaptation was kind of lowkey cursed
That's what I'm saying...
The decision to have a man be an actor that has intimate contact with a woman, *and* have that man also be the director who can decide when, how many times and what is involved in that contact - is the type of decision that a producer should have been very anxious about making.
Oh but - the guy who was also actor and director *also* Co-founded the production company! So he was also the person that appointed himself to both of these roles, and the person that hired the HR department that was supposed to hold him accountable!
This is a masterclass of someone setting up a situation that they could abuse, and ironically Sony pictures got this studio to do a movie about abuse.
Hit the nail on the head! Exactly
Dude. Your immediate and direct assumption that a successful, ambitious, hardworking man has Harvey Weinstein levels of intention, is utterly insane. Anytime a man does ANYTHING, you feminists have to dissect it and twist it to view it from a perspective of abuse. 🤮
Your brain has literally jumped to the conclusion (without knowing anyone involved or having anything to do with the project) that a married man who is a director, who co-founded the production company, who chose to act in his own movie (which he has every right to do) with a married woman, did so solely to abuse her. Congrats, You’re a nutcase.
@@robg738 🤡
@@robg738 first up - I’m not a dude.
Second - the whole point of accountability is that you’re not supposed to have a situation someone who is abusive *could* exploit, whether or not an abusive person gets themselves into that position of power or not.
It’s like having a night club with the fire doors sealed and full of flammable decorations. It might never catch fire for its entire lifetime - or it could catch fire and hurt way more people than it was supposed to. And this production company was that badly designed nightclub.
@@robg738 Have you heard of conflict of interest?
I swear, every movie where the director is also a lead is always a tire fire.
real
What are other examples? 🤔
Dev Patel in Monkey Man doesn't get enough praise for being an exception.
@@rahbeeuh The Room
Other than Woody Allen, which is a no-brainer.
"This movie is just, really really terrible". Ah yes, I always enjoy LegalEagle's objective legal analysis. 😆
It's in poor taste if you ask me. Dude gets bullied out of his own movie and LE shits on him. It's like making fun of the clothing a victim of sexual harrassment was wearing.
@@purplestuff
"Dude gets bullied"? FFS.
@@eastvandb got an actual comment?
It's based on a Colleen Hoover novel, it never stood a chance of being good.
@@purplestuffhey look, astroturfing
okay but hear me out "it ends in court" sound way better and more interesting than it ends with us , i wish THEY make a movie like that lmao that would be so cool
That's going to be the title of the documentary
@thenamelessdragon really then im definitely watching the fictional movie main characters end up in real life court battle man i like the intriguing idea
Another lawyer Emily D Baker titled her videos 'It ends with litigation' 😆
It reminds me of Don’t Worry Darling, what happened behind the scenes was way more interesting then the actual movie.
When someone is accused of doing something inappropriate or out-of-bounds and their immediate response is "I'm not even attracted to you", you know there is a problem. Being attracted to someone is not a requirement for sexual harassment. Such a comment demonstrates a lack of self-awareness. His reasoning is that since he isn't attracted to her, he couldn't possibly be harassing her, regardless of his actual behavior. Which is absurd. If you do the exact same thing to person A and person B, but you're only attracted to person B, does that imply no crime was committed against person A?
Almost like Blake didn't give the full context when she first filed the lawsuit or in the NYT article and now people have reason to believe she lied. Not to mention how its obvious that she wanted to take over production of the film.
It's such an irrevelant comment to the actual situation. That also intends to put down the other person and make them feel bad for standing up for themselves. So that in the future when they want to protest they feel like they would be made to feel embarassed again.
Really insidious.
That statement could help someone understand that no pursuit of sexual contact is desired. In an everyday situation it would be weird. In a Hollywood movie where people are making out and touching and simulating sex after not meeting with an intimacy coordinator, it makes more sense.
Next time, just say you haven't fully read about the entire situation and you have no idea what's going on instead of what you just typed lol
...seriously.
yeah we had a cooworker like that, made crude jokes knowing very well i was in earshot and was the only woman. he makes the jokes and then follows with, "oh sorry, dont mind my joke, its just a joke". he got canned a few months later, and it wasn't even me who complained. Guess he wasnt liked very much in the office 😂
FINALLY some actual legal analysis. I'm so sick of everyone two sidesing the arguments.
There's Baldoni & Heath's side of the story; and then theres **everyone elses side of the story**
@@SylviaRustyFaeI think you mean, “then there’s reality”
Damn the two people who replied to you were exactly the two kind of people you were talking about LMAO 😂 they defend their own idol as if they were on set with them to watch what was actually happening, calm down guys
@@areswalker5647 Ive literally ZERO clue who Lively or Baldoni are; i just believe the overwhelming bulk of the evidence
@@areswalker5647 I *only* watch youtube vids, i dont watch movies of any kind; i just see the facts alleged and the many witnesses to one side and the complete lack of witnesses to the other side
"while we don't agree with any suggestion of bad things happening, we also realized those were some reasonable things we weren't doing yet, for some reason."
Like whattt, intimacy coordinator should’ve been there from the jump with such a raunchy story
Nah, they said they already had a lot of those in place so they agreed. This was a pretty one sided recap of everything that happened...
@@shanel4294 They had intimacy coordinator and Baldoni shown screens of Blake refusing to meet with that person 🙃
It always rubbed me the wrong way that Baldoni insisted on a nude birth scene because his wife "ripped off her clothes during labor" and it's "not normal to wear hospital gowns during birth". First of all, who decides what is "normal" during birth? Hospital gowns are always provided for a reason, mainly privacy and comfort. One woman's labor experience is not THE universal labor experience. And, what bothers me the most, it completely ignores the fact the Blake Lively has given birth to all 4* of her children and knows what labor is really like as the person who is giving birth better than Baldoni or Heath ever could.
She had actually just had a fourth child just four months prior to filming.
@@Jordan-nw4sj you are so right i meant to write 4 lol
The concept itself doesn't bother me, but those sorts of things should be agreed to before a contract is signed
What is normal doesn't really matter here. What matters is what looks good in a movie scene. It's not like movies depict romance and sex realistically 🤷
@@jackdavinciFrom what I understand it's not really possible to agree to how every scene will be filmed before a contract is signed.
The "I'm not even attracted to you" is a tell tale sign that he was absolutely abusing his position, it's so insanely common for guys who are rejected to say in response.
I think that's something a certain political billionaire convicted felon said about someone else he was found in court to have raped.
I guess I abused my position with that girl I rejected the other day on our first date 😂
Or those who’ve been accused of sexual assault. “She’s not even my type.”
See Trump, Donald J.
@@mithicash1444stop being slow on purpose.
so much so that it's literally the classic "nice guy" response.
"i was never into you in the first place" uhhh huh.
Imo, they made a mistake when they said "but the childbirth video wasn't porn!"
She didn't say she was objecting to it because it was porn. She said she just didn't want to *see* that. "But it's not porn!" is admitting that they kept trying to show her after she said stop.
All their "denials" seemed to confirm the actions, but assert they didn't mean it.
Can we call that the "Brock Allen Turner Defense"?
He using to compare to scene they were filming. Yall are slow
@@xavierb9061 yeah, non-consensually
@@xavierb9061 You still don't show a person a video of a naked, graphic event without their consent. Not that hard to understand.
I work in the industry (in another country) and it's absolutely insane if they didn't have an intimacy coordinator on set during ALL intimate scenes. Wildly unprofessional, especially for a large hollywood production
ICs are only more recently something that is pushed in U.S. productions. And you still have a lot of actors who, even when they are offered, take offense to the very idea that they are needed. (I'm not talking about Blake)
And it's not just sexually intimate scenes they should be required for. It should be all simulated violence. You don't know if someone has a history of domestic violence where the wrong move in an intense fight scene causes trauma, such as a hand on someone's neck too long. ICs need to become more firmly part of the stunt/fight/movement team.
Blake lively has been in this industry for years. If she wanted an intimacy coordinator she should’ve made sure one was there. Also, she’s a married woman, she shouldn’t accept any movies that doesn’t have an intimacy coordinator onset. Especially on movies that have to do with DV.
Yeah when Blake first mentioned that I was also very confused! I work in the industry as well in both the US and UK, hadn’t heard of that before.
@@shelliann9690 Did you miss the part that the lead/director would improvise said scenes? Instead of say, Lively knowing about them ahead of time and thus requesting a coordinator, or backing out prior to signing a contract?
False, they're are high production with stars that don't want Intimacy coordinators
9:00 So he admits to showing an intimate video to Blake and her assistant without appropriate consent? Did his wife consent to the video being shown around? It doesn't matter if it wasn't sexual, it's still completely inappropriate!
Also it feels weird that he's like "I want you to see this video of my wife giving birth so you can understand my vision for this birth scene" to a mother a four children that just gave birth a few months prior
Yes, it's mentioned in Baldoni's lawsuit that Heath's wife consented to the video being shown
it is crazy the amount of people that are able to be manipulated by a pr lawsuit. like he literally signed an agreement before any of this happened where the allegations were made and he agreed to her terms (don't talk to her, don't address her) like by signing that he also admitted to the things she accused him of lmao
@@mkdugan8109he actually didn't admit to anything
Your comment is embarrassing really. Did you even bother to read the lawsuit against NYT?? There was nothing inappropriate nor sexual about the video shown. And the reason why that video was even shown to Blake was because they were discussing the birthing scene involving Blake's character. Please do your research before making silly and frankly unfounded comments like this again.
'man attempting to brand himself as a male feminist makes movie about the evils of domestic violence then launches campaign to destroy female co-star over her speaking up about sexual harassment at his hands' I feel bad for the onion
How do you know he did that?
@@veselgana he hired a pr company to smear her, this is well documented
The number of predatory men that pretend to be safe for women is terrifying.
Blakely also has a history of bullying coworkers/interviewers/management/everybody as well, so who knows who’s right.
Honestly, it’s like watching two “Reginas” having an argument: only entertaining for a few seconds.
@@idislikemacaroni In what kind of form is this documented and how do you have access to this documents?
I really hope this doesn't become another media circus like Heard v. Depp. Everything about that case was poisoned by the news outlets and social media piling onto it.
Edit: my opinion on Depp v. Heard is this I hate every bit of celebrity press and new media that covered it and I hate every last chucklefuck for blowing this damn case out of proportion.
It is going to be exactly that.
I could care less
Tbf, both of them are just terrible at relationships. Neither of them should have been together and should have known to leave each other.
The media didn’t need to do much except show what was going on the courtroom. What we all saw, was enough for most of us to make our judgments based off that.
you mean another situation where you have to hold your nose and be reminded that some youtubers and youtuber legal people are complete empty heads when it comes to celebrities and will ultimately disappoint you with their personal views and the ease at which they fall for propaganda and media lies? or even worse, another situation where legal youtubers who defintiely know better sell out their morals for money or to just go with the flow? me too. luckily devin doesn't fall for that ish.
@@PixieLove5I don’t know why but I thought for a second you meant Lively and Baldoni
It's so weird when people use the argument I'm cool with it, so you should be cool with it, too.
Also, ‘This woman I know is cool with it so you should be too!’ Like wtf??
Or "I won't deny doing it, but the person accusing me did bad stuff too." It's a confession attached to scorched earth.
fr I've met way too many creepy dudes who have said that
It`s worrying how many people don`t understand or don`t care about consent.
I've heard that excuse from men & women I've worked with when they behaved inappropriately. They'll say "well, it doesn't bother me!"
Yes, that's literally how harassment works. It bothers the recipient, not the harasser by definiton.
Realistically, the combo of producer, director and lead actor on a romantic drama with heavy intimate content and domestic violence, co-starrimg a famously beautiful lead actress should be a screaming red flag situation.
you would hope that a man with a "feminist" podcast would understand that abuse is about power and not even want to give himself that much power
The whole situation already has more red flags than a communist convention before it even starts. Never have someone hold the paycheck the camera and doing the intimacy all at once, it is ripe for abuse, even if the person is great, it is really easy to abuse your position without consequences.
She had the power all the way.
@@annainkala6219 how so?
@@zarengurl her hubby is a big name in Sony. She is more famous. He had only made indie movies.
I don’t know about making movies, but I feel like having an intimacy coordinator should be more than standard. And, all the protections she asked for seem like they should've already been in place.
There are texts mensajes that show that BL refuse to see a intimacy coordinator before starting to film. They just, conveniently, dont show this information on the video.
@@Tania-hj4uo How much did Tag PR pay you for your lies? lol
@@RachelDavis705 lmao I wishhh. But no, I just know how to read. You should try that.
@@Tania-hj4uo Wow that's incredible. Do you have any proof?
Should be the law!
I gave birth in a hospital gown. There is nothing wrong with being naked, the staff don't care at all, but I think Blake Lively knows a thing or two about child birth.
Let's also talk about someone who will never give birth was trying to explain to someone who had given birth multiple times including very recently how it's 'really' done. He can say he's a feminist, but his actions and words say otherwise.
I work in a hospital, and I can confirm. While we see naked people all the time and some patients don't wear a gown, most patients aren't going to strip down because it can be pretty uncomfortable to be naked in front of multiple strangers
You probably shouldn't show the video of it happening to strangers who really didn't ask.
One of those most wild things about this case is them claiming they showed her the photos of women giving birth to help her acting when shes literally given birth in real life several times.
it was a scene of a natural birth. Not everyone has a natural birth, it is a different experience.
@@sing1712and? Your point is?
I can imagine how it might be different in first person or third person, and I have heard that women sometimes don't have a perfect memory of the birth. I don't think showing her videos of women giving birth is problematic per se, but it's all about the context, and that context ain't great.
@@alex2143 again this whole mess. Isn't just about showing this piece of information. How many times have there been male managers that are too touchy with female employees. I see it too often
@@marisoldeoliveira4838 She did not say it was pornography in her complaint, she said when he first showed it to her without warning she thought it was pornography at first glance. Baldoni's team is trying to miscategorize the accusation.
@UmiMajo also showing her a water birth when the scene she was filming wasn't a water birth? So weird.
"I'm not even attracted to you" - how does a guy who has an allegedly feminist podcast not know that sexual assault is about power not sex?
if it's him hearing from others how great he is for "overcoming" misogyny or something it's a vanity thing; if it's about him owning up to things in his past without wanting any sort of praise and in fact going so far as to put people on there with him who have been victims of the things they discuss and giving them a platform, then i may be willing to consider it feminist. i haven't seen it and i never will unless someone else makes content about it, so just keep that in mind.
@@SunnyGoesIn1D I'm just always skeptical of any man with a femininist podcast, and his reaction to this suit doesn't make me think that he has done the work
The whole argument is he risked his career, family because shes so desirable. He has right to say..ummm no shes not.
I take it back...this was when things flipped. She was so mad he said this. Revenge
There must be attempt of Sex in _Sexual_ Harassment, otherwise it is just Harassment, lol.
10:57 feels like if the courts weren't so sexist, this one witness account would be enough to prove that she is not lying about harrassment. Other people do not suddenly say they think you should never be alone with a specifc person for no reason. The only time a near stranger gave me advice about someone like that, they turned out to be a horrible person who r*p*d a lot of people and eventually unalived a woman. I feel like that saved me, i understand this womans pain.
This is precisely why ALL claims should be investigated and not believed blindly. As specifically in this case it turns out that she Invited him to her trailer while pumping. Baldoni provided a text message too.
@@il42she allowed him on specific instances after having a conversation about those instances. That does not mean that he can barge into her trailer when she’s undressed whenever he wants without prior consent.
Setting aside the actual allegations, it always seems skeezy when writers or directors write themselves as actors into graphic sex scenes. That's already a huge red flag, in my opinion.
Baldoni bought rights to direct movie... Being cast as main character came later, other people suggested it
@ Interesting. But even if true, he still kept writing and adding scenes after that. Still seems super skeezy to me.
I'm not a Blake Lively fan by any means but really appreciate this video so much. I've seen sooo many commentary videos by other people who blindly side with Justin without understanding what's happening or simply nitpicking the information they choose acknowledge. Hopefully this clears some things up for people.
People have a really simple way of seeing things. If Blake Lively is a bad person she can't be a victim of sexual harassment smh...
Unlike the many people who are taking Blake's side w/out all the knowledge.
@@leila_de_hautjardin she can but she can also be intentionally misrepresenting things. That's why it's importsnt to see all the claims from both sides
And I’ve seen people blindly supporting bl just because she’s a woman and woman can only be victims
@@avp6730that is what Baldoni is doing though. Lively’s side have *literal proof* of a smear campaign, his refutations don’t make those text messages look any different, other than to those that desperately want to pretend they didn’t fall for a smear campaign. Again. AGAIN.
The fact that her list of "demands" which was literally just "stop sexually harassing me" made people online think she was being a "diva" should tell you all you need to know about the general public's opinion of women in general.
@@Clark226 she also mentioned other people. Her assistant, makeup artist, actress who played young Lily. That list wasn't even about herself, she wanted normal working conditions for herself and the staff.
I'll always remember that media relations nutso in charge of the smear campaign going "It's so easy to make people hate women that I feel almost guilty lol"
Online trolls are not the general public.
It was power move to make him villain. So she could take mre control. Manipulative. Reasonable 1 on 1 convo could solve this..otherwise quit and file charges
However, Hollywood abuses actresses all the time. Wildly popular game of thrones literally water boarded a lady and no one complained not to mention all the pointless nudity those girls had to perform over and over-yet I never heard a peep from anyone.
It’s incredible to me that when the movie came out Blake was instantly billed as some airhead who didn’t understand of the gravitas of the film SHE starred in but Justin was being soooo serious and intense about it. He worked HARD to paint her as a problem because he knew what was coming.
The media didn't make her look like an airhead, she did that in the interviews. I watched them and it made me cringe. She was always deflecting when it came to the serious subject matter of the movie. Looks like most of the people in these comments never bother to watch her.
@@michellewilliams5533 you didnt bother to be informed. SONY directed the ENTIRE cast to avoid DV topics during the film promotion - which was slick of them because they knew of the Baldoni's problematic behavior. Therefore, not only Blake, everyone else adhered to SONY's promotion plan except for Baldoni because his PR team advised him to go against SONY's plan to make himself look like a saint and it will help painting Blake as the bad person.
@ld7445 Unless you can prove this, it's not true. Sounds like you wanna gaslight people... don't believe what BL said on video.
@ld7445 so avoiding means laughing? The rest of the cast didn't do that. Everyone answered questions in a respectful way. They handled it fine. If you like Blake, just say that, but excusing her behavior makes you seem woefully biased.
@@michellewilliams5533honey, just say what you really mean.
So his argument against showing her a video of something she didn’t want to see is saying, “I showed it to her, but she’s totally wrong about it not being ok”???
sorry, but if you’re filming a scene and you’re trying to make your actor understand what you’re looking for, showing them a video that is in context to that scene is not harassment. That is nuts, we should all be watching Sesame Street if birthing videos are offensive.
@@shelliann9690 i def agree, though i would say he prob should've clarified with her the content of the video and asked if she wanted to view it, then respected her wishes to not go through with filming a nude scene if she wasn't comfortable regardless. it reminds me of the claim about her being "shamed" for her weight when baldoni needed the info in order to lift her safely. like it's an objectively okay thing to do if you go about it correctly, and it rlly seems a lot of these things are also removed from much-needed context. (edit: just wanted to add baldoni def did weird shit and crossed boundaries and all of this could've been prevented with an intimacy coordinator and better communication)
@ you think that’s going to stand up in court when he tries to (ahem…laugh…snort…) sue the New York Times? His company already capitulated to her on set and admitted there was a necessity to clarify that this would never happen again.
The details of what he was trying to are almost irrelevant, moot, and preposterous to discuss in the light of the fact that his company did this. None of his, or his attorney’s actions, jive together to form a cohesive “case”.
Also, people CAN do lots of things to research a role, or help an actor to understand a concept, but get off it. This idiot pressed the wrong person with the wrong information. They didn’t work well together. She’s difficult. He’s difficult. He misread their working relationship. That’s it.
@@shelliann9690 Don't make up knowledge you don't have, please.
@@BuildinWings that’s his defence in his countersuit which legal eagle didn’t go through. Maybe you should do some research.
as time ever erodes my memory of anything good, tommy wiseau continues climbing the ever-shortning ladder of genius.
Yes
I'll say it here and now: The Room isn't even that bad. It's pretty bad, but it's SO MUCH BETTER than truly, authentically bad movies, like Double Down (back when Neil Breen still hadn't found green screens).
@@jubuttib The Room is actually quite boring. Some scenes are funny, but most of it is also just kind of ineffective. But at least it has a main plot you can just about follow
@@jubuttib Are you doubting his Breenius?!
@@jubuttib oh it's that bad. But it's so bad it borderlines sarcastic comedy. When actors try to be serious and fall flat, that's even worse because you can't even laugh at it
The fact that the bulk of Baldoni's defence isn't a typical "I didn't do these things" but rather the claim that his actions were simply mischaracterized. When it comes to harassment (verbal/physical/sexual/etc...) the important factor is how the victim felt and not what the alleged perpetrator intended. This become particularly important in a case like this where it was brought up repeatedly that she felt his behavior/actions/etc.. was inappropriate and made her uncomfortable.
But did she bring it up, the only example of her bringing it up was when there was the meeting just before shooting resumed. She says lots of other times that she didn't like things that were happening, she doesn't actually say that she said or did anything about them.
Also she says that the reason that she brought the complaint was because she thought that the bad press that she was receiving was a retaliation campaign. Logic says that when you are promoting a movie it doesn't make sense to bad mouth the star as that could put people off watching the movie. Moreso it shows that she lacks introspection that the way that she was promoting the movie (and promoting her products more than the movie), along with a couple of bad interviews was actually the reason for the bad press.
@@amandamandamands Her complaint shows that she brought it up several times. She brought it up with Baldoni and with Heath. She brought it up with Sony. She brought it up with the HR team of Wayfare. She originally didn't want to submit a formal complaint, which makes sense. No one wants to be thought of as difficult. And she insisted in a meeting and would not go back to set until they agreed to make it a safe work environment. One can assume that after that meeting she felt safe and production resumed and the movie ended. Why would she need to bring it up again? She thought it was over. If Baldoni hadn't gotten paranoid and hired a PR film to ruin her reputation, none of this would have come out.
Her complaint also clearly states that she was promoting the movie against the agreed marketing plan. The complaint even attaches a copy of the marketing plan. Baldoni is the one who chose to steer away from it after he saw the backlash people had for it and then tried to turn it around and pretend that it wasn't the marketing plan he originally agreed to and make it seem that she was insensitive for doing what she was told to do.
Yes, I would have to agree that there is good evidence that she was concerned and brought up those issues before promoting the movie and getting those interviews and stories conveniently pop up from years ago on the internet at the worst time possible. Sony’s response is on record prior to the movie promotion and all the current drama that’s unfolded. I think having her image damaged during the movie promotion was the last straw which is why she decided to sue.
And Baldoni’s camp decided to run the smear campaign proactively in hopes of damaging her image and her credibility in case she files suit.
Baldoni's team: The text messages where we laugh about taking Blake Lively down through coordinated PR campaigns were completely taken out of context!!1!
The context: "🙃"
I've read both lawsuits/complaints and I'm at the point where I think any pro-Baldoni comment is either a plant or an incel exactly because he hasn't denied anything at all. There just isn't any context where any of this is ok.
@@amandamandamandshis pr team literally texted each other talking about how theyre going to “bury” her reputation at baldoni’s request
I had a boss that used to ask me what my bathroom habits were (in one day he mentioned 3 times how many times I had gone to the bathroom & asked if I was "going number 2") it made me extremely uncomfortable bc as a woman working under a man asking me such invasive questions about my bathroom habits being asked "what do you do in there?" Is extremely inappropriate, I was actually on my period which is why I had to use the bathroom 4 times in an 8 hour day. There was no HR as it was a privately owned company but I sobbed the whole way home bc he literally trapped me in his office to talk about my bathroom habits until he finally conceded after I told him I was on my period & needed to change my feminine products (This was a 15 minute conversation I was trapped alone in his office for after my shift had already ended). This was on a Friday, on Monday, I told my direct coworker and my other two bosses & within a week & a half I was let go, walked into my shift & promptly fired, no notice, I believe it was bc of this. I believe Blake.
What? Are you serious? A boss asking why you are spending so much time in the bathroom during work is now sexual harassment? What if he thought you were doing drugs in there or actually had so medical problem and if he should be worried about it? BUT no you think its some sexual harassment issue? GOD. Nothing in your own comment shows anything that is sexual.
And that makes you believe Blake because your own experiences?
@@monotech20.14you’re being daft, professional behaviour means you handle things in a different way than what is described here! If you are concerned about someone you definitely ask in a different way. No need to defend bullies
@@monotech20.14 Can you read? Where did the OP say it was sexual harassment? She said it was extremely inappropriate, which it was. If he thought she was using drugs he could have said so, though if drugs were an issue that would have shown in her work.
@ Yes. The things she described are clear workplace sexual harassment & are too specific to be falsified, in 99% of cases. Seems like she kept a record during filming of all the instances that things happened, which is why they are so specific, and he's not denying any of them, he's just trying to defend himself, like "I showed her that birth video to show her what I wanted her to do!" "I was allowed in her trailer while she breastfed!" He kept the same details but tried to rationalize the things he did but she provided context that showed that he was in the wrong in every circumstance.
Legit I was just at the store and saw one of those tabloid magazines with Blake and Justin on the cover and thought, "you know? I don't actually know this story well. I wonder if there's a LegalEagle video about it."
Lo and behold😅
My entire life up until I just read this comment and looked it up, I never knew that Lo and Behold wasn’t spelled “Low and behold” 😂
This is a very bias video. It’s very weird he spends almost the entire video reviewing what Blake’s lawyers said in depth but at the very end just briefly goes over what baldoni’s lawyers said. It’s pretty clear who’s point of view he’s wanting to broadcast
He even resembles Ryan the jealous/ controlling and older husband of the other bully Blake
@LSA30
Yah - haha, turns out legal-eagle knows even LESS about it that you do😅
@@Pringlebox
Agree💯
There are at least a few of us less gullible viewers who are capable of parsing out nuance and bias 8n a v8deo such as this - who DO understand how biased (for BL) this video is! 😏
I see he's using the old "nuh uh, she's mean actually" defence.
Why wouldn't he? This tactic has worked so many times before.
Please go back to School to relearn interpretation.
@@yutro213 ???
You do realize he has actual evidence and Blake’s team falsified texts and her complaint is missing context
@kiiiirbzzz I did not realize that. Please continue explaining the context of having his friend play doctor.
I'm astounded by the lack of care in production, it's willful negligence at this point. I do community theatre (meaning we're not paid and everyone involved are volunteers) and even we make sure to have intimacy coordinators and closed sets when rehearsing intimate scenes(for reference we do the rocky horror show every year, and have done other shows like spring awakening, rent, and Heathers, which all involve sexual material). There's no excuse for a big movie production to not take these most baseline measures with this kind of material.
They supposedly had one and according to the text messages, Blake refused to meet with them. It will be interesting to see if that's borne out. They seem to have both saved a lot of texts.
I work in production and I was saying the same thing. The fact that she has to demand a intimacy coordinator in the first place is such a red flag that it makes all her other allegations much more concerning.
@@christineherrmann205 no. that's not even what the accused claims. you literally just went further than what the accused claims to defend him.
he claims she refused ti meet an IC a month before the scene. which is 1. unproven and 2. completely irrelevant
he admits there was no IC present for the scene. which was his duty to organise.
@@christineherrmann205 And none of those texts even attempt a defense of him showing her sexually explicit images and videos. Please find a new line of work.
@@jurgnobs1308 blocking out the scene with the IC was something they both should have done. That's the point. And we'll probably find out whether or not that happened.
At least some these critiques of the movie are Colleen Hoover's fault.
Also, Lively's abuse allegations are so, so specific in a way that feels very real. Like God. Horrifying.
Yes, this is why we don’t make a movie of an author who literally wrote…”We both laughed at our sons big balls”
it also seems like she was relentlessly collecting receipts as things were happening. And getting all the texts and emails from the PR team literally talking to eachother about how they were hired to orchestrate a smear campaign against her and how they went about it should help a lot too. But the media and internet really does hate a woman abuse victim. So its going to be ugly no matter what
If only she hadn't already earned a reputation for being a despicable person.
But it's not true
@@olliverklozov2789you can be mean, unsensitive and STILL be a victim. This is not about who is more liked by the media.
"The video of the woman giving birth wasn't sexual, it was a deeply personal experience I was sharing with Blake."
OK, even if that were true, DID BLAKE WANT TO SEE IT??????????? THAT'S the issue, and him trying to argue that Blake was somehow in the wrong just proves to me that he doesn't understand or doesn't care about the consent of those around him.
I kinda get what hes saying- im autistic, i know what its like to have my actions be misinterpreted.
But also.... cmon, man. A BIRTHING video? That feels like its obvious
Exactly. I have no idea why this man would want to share this "deeply personal" video with someone without taking a moment to say what they're showing and getting her consent first. I had a friend want to show me her pregnancy photos and was appalled when she was naked in them and told her to stop showing me. It's fking WEIRD.
@@MadCatLady28 Thing is that when the video was shown it was in context of them deciding what the birth scene was going to look like. If you are having a difference of opinion, then showing an example of what you are talking about can be an easy way to show what it is you have in mind.
@@amandamandamands Does that make a difference? The issue is consent and respect. If it was a disagreement over a gunfight scene and the director swooped in with a graphic image of real gunshot injuries without checking beforehand that wouldn't be acceptable either.
@@amandamandamands it was in the context of him trying to convince her that the scene should be done naked which was outside of her contractual agreement. If nothing else, the guy is absolutely delulu about what is persuasive.
"No no, it wasn't a _weird_ birthing video I showed her without her consent!"
Showing someone a video of your wife giving birth isn’t normal. The wife giving consent doesn’t make it ok to show it to people that don’t want to see it.
It's not normal out of context. In context, these were movie professionals discussing how to film and portray a birth, and one of them pulled up a film of a birth to reference. That's perfectly understandable. What's more, the video apparently did not show anything that would warrant higher than a pg-13 rating due to lighting and angle. So you have professionals who agreed to depict a live birth on film looking at a tasteful live birth as reference. To take Blake's characterization that she thought he was just walking up and showing her hardcore porn to get off on her reaction or some such is quite a stretch to believability. It clearly was a toxic work environment, but both sides are slanting the facts pretty heavily.
There is a scene of giving birth in the movie. Showing actors inspiration for their parts is completely normal.
@@Oops_All_Crazythat is NOT how a conversation like that takes part. Especially when a director and producer are trying to convince an actress into a scene. Or rather, it was coercion. They bullied her into it. In context of everything else that happened, it was ridiculous.
@jaybee4118 And unfortunately, we don't have any idea how that conversation happened. You sure seem to be happy to assert what happened without knowing either. We only have Blake's telling, which as I've pointed out is pretty clearly tampered with. Probably, it was a badly organized work environment but not malicious, which is pretty mundane and might or might not be liable. The trial will hopefully get it out.
@@Oops_All_Crazy a mother of 4 has no idea about giving birth? Also why did he talk about porn addiction. That’s not normal
Imagine being in Ms. Lively's situation, having JUST given birth, for the fourth time, being told HOW women are supposed to give birth. So disgusting. I'm also starting to believe that all of the times she was "difficult" on previous sets were just her standing up for her own dignity.
Usually the case. Look at how Weinstein tarnished the reputation of Mira Sorvino and Ashley Judd by calling them difficult to work with, only to find out that they were fighting back against his abuse the whole time and he blacklisted them. I side-eye when you hear a woman is difficult in entertainment now, because you rarely hear the same accusations against men.
@@Ben-xl7fq where did you come up with that this was a hit piece…
I mean, the director has the right to discuss and decide what type of birth and how they wanna portrait it... No one mentioned anything about how they are supposed to give birth in real life
@@Caiosigmaringa But it wasn't agreed upon beforehand and he kept changing things from how they did it in rehearsal. It was one of the agreements that came out of the meeting they had in January before filming resumed.
How dare any woman have boundaries
I remember when suddenly I was seeing a ton of headlines about Blake Lively pop up. Yes, she had a movie coming out, but it struck me as suspicious that there was a sudden influx of negative attention on her. People were quick to turn on her because of these headlines and I just couldn’t help thinking there was some kind of organized effort behind it. People don’t often ask why they’re being shown information. Regardless of who’s ‘right’ here, I think the big lesson for the public should be to scrutinize media campaigns more carefully. Why are we being pushed to like or dislike certain people? Why are they suddenly digging up old dirt? Who are ‘anonymous sources’ and are they real or manufactured by the author? Remain critical of what narratives you’re being fed.
Exactly! I remember seeing the press coverage at the time and thinking it strange that the press was negative, but the cast and author were doing the press tour with her and not him. If she was so bad, wouldn't they have supported him publicly and left her to do the press tour alone? Yet it was the other way around? That was suspicious to me.
For real. Beyond the complaint and everything else in this video we have it IN WRITING that there are literally whole companies who are hired to place negative stories in the media and employ a bunch of trolls to make content and comment on social media and push their own constructed narratives to "bury" people.
Just watch her interviews when promoting a movie that it is about domestic violence and abuse and hiw she literally showed no respect to survivors and you will surely understand where the negativity comes from. I work with DV survivors and was so frustrated with everything she did and said during the promotion of that movie.
Yup! People rarely ask "Cui Bono?" now. Critical thinking is so rare nowadays
It was as if a positivity bubble had burst. Like blake and ryan were on best couples and nicest couples lusts for years and I genuinely believe that a percentage got tired of her so once there was blood in the water.... people pounced
This is sounding less like a “he said, she said” case and more like a “he said, and she brought mountains of evidence for her side” case
Not at all.
Then he said, that's not all. Here's the complete evidence... against you.
all she's brought is allegations. no evidence to back them up
I think, the video just brought up her side and not his side. If you listen to his side.. you won't come to this judgement
I think you have confused "allegations" with "evidence". There was zero evidence brought fourth in the video, he was reading the allegations she made for her court case.
The most amazing part about this, and similar cases, is that the victim (Lively, in this case) always gives their abuser SO MANY OPPORTUNITIES TO STOP without serious repercussions.
After she made the outline there were no more complaints. However when it came to the movie she shut him out v
Do I understand you? There were man opportunities to say, "NO!" but she kept going?
@@Redmenace96 The OP is saying the opposite. The abuser is given so many chances to just stop being abusive, yet they escalated.
which is often used against the victim. "Why didnt she call the cops immediately?" or something similarly dismissive
@@ms.intrigue7454 I just find it difficult to believe her narrative since Justin Baldoni's suit against the NYT.
I don’t know. I mean if multiple crew members are apparently corroborating Baldoni’s behavior and even Brandon Sklenar is publicly supporting Lively; I am leaning towards Lively’s allegations being true.
Which is why so many shills are in these comments.
Right? He had to do press alone. People who were there are siding with her. It is possible for things to get misconstrued... But that many things? By that many people who were there? That's hard to believe..
@@CabalNewsNetwork Are you calling me a shill for sharing my personal opinion or did I misread that?
The issue with corroborating witnesses who have material ($$) employment in the industry is that they have material motivation.
Tale as old as time.
If Blake is seen as the bigger player - and she might be through her paretnership with Reynolds - people may provide testimony on that basis for the future of their careers.
This happened with Depp - he was the money train - and this extended into associated industries in hollywood: psychs and bealth. The same was true for Weinstein until it all just fell apart and then no one had to protect him anymore.
Heard got no support because no one relied on her for $$ and she had no inluence.
This trial will be about the same thing when it comes to "corroboration": who has more influence and who are people scared of more? This is not always true, but for the greater part it will be, people will corroborate if its in their interest so they can preserve their careers and their own livelihood.
I'm not taking sides, hypocrisy is something people love to do. Who's gonna support someone being accused of something like that?
I'll just see what happens.
"You were ok letting people see you breastfeeding sometimes, therefore you can't complain that I decided when I could come look at you" is SUCH an abuser justification. And that's his defence, not even her accusation??? It's one of the literal textbook examples of consent training, that permission once doesn't grant permission forever.
At 11:12 you used Baldoni's name when it was actually Heath, as seen in the following screenshot where the quote is found. You do the same thing at the beginning of the video when claiming that Baldoni allegedly showed Lively videos of naked women - the only allegation of that is against Heath when he showed her the video of his wife's birth. I think a visual with the correction while you're talking would be appropriate for clarity since this will be many people's sole source of this information.
Yah - VERY sloppy fact-finding on the part of this 'legal-eagle'.
...hard to believe this guy is a 'legal' anything🥴
Someone on Reddit found an Access Hollywood interview Baldoni did when they were promoting the film over the summer. In it, he says that he worked really hard to get into the character of Rile and that he would try things in a scene that would make Blake react in a way he didn't see before, which would make him think "oh I went too far." Now that doesn't mean all the allegations are true, but it's not hard to see how harassment would arise from scenarios like that.
That doesn't makes it right though. If he did that he should've apologized so hard the first time it happened and worked harder to ensure that it didn’t happen again.
I feel it's surreal that Baldoni's seeming defense of some of his actions are not to deny the accusations but to state these were not inherently sexual (the birthing video being one). Whether someone is or is not sexually stimulated should not be the determination of whether it is acceptable behavior or not. Also, whether someone themselves is or is not "likable" is not something which should determine whether behavior was or was not acceptable and/or professional. Unfortunately, given the way such cases often seem to go, I don't think it's likely that any legal result will change anyone's attitudes about the individuals involved.
Baldoni wasn't the one who showed Blake the video. That was Jamey Heath.
I’ve been searching for his response to her claims, do you know where I can find them? I don’t think she is nice, even if all the videos about her were just part of a smear campaign no one forced her to act and say what she did. But if it is really true all of that happened to her, he deserves punishment. I will wait and see the end of this.
Literally one of the first things in every corporate mandated Sexual Harassment training course ever made is "It does not matter what the intent behind the harassment was, it is how it was perceived and received by the offended party."
Apparently Baldoni didn't complete that course. 🤣
@@vsGoliath96 He did say he missed that HR meeting
Almost like Blake didn't give the full context when she first filed the lawsuit and now people have reason to believe she lied.
So to summarize, Lively alleges that Baldoni acting as her employer behaved inappropriately toward her in a number of serious, repeated ways which multiple witnesses observed, following it up with documented libelous activities by a hired PR firm, while Baldoni alleges that she's playing comic book levels of 4D chess to ruin his movie and reputation for some reason.
She is extremely good at PR coz she manipulated everyone against him. But also terrible at PR, just look at her clothes and "wear your florals" campaign.
He is male ally with deep understanding of abuse but also just a bebe with no understanding of consent and professionalism.
@@ann3923 You've put it so cleverly! Here are your flowers -> 💐! I've been trying to figure out whose side to take for the longest while because most of the videos I found about it were biased. You've put it fantastically.
@@MENACE-km6bdIs this sarcasm 😭
For some reason? He owns the rights to the second book. This is actually a complicated IP case in disguise.
@@ann3923 the "wear your florals" was in line wiith what had been agreed upon for the marketing campaign. They were, per contract, not supposed to highlight that it was a movie about abuse and keep things light and "positive" when speaking about the film, because that is what CoHo asked for with the contract the actors signed for the marketing campaign. The comment was still definitely in bad taste, but the marketing campaign as a whole was in bad taste.
The fact that the entire cast rallied around Blake and NO ONE was with Justin during promotion says so much about how bad it was on set.
No it doesn't, it shows that Blake was the more powerful person and people were scared to go against her. Blake was the one that refused to do promo with Baldoni and threatened to walk numerous times, she managed to get her edit as the one released instead of the director's. That is a person in a position of power.
@@amandamandamands They're really not doing a good job with the public relations campaign after it got exposed, huh? On every comment, on the same topics, with samey responses
It is so annoying to see the same comment from people supporting Blake. Whenever someone disagrees or shows why they think this people accuse you of being paid for some smear campaign. Omg
This is how narcissists work. As a victim of one, they turn your ENTIRE WORLD against you, make it look like your fault. This is exactly what Blake wants you to believe. But if you read about prior cast that have worked with Baldoni, they don't have this issue. In fact, one of his co-stars (Gina Rodriguez) loved him so much he officiated her wedding.
@@ohcean5 Do you know these people? You're acting like you were there and you saw everything.
I love that Devon's true self as a movie nerd has finally come out
Idk. Seems kinda sus that Baldoni didn't counter sue Lively with all the proof he allegedly has.
And that his suit to the NYT has very little to do with the NYT.
Right? From what I gather his suit against NYT is saying that it's painting him in a "false light," not alleging that any of the evidence presented is fake. Like sorry not sorry my guy what "omissions" could make what you did ok?
His attorney has said he plans on filing suit. She had not filed suit yet when he sued NYT (just a California right to sue determination). If he filed a lawsuit against her before she filed one against him, people would likely view that as further evidence of retaliation.
maybe it's because she didn't file the lawsuit until he did? she only filed a civil complaint which then conviniently leaked to NYT which he IS suing first? maybe?
In the works don’t worry
Also, she was contractually obligated to talk about the movie the way she did during promotion, which was not discussed in this video. when they did their media tour she was told how to promote the movie and then those same people that told her how to promote it bashed her for it as part of that smear campaign. that way they could then discredit her if she ever came out with the sexual harassment claims. if you watch Rosanna Pansino's video she provides more of the leaked texts from the crisis management team on how they were going to destroy her.
Can you share a link of a copy of that contract, I would love to read exactly what she was obligated to say.
Yes. Sony wanted the movie promoted as a story of resilience rather than victimhood, hence the lighthearted promotion of serious topics. But Baldoni went rogue and started focusing on the abuse and survivor's element of it. Then the PR team he hired used that promotion disparity to discredit Lively. It's really diabolical.
@@mithicash1444it’s free online! I read both the one from baldoni and Blake. Both available. I’m not sure who to believe but I will say Blake has a lot more evidence that baldoni doesn’t address in his lawsuit which rubs me the wrong way
that's also false - she wanted to promote it this way after she twisted the hands of both JB and Sony with threats to quit either the film or the promotion. JB always wanted to market it the way he did and he has the right as the producer owner of the production company and director.
@@soonsims Sony's directive was included as part of the lawsuit she filed against Baldoni and Heath. He still has to abide by the requirements of the studio who is funding it.
Comparing Justin Baldoni to Tommy Wiseau is savage AF!
I finally have that "someone famous I knew from high school" anecdote that really puts a bow on one's life
Dish
@maries1993 we were on varsity soccer together in southern Oregon. He told the coach he couldn't make it to practice one day cause he was sick. Halfway through, we notice that Justin is kicking balls around with some ladies 3 fields over during our practice. My guy, we practice the same place every day. I think he just thought he was above it even if he got caught.
Always said he was going to be an actor. Got a lot of financial support from his folks to do it. Past all these allegations- I didn't ever see him be cruel. Not past what high school soccer players are like, at least.
So, all of this could have been solved by having an Intimacy Coordinator. Frankly the position should be required at this point.
I’m pretty sure they had one
Sure but according to Baldoni, she refused to meet with one and produced texts.
@@davidneff7620 Not true, there is one text where she didnt feel that she had to meet them before filming. That doesn't excuse the IC not being on set when Baldoni wanted to add nudity to a scene.
There was one.
Some of it. Having an intimacy coordinator wouldn't have stopped him from barging in on her when she was getting the body makeup removed. Or asking her inappropriate questions about her marriage.
Or showing her the birth video without warning.
I knew something wasn't right when it went from "two actors didn't get along", to suddenly "Diva Blake Lively was unhinged on set" overnight.
A director or screenwriter should never be casting themselves in a role where there's intimacy involved.
Colleen - the author of the book - insisted that Baldini play the part of Ryle in the movie.
So, no he didn't 'cast himself'
Get yoor facts straight🥴
@barbarafairbanks4578 then he should've turned down directing it. Massive conflict of interest. It simply shouldn't be allowed.
I agree that given the subject matter and his role, it was super inappropriate to have him also direct. It enables a really dangerous power imbalance. There should have been someone else directing just so there was another voice in the room.
That sexual harassment course I was required to do for work comes in handy here.
Sexual harassment does NOT REQUIRE sexual attraction or interest. That was a portion of the training that was made very apparent…
His excuses are hilariously sad, and have no basis anyways lol.
How you gonna show that line from The Room and cut out the best part?
"...oh, hai mark!"
Because Baldoni's scene doesn't have a "oh, hi Mark" line to save it.
I don't feel like people understand that you can dislike one person's behavior off set or while doing publicity, AND hold a man accountable for being creepy onset. It's not one or the other. Being a "mean girl" is not criminal. Baldoni's alleged actions on set are.
Baldoni isn't a crimainal woman do lied abut being SH
All I know is everything I see seems to be against Blake. Thank you for clearing things up because I had no idea what was going on. Honestly I don’t really care except for the fact that if she was harassed and abused on the set, then she has a legit complaint. I don’t understand why women aren’t believed. 99% of the people that make these claims are legit. Nobody wants to be involved in something like this, if they don’t have to be.
An apparently successful PR campaign to discredit Blake because she was already complaining on set.
There was a scandal where his PR team were bragging about how well his smear campaign was doing on Reddit and Twitter. It's a fantastic read.
Blake and her parents have been part of Hollywood for a long time. No one would dare mess with them or would they let anyone mess with them. In my opinion as someone who has followed Blake’s career she has always been a mean girl. She starts the drama they hides her hands behind her back. Justin defended himself however he could and will continue too like we would all do.
It's funny, everything I've seen is openly for her, including questionable statements by people you probably don't want coming to your defense.
I personally can't wait for James Franco to release "The Disaster Artist Part II: It Ends Both of Our Careers"
Okay but can we talk about truly despicable Melissa Nathan must be to have a whole business dedicated to destroying peoples reputations?
I bet it's an extremely lucrative business in hollywood
Dirty businesses like that one make the most money.
I feel so bad for Blake. Yeah, she's been rude in the past, but that doesn't justify literal crimes being committed against her. In these situations, the woman being unlikable is always an excuse to side with the man who committed actual crimes. This has to be exhausting to deal with for her. Having a role in a Colleen Hoover book adaptation is punishment enough for being rude to an interviewer 😭
Even in these comments it’s the same. Like people didn’t even watch the video
I hate big movies and my first thought when the smear campaign was going against her was 'why am I even hearing about this'. I can't say I called it with her being the victim here but I at least knew to withhold judgment when someone is being publicly smeared over undisclosed personal drama.
you know i really disagree about the whole smear campaign thing. everyone has taken what lively has said to be factual and while i understand believing the claimed victim, her attitude was very different. nobody needs to smear your name if you go on interviews and act in a disgusting manner. she kind of dug her own hole when she was rude to interviewers and insensitive to the whole point of the movie. my biggest issue is that if she’s a victim in this whole situation, why is her demeanor toward the message of the movie so indifferent? she seems to not care AT ALL about the problems presented in the movie.
@@Val-pr5xr two things can be true at once. A "mean girl" can still be a victim of sexual harassment - however she behaved during the promotion is largely irrelevant here. For my money, both of them in the bin, but for my money also - baldony gets a nastier corner.
@@Val-pr5xr I'm sure she didn't want to promote Baldoni and his insincere virtue signaling, given what she's alleging.
@@Val-pr5xr She was rude to ONE (1) interview, YEARS ago, who asked invasive questions about a pregnancy that was not public yet.
Could you at least question a narrative before you leap to dogpile on someone?
I’m sorry, but before all of this came out, I watch Blake lively’s interviews , and I was left scratching my head. Her nonsensical answers had nothing to do with DV. It made me wonder if it was the same ”It ends with us” book that I had read.. she did this to herself and now she’s looking for somebody to blame. Also, if you watch her interviews, she comes off as a bit of a narcissist and if anyone has ever worked with a narcissist, this is the shit they pull on you every time. Turning something that’s completely normal like a birthing video into porn. I feel sorry for Justin.
Am I missing something? Given she's got the reciepts (ie filed claims in writing), I can't see how this isnt a slam dunk in her favor? Particularly if they can get some corroborating witnesses. This guy doesnt sound like he's got the pull to end careers so hopefully that isn't hard.
It is a slam-dunk in her favor, which is why Baldoni's PR firm is all over the internet to push his side, which conveniently ignores most of the sexual harassment Lively alleges.
Well Baldoni is definitely gonna lose so he's doing his darndenest to at least make her look bad or worse by spinning everything with the PR firm. Though that's honestly also a bad idea since he and his firm can be sued for that too and while defamation is hard to prove, this doesnt feel as difficult due to the many many receipts and proven malice.
So yea, in short, he's a moron.
Because he has receipts too and a lot of the stuff being claimed by BL can be subjective so we can’t be basing stuff solely on the written claims on both sides
@@catg.a9225 How much did Tag PR pay you for your comment? lol The smear campaign is ridiculous, anyone who reads the documents for themselves would not side with Baldoni
Almost like Blake didn't give the full context when she first filed the lawsuit or in the NYT article and now people have reason to believe she lied. Not to mention how its obvious that she wanted to take over production of the film.
THIS is the video ive been waiting for regarding this. So many people are just looking at a few article and hating on blake because they dont like her personality instead of explaining the actual details of the allegations… I like that you dont take sides and just report on the actual allegations and responses. The good thing about this case is that documentation will be able to either confirm or deny Blake’s allegations. Im glad you are covering it without opinions involved
Her allegations against him are weird, because individually most could be explained away. However when taken all together they show a clear pattern of harassment.
That's one reason harassment can be so hard to prosecute, or to sue over, because any single incident seems minor, trivial. Not worth making a big deal about. Maybe someone just said something in an awkward way, didn't mean anything by it, etc. Most of us give people the benefit of the doubt if something is just a one off. It's the repetition that matters. And the legal system can often focus on individual incidents, none of which rise to the level of something actionable.
Some of the incidents are accusations leveled at Heath instead of him. But...yeah, if your boss gets you alone multiple times talking about his porn habits, his sex life, asking you about your sex life... it meets the legal definition. But because her lawsuit exempted some clarifying information that made it seem to people like her team was willing to mislead people, I would hope she's going to have some people deposed. Including the intimacy coordinator. "Were you made aware that the director was adding intimate scenes to the movie and asking for nudity? Were you asked to be on set?"
If you show people naked pictures at work, you don't belong in the workplace.
No they don’t. All her allegations have been disproven or lessened greatly
@@Ben-xl7fq can you cite all your proof for most allegations in the video being disproven then?
A man who says they're a feminist because he "loves" women. A lot of men do this but just not on this scale. I can hear him say I'm not toxic while gaslighting those around him.
Added his best friend in to play the OBGYN wtf disgusting shit is that. What a sad group of people Hollywood as become.
Hollywood has always been this way
@@mangos2888^ This. This isnt even the least bit new for Hollywood or the entertainment industry. Remember Harvey Weinstein?
11:08 Correction - this wasn’t Baldoni who did that case of entering the dressing room, it was Heath!
Who?
Also yikes what a mistake!!! @legal eagle
Studio documents that Baldoni signed say otherwise.
It's what's being highlighted on the screen!
to be clear justice for blake i think justin baldoni needs to never make a movie afain
The topics listed in the protections to return to production, leaves enough for you to know what happened there. They wouldn’t have documented the required steps if they were actually following them…
Word
No, Ryan tried to buy out Justin's shared of the sequel just before the writer's strike. When Justin refused, they tromped up this whole list of bs.
there's full on text message and email evidence and Baldoni is still trying to claim he did nothing wrong that's wild tbh. also the most horrifying thing about all of this is that almost every single thing that people have been mad at Lively about in the past few months seemingly leads back to Baldoni. Like that's awful.
Gawd, I was waiting for LegalEagle to address this; FINALLY!! (Although in his intro he addressed that this has happened so many times before, he failed to address those in his video.)
I'm a retired attorney living in Japan (the US is a very hostile place). I read all of Blake's initial filing which LE included only two small portions of actual collaborating evidence. The way to get around the "he said, she said" which literally goes on throughout history is to provide collaborating evidence. Blake's attorney's do this well repeatedly. I tried to read Baldoni's complaint against the NYT but it became clear very shortly that he was trying to obfuscuate. He literally doesn't address most of her complaints. He complained that she filed a discrimnatory action with the state but didn't file a lawsuit. Now we know that filing an action with the state is required before filing a lawsuit which she did a few days later. Baldoni's attorneys are looking as bad as his PR team. You should read the complaint. The text messages they got through subpeonas are extremely damning. That is something that Baldoni never addresses in his action against the NYT and can't because it is extremely hard (Immpossible) to explain away.
I remember when the story first came out and I pointed things out to people about Baldoni in the complaint and it was incredible the backlash that I got of people supporting him. Even more surprising, most of the comments referred me to three months ago when the movie came out which further showed that his smear campaign was working. I pointed this out to people only to be met with more backlash.
Regardless, it is sad all around. What we do know from these events is that the actors don't recover. We don't see Depp or Heard anymore, and the list from these things just goes on. Sad. I don't know Baldoni, but have seen Blake in a couple of movies before I found out who she was married to. To me this looks pretty open and shut, but the retribution will never end. This is "Hollywood" at its best.
What did you point out that was so controversial?
Subpoena yes but why were they taken out of context? You also read the other lawsuit right? With the complete conversation?
Because I too was appaled when the first complaint was published for the public to read (Is that even allowed? I have no idea. But you can tell us since you are a recent retired lawyer)
I am not on any sides here. This whole drama and lawsuit ended up in my feed, now I have to see the end of it.
As far as I know, context matters a lot. As much as evidence. Everything is tested and challenged during discoveries and examination: integrity truth, relevance.
He said she said can be verified with testimonies. The witnesses will be under oath.
Exactly. Hollywood with their influence games, image, money and power.
I hope the real truth will come to light
Yeah it will hurt them both in the end. Like Depp and Heard, irrespective of the "winner" it seemingly totally damages both.
Better to make sound decisions up front to stay out of court at all if possible.
How anyone can look at this complaint and STILL side with Baldoni is beyond me. And I‘m saying this as someone who doesn‘t even like Blake Lively
because Blake really selectively chose what to put in there and Justin immediately countered with reliable evidence that she wasn't telling the whole truth and was framing the whole thing up the wazoo
No one deserves to experience Colleen Hoover as art.
underated comment
@@BiggestCorvid Idk why her books are popular when the stories suck
No, come on, there’s no way the main female character’s name is Lily Blossom Bloom and she actually owns a flower shop?!
Who writes this slop?
Or better yet, who reads it, makes a film about it, and then people actually go and see it enough to make it a hit?!?
As I've learned from my Film and Animation Community days, no-one can control which movies become hits and which movies don't.
Whats questionable about your comment is that this 'movie is a hit.'😅
Even the unwanted improvisions during the intimate scenes can be seen as borderline sexual assault
I thought this would be 50/50 breakdown of the cases, ended up as 80/20
That's what I thought too. Very unbalanced.
It’s incredibly unbalanced and yet the comments are going so hard about “thank you for finally presenting an unbiased” account 😂 Legal “Eagle” doesn’t even go into the evidence that contradicts Blake’s allegations. He only presents Blake’s versions. Seems like HER PR team is spamming the heck out of this video bc nowhere else have I seen such a one sided reaction to this topic.
Yah, and biased AF!
Cause his side is "nuh uh, i didnt mean it that way." People support this video because 90% of the current media are on a hate train against her.
you forgot to mention the part where all the incriminating texts between baldoni and his pr person were given willingly to lively’s legal team to use as evidence in their complaint because his former pr team was so sick of him 😭
No not because of that, the specific PR person that he was working with left and had to leave behind her work phone. The PR company is the same company that Lively and Reynolds use. None of that indicates that they were sick of him, just that there was a dispute between 2 of their talents and they went with the bigger name.
no they are under the same company an the texts that Blake gave were photoshopped. Justin provided the full conversations and no edits.
@@danniwills8739 do you really think blake’s legal team would submit fabricated evidence to the court? Really? No lawyer would do that bc it’s so easy to be proven false and they could face discipline from the board for forging evidence. Cmon I know you love baldoni but dang
@ and do you think that Justin and his lawyer would lie about what they presented? Be real
Baldoni claiming he's "at the top of the totem pole" is all I needed to know to side with Blake (the most important figures are at the bottom of pole if they are used to show hierarchy)
Blake is a liar she wasn't SH and Blake supports Woody Allen and Harvey Weinstein.
He should be found liable for mansplaining labor to a mom of 4, with one of then currently nursing. Straight to jail! Guilty!
@NotHere4ThisShip
One of the whackiest comments here...
YOURS😅🥴
Thank you for covering this story. Every time there is a sexual assault case around Hollywood, it always turns into these weird "pick a side" issue. And yet, time and time again it's women who are abused. I don't understand why people think that unless women are perfect they are asking for it. Men think they are entitled to women, and then when it happens to men it's treated like they should want it because men want sex. I really wish people would treat this as it is, abuse of a people not hot drama.
from justin baldoni screen shoot chat with blake lively. It show a valid proof that there was a intimacy coordinator put in place.
Shhhhh we are not presenting both sides of the story here!
I’m more inclined to believe Blake than Justin at this point. What would even be her motivation to falsely accuse him? She’s an established actress, not a new up and comer, who could be motivated by fame or money
Right? It makes no sense to me at all that Lively just made up a bunch of very specific sexual harassment claims against Baldoni. What reason would she have to lie about them? She had nothing to gain and everything to lose.
People keep saying "to fix her reputation", but that makes zero sense when you think about it for more than two seconds. She and her husband are practically royalty when it comes to putting out a positive image. They both have to know damn well that suing for sexual harassment never results in a positive reputational turnaround for the claimant. Baldoni claiming that she did it for PR is like if someone told you that Michael Phelps suddenly decided to wear lead boots in the pool because he thinks it'll make him swim faster. It's just so obviously absurd, and it's baffling to see people fall for it.
How about a desire to take over the film?
She and her husband wanted to buyjusting out of the sequel and gain full control over the movie. Seems enough motication to me
Ooo! Now talk about the doctored text messages from Blake’s side!
I have never been this early for a Legal Eagle video! Another amazing video as always
@@hammondOT I'm a real person but okay
@@hammondOTpeople like to make comments to boost the performance of their favourite UA-camrs in the algorithm. Are you new here?
...amazingly ignorant and biased.
Okay... So I am not a woman, I have never given birth or been involved in someone giving birth... But given when I googled if it is normal to wear a hospital gown during birth I found mostly material discussing whether to use the gown provided by the hospital or bring your own, his claim for it to be normal to be nude during birth seems... Very dubious. Any mothers, OBGYNs, nurses or hospital staff here to chime in?
if giving birth at the hospital like in the movie, you are provided a hospital gown
Nursing student here. If you're giving birth in a hospital bed like she was in the movie, most people would be wearing a hospital gown. Patients in the birthing unit already have a lot of providers examining their intimate areas, so most people generally try to keep as much privacy as they can.
Some hospitals have water pools where people can give birth, in which case the person might be naked, but in the movie, she wasn't in a water pool/bath tub.
It looks like the wife had a water birth at home, where it would make sense to be naked, but why would someone need to be naked in a hospital birth? It literally makes no sense. Also, why would you try to force someone to do an unnecessary nude scene when they're clearly uncomfortable with it? It doesn't add realism. It's just unnecessary and sketchy.
I know two women who gave birth naked because they felt excessively warm and irritated by the gown. That said, it absolutely wasn't standard at the hospital I worked at.
@@TheNaldiin @glitch--gamer So what I am understanding is:
It is not like a naked birth is unheard of or would be unrealistic and there are setting in which it might even be likely, but his claims of the scene being weird or unrealistic if she used a hospital gown like she wanted were wildly off...
Thanks ^^
8:47 it doesn't fing matter if it's not pornographic. It's inappropriate to show stuff like that to people without their concent and then go on to say "we need to do it more like this."
No...what MATTERS is that her allegation is that it is a PORN video - when CLEARLY it was NOT.
That's what matters. Get your priorities straight!
Justifying sexual exploitation by saying that other women would find it hot is insanely disgusting (at 7:00)
This was all Blake’s complaint… not Justin’s…
Right? Has Legal Eagle been paid by Blake? 😂
i think the fact he directed and starred in the adaptation of the rape apologia novel should have been a massive red flag
Isnt it concerning how effective slapp lawsuits are at swaying public opinion? Maybe Im just some dum dum but this seems pretty clear cut that violations were made to a contract this is INSANE?
It's truly bonkers that on *this* film, with *this* subject matter, they didn't have an intimacy coordinator on set from the start. That alone seems damning.
They did. But she did not want to meet.
@@orange25i um, what is the evidence for that?
@@SometimestheY It's in Baldoni's lawsuit. You can easily Google this. This video is clearly favoring one party.
75-80% of this was one sided and there was no mention of the text omissions made in the the NYT story that reframed the conversation and in fact reiterated said edited conversation. TF is this?
Agreed. It’s like Legal Eagle did zero research.
@ honestly, feels more intentionally biased.
I'm seeing multiple comments with almost the same wording from different accounts with really high likes. Are they botting?
Yep. Baldoni's PR firm is in these comments pushing whatever they think will work on us.
I have the same thoughts.
There are about 3-4 comment templates going around in the comment section here. All of them are based on saying what a fair and accurate legal analysis this is and how awful Baldoni is. It’s quite clear to anyone who has bothered to read all the filings in both cases that this video is one sided and the comment section purporting to stan the video and Blake are painfully inauthentic
Yep!
...And all the 1.5K LIKES after these biased BOTS for lively - a DEAD giveaway.
You nailed it😅
@@bingleytillydid you not see his evidence? His so called evidence is not credible enough. While she has actual proof that he just says “i wasn’t doing it in that kind of way, i was just being cool”.
I’ve been waiting for this one! Quality info as always 👌
Why is it so hard for some of these men to just be responsible and respectful.
have you ever considered making videos about PAST events? i would love to see that, you could cover more landmark and historical events like major bills passing or being denied and even some silly stuff ?
It's wild how sets like this are still happening. So much has been done to prevent exactly this kind of thing, yet people like Baldoni keep creating these environments. The film industry needs to make examples of men like this, because they just make the job of every other director and actor harder