Film Industry
Blake & Ryan’s Step-By-Step Strategy to Steal Movies
A new video essay from the YouTube channel “Bopping” is making waves online, arguing that Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds orchestrated a strategic “hijacking” of the upcoming film adaptation of Colleen Hoover’s “It Ends With Us.” The Bopping analysis claims this wasn’t a spontaneous move but a carefully planned operation, mirroring Reynolds’s own tactics in gaining control over the “Deadpool” franchise.
Step-by-Step Breakdown of the Alleged Strategy (Per Bopping):
The Bopping video breaks down the alleged plan into several key steps:
- Start Small and Be Underpaid: According to Bopping, Lively intentionally accepted a lower salary ($3 million) for her role as Lily Bloom, while securing an executive producer credit. This mirrors Reynolds’s initial approach with “Deadpool,” where he reportedly took a pay cut to demonstrate commitment to the project. The lower budget of “It Ends With Us” (reportedly $25 million, self-funded by Justin Baldoni’s Wayfarer Studios, with Sony as co-distributor) allegedly made it easier for Lively to exert influence.
- Wait Until 50% of the Budget is Spent: Bopping’s analysis suggests Lively waited until a significant portion of the budget was used, including funds allocated to her character’s wardrobe. She then allegedly demanded changes to the wardrobe, causing budget overruns and tension with Baldoni, who had been developing his vision for the film for five years. Bopping posits that Baldoni couldn’t risk firing Lively at this stage, as the project was heavily reliant on her involvement.
- Take Over the Script and Leverage “Dragons”: The Bopping video claims Lively enlisted Reynolds to rewrite dialogue and scripts without consulting Baldoni or the screenwriter. The video references a text message where Lively calls Reynolds and Taylor Swift her “dragons,” implying they wielded significant influence. The analysis details an incident where Lively invited Baldoni to her home, where Reynolds and Swift allegedly pressured him to accept script changes.
- Exploit the Writer’s Strike: The production halt due to the actors’ and writers’ strikes provided Lively with an opportunity to renegotiate her contract, allegedly presenting a list of 17 non-negotiable demands, including increased creative control. Bopping argues Baldoni was in a vulnerable position due to budget constraints and the importance of Lively’s participation for Sony.
- Infiltrate the Editing and Extend the Access: According to Bopping, after filming, Lively allegedly gained access to the editing bay during Baldoni’s protected director’s cut period. The video claims she extended her access to 10 days, replaced original editors with her own hires (including someone who worked with Reynolds on “Deadpool”), and even influenced the firing of the original composer due to Taylor Swift’s alleged personal issues with him. The video further states Lively’s cut was then forced to compete with the director’s cut.
- Threatening to Not Promote: The video claims that Blake threatened to leave the project, take the book’s author with her, and make zero marketing appearances if her cut wasn’t picked.
- Steal Producer Credit: The final goal, according to the Bopping video, was for Lively to secure a formal producer credit, transforming her career and allowing her to negotiate higher salaries and backend deals in future projects. The analysis suggests Lively met the criteria for a PGA mark by influencing the story, hiring key personnel, supervising post-production, and contributing to the music and marketing.
The Ultimate Goal: A Colleen Hoover Empire? (Bopping’s Theory)
The Bopping video concludes by suggesting that Lively and Reynolds’s ultimate goal is to secure the rights to all of Colleen Hoover’s books and build an exclusive film franchise.
It’s important to note that these are just claims made in a YouTube analysis by “Bopping.” There has been no official confirmation on any of these points.
Disclaimer: This article is based solely on the claims and information presented in the provided YouTube transcript from the “Bopping” channel. It does not represent verified facts or the views of this writer.

Bolanle Media covers a wide range of topics, including film, technology, and culture. Our team creates easy-to-understand articles and news pieces that keep readers informed about the latest trends and events. If you’re looking for press coverage or want to share your story with a wider audience, we’d love to hear from you! Contact us today to discuss how we can help bring your news to life
Film Industry
Actors Win AI Deal – But Your Face Is Still Training the Machine

SAG-AFTRA’s new rules on digital replicas are being framed as a major win for performers. But while actors gained stronger rights around consent and compensation, the bigger fight over AI training data is still far from settled.
May 20, 2026 · 3 min read
The headline win
In Hollywood, the latest SAG-AFTRA agreements are being described as “historic” because they finally force studios to be more explicit about how artificial intelligence can be used in connection with a performer’s work. Actors now have stronger protections around consent, compensation, and transparency when producers want to create a “digital replica” of their face, body, or voice.

That is not a small shift. For years, performers feared being scanned once and reused indefinitely, sometimes under vague contract language they had little power to negotiate. These new guardrails move AI out of the fine print and into the center of the conversation.
Where the loophole is
The problem is that most of these protections are built around the use of digital replicas, not the broader issue of training data. In other words, a contract may now be clearer about when a studio can create an AI version of you, while still saying much less about whether your performance can be analyzed, stored, and used to teach AI systems how to generate human-like acting in the future.
That distinction matters. A performer can be protected from one obvious form of replacement while still contributing to the system that may eventually replace them. The AI may not legally “be” you without permission, but it can still learn from you.
Why performers are worried
What actors bring to the screen is not just a face or a voice. It is timing, micro-expressions, emotional instinct, and a set of creative choices developed over years of work. Those are exactly the kinds of patterns modern AI systems are designed to absorb when they are trained on large collections of audio and visual material.

That is why many performers see the current moment as both a win and a warning. Yes, the industry has finally acknowledged that digital cloning needs boundaries. But until contracts and laws deal directly with AI training data, the protections remain incomplete.
What happens next
The legal system is still catching up. Existing copyright rules were not built for a world where a machine can study style, likeness, and performance at scale without copying a single clip in a way that is easy to challenge. Some new laws are beginning to address deepfakes, publicity rights, and consent-based standards, but the framework is still uneven.
For now, the burden remains on performers to read every AI clause carefully, question any language involving scans or reuse, and push for specific limits on how their work can be used beyond the immediate project. The contracts may have moved the line, but they have not ended the fight.
The real issue is no longer just whether AI can copy you. It is whether it can study you long enough to build something that competes with you.
In that sense, this is the contradiction at the center of the AI era in entertainment: actors may have won important new protections, but their faces, voices, and performances are still helping train the machine.
Advice
How to Make Your Indie Film Pay Off Without Losing Half to Distributors

Making an independent film is often a labor of love that can take years, countless hours, energy, and a significant financial investment. Yet, for many indie filmmakers, the hardest part is recouping that investment and making money once the film is finished. A common pitfall is losing a large portion of revenue—often half or more—to sales agents, distributors, and marketing expenses. However, with the right knowledge, strategy, and effort, indie filmmakers can maximize their film’s earnings without giving away so much control or profit.

Here is a comprehensive guide to keeping more of your film’s revenue and ensuring your film gets the audience and financial return it deserves.
Understanding the Distribution Landscape
Most indie filmmakers traditionally rely on sales agents and distributors to get their films to audiences. Sales agents typically take 15-20%, and distributors can take another 20-35%, easily cutting your revenue share by half right from the start. Additionally, marketing costs that may be deducted can range from a few thousand to upwards of $15,000, further eating into profits. The accounting is often opaque, making it difficult to know how much you truly earned.
Distributors nowadays tend to focus on worldwide rights deals and use aggregators to place films on streaming platforms like Amazon, Apple TV, and Tubi. These deals often do not fetch the best revenue for most indie filmmakers. Many distributors also do limited outreach, reaching only a small number of potential buyers, which can limit the sales opportunities for your film.
Becoming Your Own Sales Agent
One of the most important shifts indie filmmakers must make today is to become their own sales agents. Instead of relying entirely on intermediaries, you should learn the art and business of distribution:
- Research and build an extensive list of distributors worldwide. Top filmmakers have compiled lists of hundreds of distributors by country and genre. Going wide increases your chances of multiple revenue deals.
- Send personalized pitches to hundreds of distributors, showcasing your finished film, cast details (including social media following), genre, logline, and trailer. Ask if they want to see the full feature.
- Don’t settle for a single distributor or a big-name company that may not prioritize your film. Instead, aim for multiple minimum guarantees (MGs) from niche distributors in individual territories like Germany, Japan, and the UK.
- Maintain transparent communication and track every outreach effort carefully.

Pitching and Marketing Tips
When pitching your film:
- Highlight key genre elements and target audience since distributors are often risk-averse and look for specific film types.
- Include social media metrics or fanbase counts, which can make your film more attractive.
- Provide a strong one-minute trailer and a concise logline.
- Be prepared for rejections; even a 5% positive response rate is success.
Marketing is also crucial and can’t be left solely to distributors. Understanding and managing your marketing efforts—or at least closely overseeing budgets and strategies—ensures your film stands out and reaches viewers directly.
Self-Distribution and Hybrid Models
If traditional distribution offers no appealing deals, self-distribution can be a viable option:
- Platforms like Vimeo On Demand, Amazon Prime Direct, and YouTube allow you to upload, price, and market your film directly to audiences while retaining full creative and revenue control.
- Aggregators like Filmhub and Quiver help place self-distributed films on multiple streaming services, often for a reasonable fee or revenue share.
- The hybrid distribution model combines some traditional distribution deals with self-distribution, maximizing revenue streams, audience reach, and control over your film’s destiny.
Takeaway: Be Proactive and Entrepreneurial
The indie filmmaking world is now as much about entrepreneurship as artistry. Knowing distribution essentials, taking ownership of your sales process, and actively marketing your film are no longer optional—they are key for financial success.
By investing time in outreach, exploring multiple territories, securing minimum guarantees, and considering hybrid or self-distribution approaches, indie filmmakers can keep more of their earnings, increase their film’s audience, and avoid being sidelined by opaque deals and slim returns.
The days of handing your film over to a distributor and hoping for the best are gone. The winning formula today is to be your own sales agent, marketer, and advocate—empowered to make your indie film pay off.
Business
What the Michael Biopic Means for Every Indie Filmmaker

The Michael Jackson biopic Michael is more than celebrity drama; it is a real-time lesson in how legal decisions can quietly rewrite a story that millions of people will see. You do not need a $200M budget for the same forces—contracts, settlements, and rights issues—to shape or even erase key parts of your own work.

What Happened to Michael
The film Michael originally included a third act that addressed the 1993 child sexual abuse allegations and their impact on Jackson’s life and career. Trade reports say this version showed investigators at Neverland Ranch and dramatized the scandal as a turning point in the story. After cameras rolled, lawyers for the Jackson estate realized there was a clause in the settlement with accuser Jordan Chandler that barred any depiction or mention of him in a movie.
Because of that old agreement, the filmmakers had to remove all references to Chandler and rework the ending so the story stopped years earlier, in the late 1980s at Jackson’s commercial peak.
According to reporting, this meant roughly 22 days of reshoots, costing around 10–15 million dollars and pushing the total budget over 200 million.
Meanwhile, actress Kat Graham confirmed her portrayal of Diana Ross was cut for “legal considerations,” showing how likeness and approval issues can wipe out an entire character even after filming.
For audiences, the result is a movie that intentionally avoids one of the most controversial chapters of Jackson’s life, which some critics argue makes the portrait feel incomplete or selectively curated.
The Hidden Power of Contracts and Rights
The key detail in the Michael story is that a contract signed decades ago could dictate what present-day filmmakers are allowed to show. That settlement clause did not just affect the people who signed it; it effectively controlled the narrative of a big-budget film made years later. This is how legal documents become invisible co-authors: they quietly set boundaries around what your story can and cannot include.
Creators face similar invisible lines with:
- Life-rights and defamation: If you dramatize real people, especially in a negative light, they can claim defamation or invasion of privacy if your portrayal is inaccurate or harmful.
- Copyright and trademarks: Unlicensed music, clips, logos, or artwork can trigger copyright or trademark claims that block distribution or force expensive changes.
- Distribution contracts: Some deals give distributors the right to re-edit, retitle, or repackage your work without your approval unless you negotiate otherwise.
Legal commentary warns that fictionalizing real events and people carries heightened risk because audiences tend to connect your dramatization back to actual individuals. That risk does not disappear just because you are “small” or “indie”; impact, not audience size, usually determines exposure.
Why This Matters for Indie Filmmakers and Creators
Independent filmmakers often choose the indie route precisely to maintain creative control, but they can face more risk if they skip legal planning. Common problems include unclear ownership of the script, missing music licenses, handshake agreements with collaborators, and no written permission to use locations or people’s likenesses. These are the kinds of issues that can derail distribution, block a streaming deal, or force last-minute cuts that fundamentally change your story.
Legal guides for indie filmmakers consistently emphasize a few realities:
- You do not fully “own” your film unless you have clear contracts for writing, directing, producing, and underlying rights.
- Unregistered or unlicensed creative elements (like music and logos) can make your project uninsurable or unattractive to distributors.
- Fixing legal problems after the fact is almost always more expensive and limiting than planning for them at the beginning.
So when you watch Michael skip over certain events, you are seeing, in exaggerated form, the same forces that can shape an indie short, web series, documentary, or podcast episode.
Practical Legal Lessons You Can Apply Now
You do not need a law degree, but you do need a basic legal strategy for your creative work. Here are practical steps drawn from entertainment-law and indie-film resources:
- Clarify who owns the story
- Use written agreements with co-writers, directors, and producers that state who owns the script and finished film.
- If your work is based on a real person or memoir, secure life-rights or written permission where appropriate, especially if the portrayal is sensitive.
- Be intentional with real people and events
- When telling true or inspired-by-true stories, avoid making specific, negative claims about identifiable people unless they are well-documented and legally vetted.
- Change names, details, and circumstances enough that the person is not clearly identifiable if you do not have their cooperation.
- Lock down music and visuals
- Use original scores, licensed tracks, or reputable libraries; never assume you can keep a song just because it is in a rough cut.
- Clear artwork, logos, and recognizable brands, or replace them with generic or custom-designed alternatives.
- Protect yourself in contracts
- When signing any distribution or platform deal, read the clauses about editing, retitling, and marketing carefully; ask for limits or at least consultation rights.
- Include terms that let you reclaim rights if a partner fails to release the work, goes dark, or breaches key promises.
- Document everything
- Keep organized copies of releases, licenses, and contracts; these documents are part of your project’s value and proof of your rights.
- Register your work where applicable (for example, copyright), which strengthens your ability to enforce your rights if someone copies you.
Education-focused legal resources repeatedly stress that preventative steps—basic contracts, clear permissions, and simple registrations—are far cheaper than dealing with takedowns, lawsuits, or forced rewrites later.
The Big Takeaway: Story and Law Are Connected
The Michael biopic illustrates what happens when legal obligations and creative vision collide: whole characters disappear, endings are rewritten, and the public only sees a version of the story that fits within old contracts.
As an indie filmmaker, writer, or content creator, you may not have millions at stake, but you do have something just as valuable—your voice and your ability to tell the story you meant to tell.
Understanding the legal dimensions of your work is not a distraction from creativity; it is a way of protecting it. When you know where the legal boundaries are, you can design stories that are bold, truthful, and still safe enough to reach the audiences they deserve.
Advice1 day agoHow to Make Your Indie Film Pay Off Without Losing Half to Distributors
Advice1 day agoHow to Find Your Voice as a Filmmaker
News3 weeks agoFIPRM Expands Into Sports, Partners With Bolanle Media to Launch New Media Platform
Business2 weeks agoWhat the Michael Biopic Means for Every Indie Filmmaker
Entertainment3 weeks agoMother’s Day AfroFun Praise Party: Gospel Dance, Fitness & Feel‑Good Stats in 60 Minutes
Business5 days agoGLOBAL SUSTAINABILITY SUMMIT RETURNS FOR ITS 5TH EDITION AT THE BRITISH PARLIAMENT – HOUSE OF LORDS, PALACE OF WESTMINSTER
News3 hours agoCan AI Really Steal Your Fingerprints From a Selfie?
Film Industry2 hours agoActors Win AI Deal – But Your Face Is Still Training the Machine




























