Urgent: Blake Lively’s Editor Critiques Sex Scene Approval Rights
UPDATE: Newly unsealed texts reveal a heated discussion among editors regarding Blake Lively’s final approval rights for sex scenes in the upcoming film “It Ends With Us.” The texts, released as part of Lively’s ongoing federal lawsuit against costar and director Justin Baldoni, show editor Robb Sullivan expressing frustration with Lively’s demands for control over intimate scenes.
The text exchange, dated April 18, 2024, indicates significant tension as the film approaches its scheduled release on March 9, 2024. Sullivan was caught saying “SMH” (shaking my head) over Lively’s insistence on approving not just her own sex scenes, but also those featuring the young actress portraying her character’s teenage self in flashbacks.
The conversation begins on a lighter note, celebrating the film’s PG-13 rating, but quickly shifts to the underlying stress surrounding Lively’s involvement. In one message, editor Oona Flaherty exclaims, “Woot!” to which Sullivan responds, “Woo hoo,” before his tone changes to express concern over Lively’s control over sensitive content.
According to Lively’s 163-page lawsuit, Baldoni is accused of sexual harassment, retaliation, and attempting to undermine her reputation through a social media campaign. Baldoni has vehemently denied the allegations, countering with a now-dismissed $400 million countersuit that claimed Lively engaged in a “hostile takeover” of the film’s production.
The lawsuit is ongoing and has become increasingly contentious. In a recent ruling, a judge ordered Lively to disclose three years of her business income records to Baldoni. Legal proceedings continue to unfold, with Lively’s case set to be heard in federal court in Manhattan.
The unsealed text messages were originally provided to Lively’s legal team by Baldoni in response to a subpoena. The chain is partially redacted to protect the identities of participants, including one referred to as “Henny Grace,” who commented, “Honestly, it’s all about control.”
Lively has faced challenges in serving subpoenas to key individuals in the case. A judge allowed the process server to leave a copy of a subpoena at Sullivan’s residence after multiple unsuccessful attempts to deliver it in person.
As this high-profile legal battle unfolds, the film industry watches closely. The implications for both Lively’s career and the film itself are profound, raising critical questions about control and creative input in cinematic storytelling.
This developing story is likely to evolve as the trial approaches. Stay tuned for updates on this urgent matter as it impacts not only the individuals involved but also the broader entertainment landscape.
