In Dispute: Lively v Baldoni

This documentary significantly oversimplified a complex legal situation. It featured interviews with individuals who presented inaccurate information and constructed a flawed timeline of events. Crucially, the documentary omitted key parties and numerous lawsuits, while downplaying serious allegations. For instance, the extortion claim, a central element of the legal proceedings, was barely addressed and dismissed as an exaggeration.

The documentary relied heavily on the perspectives of three bloggers, a non-expert attorney, and an inexperienced freelancer. This approach lacked investigative journalism and demonstrated a failure to fact-check. The documentarians presented these viewpoints as definitive, without providing any balanced, or well researched information.

It is important to note that there are currently eight complaints filed by six distinct groups of individuals related to this case. The documentary only acknowledged three of these complaints, which shows a significant lack of depth.

This coverage was one-sided and unfairly favored Blake Lively. It only highlighted details that support her claims without looking at the full context. A balanced report should include all the facts, not just selected ones.

For a more complete and fair breakdown, check out Candace Owens on YouTube or BeBetter on TikTok. They review both sides and all the evidence, which shows Justin Baldoni is not guilty of what she claims. In fact, it seems like Lively is the one trying to smear him to take control of this film and future projects.

Good reporting should present both sides so people can make their own informed opinions.

This "documentary" if you can even call it that...more like mocumentary...is so incredibly biased! Another bought and paid for biased review just like the NYT article. You could tell the Buzzfeed editor, the guy from on The Ankler, Dina Doll and Emily Bergh are very biased or just terrified of kaleesi and her dragons.

I give this show 2 stars for having Perez Hilton and Kiersti Flaa. However, where is Candace Owens, Zack Peters or Stephanie Tleiji. They have all gone into minute details, sifted and read documents, spoken to multiple people who were on set and those who have worked with both Blake and Justin. They absolutely should have been interviewed if you really wanted to be truly unbiased!

I've never been a huge fan of Blake Lively but I have liked a few of the movies she's been in. I had never heard of Justin Baldoni before this movie. I know for a fact Coleen Hoover had a 'morals clause' in her contract with Justin that stated if Baldoni was found guilty she would get her movie rights back. This should be proof to everyone! She's been on camera ADMITTING she wishes she had the rights back bc she would love for Blake to have the movie rights NOT Justin. Further evidence for me personally.... I had been in a DV relationship before my husband and I have been harassed quite a few times in places I've worked (I waitressed and bartended thru college). He would NEVER and I mean NEVER joke about it! Ryan made jokes in his movie (Deadpool v Wolverine) and he made jokes during the SNL skit. I don't believe for a moment any loving husband would ever make light of or joke about their wife/mother of their children being harassed or abused if they honestly believed it happened and was traumatic. That should be a clear sign to everyone her claim is garbage!

No facts and biased. I wouldn't be surprised if a 7 grader made this for a school project on her favorite female celebrity drama they've been apart of. This is what it feels like. Why would someone take time and money (based off what I watched I doubt any real money was put into this, unless it was bought by the star bully protagonist herself) to put this together? This in itself seems like a smear campaign and tactic to sway the public, unfortunately we can read, research, and have critical thinking skills. I wish the director actually took time to read the lawsuit on both ends before putting out such garbage.

The documentary leans on Lively's side and omitted Baldoni's best counter arguments and proof. It shows Lively's strongest arguments and counters with some of Bladoni's weakest arguments to try to appear unbiased. Lively and Reynolds have taken over this movie while Baldoni is the one who purchases the rights to the movie.

The documentary did not go over any of the messages where Lively is flirting with Baldoni. He always replied shutting down the flirtation attempts. But yet it focuses on him responding to her text messages at 3AM and highlighted that as him being unprofessional.... Just one example of where they focused on a minuet detail so that Lively would look good, instead of talking about evidence that is more significate, but would support Baldoni.

Ultimately it sides with Lively while the trial has not yet begun.