Movies

Justin Baldoni’s explosive fightback against Blake Lively revealed: Claims her team smeared HIM, ‘weaponised’ WhatsApps and lawsuit is ploy to rebuild her image. Read ALISON BOSHOFF’S bombshell world exclusive

BBG News

As a seasoned observer of Hollywood’s intricate web of power dynamics, I find myself drawn into this captivating tale that unfolds before our eyes like a taut thriller. The drama surrounding Blake Lively, Stephen Baldwin, and their entourage is not just about a movie set; it’s a fascinating peek into the labyrinthine world of Hollywood PR.

There’s nothing surprising about a temporary truce during Christmas. However, the recent pause in the disagreement between A-list actress Blake Lively and her former co-star from It Ends With Us, Justin Baldoni, isn’t due to holiday cheer. Instead, it’s because courts are closed during the festive season.

The shocking news about the legal complaint filed by 37-year-old Blake Lively, popularly known for her role in Gossip Girl and married to Ryan Reynolds, against Baldoni was first reported on Friday, just before the break.

In this account, it’s stated that Baldoni, aged 40, allegedly:

The lawsuit also stated that Baldoni asserted he was communicating with Lively’s deceased father and made disparaging comments about her weight. Moreover, it suggested that Baldoni’s public relations team tried to damage Lively’s reputation, referring to a text from his PR representative Melissa Nathan which said: ‘We can discredit anyone.’

As a lifestyle expert, I found myself captivated by the global buzz surrounding an intriguing revelation that unfolded swiftly. Within just a few hours of the relevant documents being submitted, The New York Times graced us with a comprehensive 4,000-word piece, titled ‘Inside a Hollywood Smear Machine’. This in-depth article provided unique insights into a captivating behind-the-scenes saga, making headlines worldwide.

The August-released film adaptation of Colleen Hoover’s 2016 top-selling book saw tremendous success at the box office, earning over $350 million on a production budget of just $25 million. Starring Lively as Lily Bloom, a florist, and Baldoni as her enchanting yet abusive love interest (who also directed the movie), the story unfolds around their romantic entanglements.

As a devoted admirer of both Lively and Baldoni, it’s deeply unfortunate to witness the intense dispute they find themselves in. This strife seems destined to cast a shadow over their project, making it more notable for its behind-the-scenes turmoil than its box office performance.

As a lifestyle expert, I must share some intriguing developments that have been brewing in the realm of celebrity news. Over the summer, whispers of a disagreement between these two stars started to surface, as they seemed to steer clear of each other during the promotional tour for their recent film. The tension reached its peak barely a week ago with the filing of a lawsuit by Lively. It appears this dispute is far from over and could escalate further.

After the courts resume operations following the New Year on Thursday, Baldoni, along with his business partner Jamey Heath and the publicists mentioned in Lively’s lawsuit, are planning to respond aggressively by filing a powerful counter-lawsuit.

This implies that the accusations of smear campaigns against Baldoni were actually orchestrated by Lively’s team, not the other way round. Moreover, it suggests that certain emails, texts, and WhatsApp messages seemingly incriminating Baldoni’s publicists have been manipulated to alter their original meanings.

As a devoted follower, I might rephrase it this way: In their argument, they assert that my publicist, Leslie Sloane – a highly influential figure in Hollywood – attempted to tarnish Baldoni’s reputation by spreading false stories to multiple media outlets.

The core argument that attorney Bryan Freedman has been working on in response to Lively’s legal action over the past few days is that her complaint, which was submitted to the California Civil Rights Department instead of a court, is just a strategy to boost her public reputation.

It is expected that it will be asserted that a strained professional relationship with Baldoni and a misguided marketing approach to sell a movie about domestic abuse as a light-hearted choice for ‘girls’ night out’ sparked a social media uproar, leading millions of people to act as detectives, scrutinizing the apparent frosty dynamic between Lively and Baldoni.

It’s common knowledge that they didn’t get along well on set. Baldoni’s group argues that the negative sentiment towards Blake online, often referred to as ‘Blake-lash’, naturally escalated without any deliberate manipulation. Incidents like her 2012 wedding held at a former slave plantation and her unfriendly behavior towards reporter Kjersti Flaa during a 2016 TV interview became public knowledge gradually, rather than being intentionally leaked to harm Blake’s reputation, as her team suggests.

The question on everyone’s mind is: Is Blake Lively known for being high-maintenance, or does Justin Baldoni have questionable behavior? Could it be possible that they exhibit both traits?

A person familiar with the matter expresses skepticism: “Isn’t it implausible to believe that Blake Lively, married to a high-profile individual and represented by an influential publicist, would quietly tolerate sexual harassment on a film set, only to wait for four months after the movie’s release before filing a complaint? That just doesn’t add up.

Speaking as a devoted follower, I must add this insight: They never saw eye-to-eye. Justin, being deeply spiritual and somewhat unconventional, often refers to himself as ‘bohemian.’ He claims to communicate with the departed souls, including the possibility of having conversed with Blake’s late father. As for any accusations of harassment, he firmly denies such actions, asserting his intentions were respectful.

They clashed terribly, and she used snippets from their past friendly chats when he was trying to befriend her, twisting those innocent words into harmful weapons against him.

Born in Los Angeles and married to Emily, a 40-year-old Swedish actress with whom he has two children, Baldoni initially found success as a TV actor before transitioning into films and directing. However, his detractor alleges that on January 4 this year, just prior to resuming filming, Lively requested an ‘all hands’ gathering to discuss what her court filing labels as the ‘unfriendly atmosphere’ on set.

At the meeting, Lively wasn’t by herself; her husband Reynolds, who is 48 and together they have four children, accompanied her. In addition to them, Jamey Heath, Baldoni’s business partner and the movie’s producer, was present, along with a representative from Sony, the company responsible for distributing the film.

At the end of the meeting, a list of 30 guidelines was drafted, agreed upon, and enforced for the rest of the filming, all in response to incidents that were said to have occurred on set. The new production rules specified that Lively would be substituted by a prominent stunt double for scenes depicting ‘rape and/or violence’, with Baldoni.

In addition, they stipulated that Baldoni should refrain from including any additional ‘romantic or explicit scenes, oral encounters, or on-screen climaxes’ beyond what was originally scripted. Furthermore, an intimacy advisor was to be present whenever the two actors appeared together in a scene. Among their other requirements were requests for Baldoni to cease portraying conversations with Lively’s deceased father and to desist from inquiring about her weight.

In a formal response letter through Wayfarer Studios, Baldoni indicated his agreement with the demands, stating: “Though we may have differing viewpoints on various matters, creating a secure workspace for everyone remains our top priority.

As a lifestyle expert, I wholeheartedly agree with your suggested points; they aren’t just reasonable but absolutely crucial for the well-being of everyone involved. Filming resumed for us on January 5 and wrapped up successfully by February 9. No additional instances of harassment were reported in Miss Lively’s complaint post that date.

In an unexpected turn of events, after the shooting wrapped up, Lively took charge of the movie from Baldoni. She then brought on board her own editor, who had just worked on her husband’s blockbuster Deadpool & Wolverine and is also the godfather of her son, to create a standalone version of the film, independently edited by this new hire.

Before the movie’s release on August 6th, I, along with several of my fellow cast members and the author himself, Mr. Hoover, have collectively decided against participating in any press events alongside Mr. Baldoni.

According to Lively, Baldoni embarked on a harmful effort to influence public opinion, aiming to damage her reputation. To accomplish this, he enlisted crisis communications specialist Melissa Nathan, who had previously helped rehabilitate the image of troubled actor Johnny Depp, and PR representative Jennifer Abel.

She claimed that Baldoni and his group subsequently organized a worldwide defamation campaign against her, involving what is commonly referred to as ‘astroturfing’ – the dissemination of harmful content online from seemingly genuine profiles, which they would likely deny.

Through her lawyer’s announcement, Lively expressed her hope that her lawsuit will expose the underhanded, vengeful strategies used to punish individuals who voice concerns about misbehavior, thus safeguarding those potentially facing similar situations.

She was backed by Amber Heard, herself a victim of global trolling during her two court cases involving ex-husband Johnny Depp, by actress Gwyneth Paltrow, by the SAG-AFTRA union, and by the film’s distributors Sony Pictures, who said in a statement: ‘We have previously expressed our support for Blake in connection with her work on and for the film. We fully and firmly reiterate that support today.

Additionally, we firmly denounce any character assassination attempts against her. Such actions are unacceptable in our professional environment and in a respectful community.

Over a long weekend, Baldoni’s representation at WME was terminated, leaving Lively and Reynolds as their remaining clients. He lost an allyship award from Vital Voices and his podcast partner ended their joint venture. Essentially, Baldoni has experienced a complete cancellation due to these events.

However, Baldoni’s team is counterattacking. They claim they possess evidence that false narratives about him were spread in the community by Lively’s publicist, Leslie Sloane.

One account suggested that Baldoni faced three allegations concerning his workplace behavior, but his attorney, Bryan Freedman, has denied these claims. It is reported that there may be compelling evidence, or what some call a ‘smoking gun’, pointing towards the involvement of Sloane in this matter.

Yesterday, when someone approached her, Sloane revealed to the Mail that a journalist had reached out to her regarding the allegations made to HR concerning Baldoni, following an anonymous tip.

Later on, I received inquiries from several media sources regarding accusations of Human Resources complaints. Upon being reached, I addressed the media’s queries by directing them to Wayfarer for comment.

Sony or Sony’s representatives seem to imply that I created news articles concerning HR issues on set, which is not true.

Regardless of its veracity, this revelation could spark a commotion in Hollywood due to its scandalous and gritty exposure of Hollywood’s PR machinery that hasn’t been seen for many years, and it implicates some major players within the industry.

In her detailed grievance, Lively alleges that Sloane, whom she refers to as her “publicist” but isn’t explicitly named in the lawsuit, had no knowledge of the events transpiring during or post-filming at all.

Her filing reads: ‘Lively neither publicly commented nor directed any of her representatives to comment or engage with the print media, social media or otherwise about the hostile environment Mr Baldoni, Mr Heath and (their company) Wayfarer created.

In the given timeframe, Ms. Lively didn’t share information about the unfriendly work atmosphere she and other cast and crew members faced with her publicist.

In response to the allegations, the countersuit argues that the accusations of smear campaigns directed at crisis PRs Melissa Nathan and Jen Abel are, essentially, false smears. Nathan and Abel will argue that their text conversations have been manipulated and portrayed in a manner that paints an untruthful and damaging picture.

In a fascinating twist, the messages in question have come from Abel’s mobile phone

Device that Stephanie Jones flipped over upon departing from her job at yet another influential Hollywood PR firm.

As a lifestyle expert, let me rephrase the situation in a more personal and conversational manner: It appears that I, at one point, was bound by contract to Baldoni’s Wayfarer and subsequently passed those items over to Lively’s team. Lawyers representing Lively have confirmed that they acquired these items through a subpoena order issued against me.

In this case, it becomes even more complex because there’s debate over whether the subpoena served as a disguise for Jones to settle a personal score with Abel, her former employee who chose to depart.

Lawyer Freedman for Baldoni states that Jones confiscated an employee’s phone and utilized the data to strengthen team Lively, as Wayfarer had informed her they intended to terminate their contract with Jonesworks, her company.

In the face of potentially losing another client, [Jones] opted for strategies she’s previously used in such situations and tried to significantly reduce her own client base, as stated to a U.S. publication yesterday.

As an over-the-moon fan, I find myself compelled to share some news that’s left me feeling rather unsettled. It appears that Jones is taking legal action against Baldoni due to claims of a contractual breach. This breach supposedly involves failing to pay her a monthly salary of $25,000, effective from May 2025.

According to our information, those claiming Blake Lively fell prey to a defamation campaign are actually perpetrating one themselves. We possess substantial proof from emails, WhatsApp chats, and various documents that support this claim.

A representative for Jones told the Mail: ‘For months, this group has gaslit and disparaged Stephanie Jones and her company for financial gain, to settle personal scores and most recently to distract from their disgraceful smearing of Blake Lively.

Taking legal action is essential to halt the persistent wrongdoing of the defendants, allowing Steph to restore the hard-earned reputation she spent decades building, a reputation that the defendants unscrupulously tarnished for their own harmful intentions.

According to Matt Belloni, who writes for The Hollywood Reporter (Puck), this story in Hollywood is incredibly intriguing. On Thursday, he posted: “This tale isn’t ending yet. We’re soon going to peek behind the scenes of the smear tactics employed by multiple entities within Hollywood – and yes, I intentionally used the plural.

Read More

2024-12-28 05:23

Previous post Cat Deeley’s future on This Morning sealed as star makes shock admission about her time on ITV show
Next post Robert Irwin makes the most of his time off as he enjoys family getaway with mother Terri and sister Bindi over Christmas before I’m A Celebrity duties kick off