On Thursday in court, Justin Baldoni’s attorney brought up the television series Heated Rivalry to dispute Blake Lively’s sexual harassment claims against the actor. The defense cited this show as evidence to argue that Baldwin’s actions during filming were part of typical acting improvisation rather than harassment, linking this to the Blake Lively lawsuit dismissal efforts.
Attorney Jonathan Bach mentioned Heated Rivalry while addressing Lively’s accusation that Baldoni touched her without consent during an improvised intimate moment for the film It Ends With Us, according to Variety. Bach’s courtroom remarks lightened the mood when he asked,
I don’t know if the court is familiar with the show ‘Heated Rivalry,’
Variety reported.
Judge Lewis Liman responded that he had not seen the show, which led Bach to explain that it is a queer hockey romance featuring explicit scenes where the male actors, Connor Storrie and Hudson Williams, often improvise during intimate moments. This explanation was part of the defense’s argument that such improvisation on set is customary.
Defense Argues Gender Neutrality of On-Set Improvisation in Sexual Scenes
Bach contended that if male actors are permitted to improvise during sex scenes, then it would be inconsistent to claim gender-based discrimination against Baldoni. He argued that any physical contact between Baldoni and Lively arose from their characters’ relationship in the film and was unrelated to Lively’s gender.
The defense further stated that Lively had accepted her role in It Ends With Us aware that it included “hot and sexy scenes” and that her complaints were minor issues, described by Bach as “small potatoes” that did not meet the threshold for sexual harassment.
However, Esra Hudson, one of Lively’s attorneys, rejected this view, emphasizing that Lively was subjected to being “kissed, nuzzled and touched” in ways without her consent, regardless of her knowledge about intimate scenes in the film, as Variety reported.
Judge Liman challenged the defense’s position by highlighting that the film’s sexual content did not grant Baldoni permission to touch Lively without her consent. Bach responded by underscoring that “context matters” in interpreting the interactions on set.
Details of Allegations and Response from Baldoni’s Legal Team
In her lawsuit, Lively alleged that Baldoni sexually harassed her on set. Court documents obtained by Page Six detail an incident during the filming of a silent slow-dance scene where Baldoni reportedly
“leaned forward and slowly dragged his lips from her ear and down her neck”
while whispering, “It smells so good.” When Lively objected, Baldoni allegedly said,
“I’m not even attracted to you.”
In defense, Baldoni’s attorney Bryan Freedman released behind-the-scenes footage showing Baldoni and Lively during the slow-dance scene to contradict the harassment claims. Freedman emphasized,
The scene in question was designed to show the two characters falling in love and longing to be close to one another. Both actors are clearly behaving well within the scope of the scene and with mutual respect and professionalism,
according to his statement to Page Six.
Behind-the-Scenes Improv Culture Cited as Context for Dispute
Bach used the example of the show Heated Rivalry to illustrate the nature of improvisation in intimate scenes. Hudson Williams, who portrays Shane Hollander in Heated Rivalry, humorously remarked in Vanity Fair that his on-screen relationship with Connor Storrie (Ilya Rozanov) was “a nightmare for HR.” Williams explained,
We got comfortable just being inches from each other’s face and invading each other’s personal space,
emphasizing the informal and close nature of such performances.
This example aimed to highlight how actors may engage in physical closeness as part of their work, yet it also raises questions about the boundaries of professional conduct during filming, especially in light of Lively’s claims.
Implications for On-Set Conduct and Legal Outcomes
The case underscores a tense debate about consent and professional behavior in intimate film scenes. While the defense urges courts to consider industry practices like improvisation and acting context, the plaintiff’s team maintains that no acting choice justifies unwanted physical contact.
The ongoing dispute draws attention to how courts will navigate the complexities of consent within the entertainment industry, especially in productions involving sensitive scenes. Ultimately, the judge’s willingness to question arguments about context signals that the trial could clarify standards for acceptable conduct during filming.
As the Blake Lively lawsuit dismissal is contested, the outcome may set precedents determining the boundaries between acting performances and personal rights on set. This case continues to attract public and industry scrutiny, reflecting broader cultural conversations about workplace behavior and accountability.
