I sometimes read Lainey Gossip for things like this. It has not always been my favorite because they could be just cruel, though in the last few years they have been open about the harm they've caused. I would read it because...well celebrity gossip can be fun, but i actually started to learn from reading it, especially for situations like this. I will admit it really opened my eyes to how often i would fall victim to PR and "public opinion". They often point out what stories feel like PR moves, which outlets favor certain celebrities based on fame or even gender, and even what sounds like true leaks. Anyway, I want to say that even before anything came out about Blake's past interviews Lainey was pointing out that while Blake's promo was odd compared to Justin's it was interesting that most of the cast, especially the women unfollowed him and didnt promote with him. And now we know that promoting the movie like a romcom might of been something in her contract.
100% it’s eye opening when we see how the media and PR push narratives. I found the weird split in how it was promoted strange and now I’m like oh wow of course
Every single person that talks about this has to say how much they don't like Blake and sometimes Colleen and it seems that's why it was so easy to just take Justin's side. Your personal opinion on her doesn't change the facts even if it comes out that she did do this to wrest control of the movie (justin's allegation). Like I'm not trying to target you in particular but it feels like everyone is in a hostage situation being forced to admit she might have a point.
Oh absolutely. I feel like the odd one out when i literally could care less about anybody in this situation. Mostly I’m fascinated that it’s all happened around a CoHo book.
We can't know what we don't know. That's not any kind of excuse, but it is very much an explanation. There are things about industry that we have a full picture of, even if we engage with the output of said. I thought the way that everybody else was marketing the film was tasteless, and that was an extension to the fact that I find the marketing around a lot of CoHo stuff kinda tasteless. That is especially true in the case of IEWU, which by RWA (disclaimer: the RWA sucks) standards *is not a Romance novel* even though it has spent years being slyly, quietly pushed as one--though this is mostly by laypeople (who still think Wuthering Heights is a Romance novel). But the cover of the book does not help in any way to dispel the myth, there was the colouring book fiasco, and there's the fact that the flip side of the coin it's usually the audience (especially those who hate dark/er romance) who point out CoHo's readers should really only be adults. I'd love to be corrected if Hoover and her publisher have spilled a lot of digital ink informing parents & booksellers that her books are 18+ only. Anyway, getting back to the "don't know what we don't know"--despite spending over 35+ years watching movies, despite having spent 7 years working in a video store... it didn't occur to me that things like "this is how we do promotion for this film" would come from from studio mandate, so I got swept up in the "whisky tango foxtrot?!" of the backlash to the marketing. I thought it was gross. Now I fully grasp that that was on Sony. So now, I'm just mad at Sony for a) forcing the cast to market the movie based on sunshine and lollipops (ie, florals) AND ALSO 2) not yanking Baldoni's leash when he refused to play ball.
Did he just decide to do method acting? Ughh. Seems just ironic. (I almost read Hoover when I first got into romance, but then some stuff came out, and I wasn't about that!). You would think a movie that centers domestic abuse would have a much better on set culture and protocol than this. (And I have no opinion on either party. I am a Swiftie, but not the kind that really cares about her besties.)
You know I was hoping that we wouldn’t have more Collen Hover movies coming out but not like this(when it comes to the prevented the second movie coming out)
Once again, media literacy and critical thinking are proving to be essentials😅I knew nothing of this situation, except a few surface level things that I came across online, but now I'm too nose-y to not want to now how things will develop😂
Yeah this is messy af. Everyone is just pointing fingers at each other right now. I just think it is interesting that this authors adaptation is causing so much mess and drama.
I admit I fell for the Blake smear campaign a little when things first went down as I already felt a little iffy about her because of the plantation wedding and other missteps from her past. However, I wasn’t completely gung-ho for Justin either, because I thought it was weird that he would choose a Colleen Hoover book, with all her baggage, as a vehicle for his DV work. So learning about the alleged marketing pivot and that it may not have been entirely genuine actually makes a lot more sense. And as much as I still dislike CoHo, I’m glad she’s one of many involved in the film siding with Blake, especially since one of many wild things in Justin’s suit is that he thinks *he* did Colleen, Queen of BookTok, a favor, by adapting IEWU? Who does he think he is?
I was buying Baldoni's version until he signed with Deep's PR company. Blake is controversial (she seems more air head than toxic), but it's as you said, both things can be true, she is a victim and did some questionable things in the past.
I sometimes read Lainey Gossip for things like this. It has not always been my favorite because they could be just cruel, though in the last few years they have been open about the harm they've caused. I would read it because...well celebrity gossip can be fun, but i actually started to learn from reading it, especially for situations like this. I will admit it really opened my eyes to how often i would fall victim to PR and "public opinion". They often point out what stories feel like PR moves, which outlets favor certain celebrities based on fame or even gender, and even what sounds like true leaks. Anyway, I want to say that even before anything came out about Blake's past interviews Lainey was pointing out that while Blake's promo was odd compared to Justin's it was interesting that most of the cast, especially the women unfollowed him and didnt promote with him. And now we know that promoting the movie like a romcom might of been something in her contract.
100% it’s eye opening when we see how the media and PR push narratives. I found the weird split in how it was promoted strange and now I’m like oh wow of course
Every single person that talks about this has to say how much they don't like Blake and sometimes Colleen and it seems that's why it was so easy to just take Justin's side. Your personal opinion on her doesn't change the facts even if it comes out that she did do this to wrest control of the movie (justin's allegation). Like I'm not trying to target you in particular but it feels like everyone is in a hostage situation being forced to admit she might have a point.
Oh absolutely. I feel like the odd one out when i literally could care less about anybody in this situation. Mostly I’m fascinated that it’s all happened around a CoHo book.
@@HappyforNow A CoHo book, (checks notes) about domestic abuse and how it develops. Alexa, play Ironic by Alanis Morrissette.
We can't know what we don't know. That's not any kind of excuse, but it is very much an explanation. There are things about industry that we have a full picture of, even if we engage with the output of said. I thought the way that everybody else was marketing the film was tasteless, and that was an extension to the fact that I find the marketing around a lot of CoHo stuff kinda tasteless. That is especially true in the case of IEWU, which by RWA (disclaimer: the RWA sucks) standards *is not a Romance novel* even though it has spent years being slyly, quietly pushed as one--though this is mostly by laypeople (who still think Wuthering Heights is a Romance novel). But the cover of the book does not help in any way to dispel the myth, there was the colouring book fiasco, and there's the fact that the flip side of the coin it's usually the audience (especially those who hate dark/er romance) who point out CoHo's readers should really only be adults. I'd love to be corrected if Hoover and her publisher have spilled a lot of digital ink informing parents & booksellers that her books are 18+ only.
Anyway, getting back to the "don't know what we don't know"--despite spending over 35+ years watching movies, despite having spent 7 years working in a video store... it didn't occur to me that things like "this is how we do promotion for this film" would come from from studio mandate, so I got swept up in the "whisky tango foxtrot?!" of the backlash to the marketing. I thought it was gross. Now I fully grasp that that was on Sony. So now, I'm just mad at Sony for a) forcing the cast to market the movie based on sunshine and lollipops (ie, florals) AND ALSO 2) not yanking Baldoni's leash when he refused to play ball.
Did he just decide to do method acting? Ughh. Seems just ironic. (I almost read Hoover when I first got into romance, but then some stuff came out, and I wasn't about that!). You would think a movie that centers domestic abuse would have a much better on set culture and protocol than this. (And I have no opinion on either party. I am a Swiftie, but not the kind that really cares about her besties.)
You know I was hoping that we wouldn’t have more Collen Hover movies coming out but not like this(when it comes to the prevented the second movie coming out)
Same 😅
Once again, media literacy and critical thinking are proving to be essentials😅I knew nothing of this situation, except a few surface level things that I came across online, but now I'm too nose-y to not want to now how things will develop😂
My need for seeing how it plays out at this points just never going away. It feels absolutely wild what has come out vs the initial situation💖
Yeah this is messy af. Everyone is just pointing fingers at each other right now. I just think it is interesting that this authors adaptation is causing so much mess and drama.
Same the fact it’s a CoHo book is just making it more fascinating. And honestly the only reason it’s even on my radar.
I admit I fell for the Blake smear campaign a little when things first went down as I already felt a little iffy about her because of the plantation wedding and other missteps from her past. However, I wasn’t completely gung-ho for Justin either, because I thought it was weird that he would choose a Colleen Hoover book, with all her baggage, as a vehicle for his DV work. So learning about the alleged marketing pivot and that it may not have been entirely genuine actually makes a lot more sense. And as much as I still dislike CoHo, I’m glad she’s one of many involved in the film siding with Blake, especially since one of many wild things in Justin’s suit is that he thinks *he* did Colleen, Queen of BookTok, a favor, by adapting IEWU? Who does he think he is?
I was buying Baldoni's version until he signed with Deep's PR company. Blake is controversial (she seems more air head than toxic), but it's as you said, both things can be true, she is a victim and did some questionable things in the past.