Fired from Fantastic Beasts
๐ค
shareWow.
share
MovieChat Forums > Johnny Depp Discussion > Fired from Fantastic Beasts
Amber Heard won
shareHe's too much of a fantastic actor for that crap anyway.
share[deleted]
Its not just this movie. His career in studio movies is done. It's indie movies, if anything, now. Media is, not surprisingly, treating this like Depp was convicted and Heard proven to be telling the truth.
shareWe should all believe Heard.
First, false allegations VERY rarely happen, so even bringing it up borders on a derailment tactic. It's a microscopic risk in comparison to the issue at hand (worldwide, systemic oppression of half the population).
And more importantly: The benefit of all of us getting to finally tell the truth + the impact on victims FAR outweigh the loss of any one man's reputation.
Sorry. If some innocent men's reputations have to take a hit in the process of undoing the patriarchy, that is a price I am absolutely willing to pay.
Trouble is only one of the two involved in this was ever arrested for domestic abuse... Amber, yet the media ignores that and claims he is the abuser. The simple fact is the evidence in the trial never showed and proof that Depp ever hit her, none. The problem is this was a defamation trial where he was supposed to prove his innocence rather than the paper needing to prove accusation. It is next to impossible to prove you are not a wife beater since you would need to have cameras going 24 7 all the time to show you were innocent.
shareTrue unless you're rich then there is something always in play with these types of women.
shareYou already wrote this before word by word so you are either trolling or are preaching your religion. But from your post I can read you dont really care if Depp is innocent or not just as long as believe all women movement stays strong which means you actually do believe Depp is in the right and innocent but dont want to admit it. Otherwise you would just state all the evidence against him instead of saying it is not important if he did it or not.
shareIf YOU are willing the pay the price then i hope i will see you in prison, falsely accused of something.
Unless my sarcasm detector is broken ...
"Media is, not surprisingly, treating this like Depp was convicted and Heard proven to be telling the truth."
Which is exactly the truth, Heard was in the right.
No it simply shows that Depp was unable to show that they had no reason to believe he was guilty when they printed the story. Even if amber said at the trial that she lied about everything the paper would have still been found innocent as when they published the story the evidence was strong enough against him.
shareThat's true about libel cases in the US, but looking at the judge's decision, in this case he actually does write that the paper's story was true, in his opinion. He actually goes through the evidence Depp had and dismisses it all. Heard said that Depp cut the end of his own finger off, he believes the evidence is strong that Depp's story is false.
shareWhat is very odd with the judges decision is that it completely ignores all evidence by health care worker, police officers, Amber's own personal assistant and others which all provided evidence counter to Amber's testimony. One is left wondering if Amber was blowing the judge while he was writing the opinion. In most instances you would at the very least explain why you believed one lone person over the testimony of several other people... what the judge has implied is that the police were lying as was everyone else that testified to Amber making shit up.
shareMaybe Ambers lawyer found some dirt on the judge from way back lol
or maybe the judge just didnt want to go against the current #Metoo movement lest somebody starts digging stuff up on him! (we've all got some)
Overall Depp should've thought twice about bringing it to court
I haven't read the entire decision because it's a long document, but it looks like the judge is the type that believes that women do not lie about these things, a woman's word is all the evidence you need. He doesn't state it directly, but time after time, Heard's testimony was enough to refute Depp's evidence. Heard swears that the audio Depp had isn't what it sounds like, then that's it. Refuted.
Amber is recorded mocking Depp saying no one will believe him while displaying no fear whatsoever and trying to extort him for money. Not exactly symptoms of a victim. She was also screwing Musk at the same time so if you wonder if the judge may be bought wink wink
shareATTENTION, ATTENTION, M.R.A. NUTTERS AND OTHER IRRATIONAL PERSONS!!
Depp wasn't just fired because of the court case, he was fired because they were paying him a shit-ton of money, and recent changes in the film industry require massive cost-cutting. With the movie theater attendance expected to decline permanently, movies have to be made for less, and that includes franchise films.
So Depp was expensive, his foolish decision to pursue his ex wife in court had brought him years of bad publicity, and he was doing a crap job anyway. As Hollywood changes and adapts, he has been made an example of what needs to go.
The problem with your theory is it assume the pandemic will continue forever. It won't. The other problem is apparently quite a few scenes are now going to have to be re-shot which isn't going to be cheap to do it will only increase the price. You also assume that he isn't going to walk away with a huge chunk of money, remember he was asked to leave after he had already started work on the movie so it isn't like they get to avoid paying him anything. The wanted to dump him because of the vocal minority of woke warriors. One can only hope that at some point businesses will wake the fuck up and stop giving a shit about a small twitter mob that wants to tell the world what to think and how to act.
shareBy the time the pandemic ends and people who understand disease prevention are willing to go back to theaters, many movie theaters will have closed, and FYI a major theater chain in my area recently announced it's gone for good. So after the pandemic ends there were be fewer movie theaters and more home streaming, permanently, and the movie-making industry has to adapt to a whole new economic picture. I've already said that this means the end of the tentpole blockbuster film, the kind that $300 million to make and which earns more than a billion back, and it also means the end of blockbuster salaries for actors. From now on, movies will have to be made for less, until openings on streaming become as big a deal as the opening of the latest Avengers extravaganza.
So Depp's firing is part of a trend, something that sends a message to the rest of the industry about the New Order. No more dead wood, no more huge salaries, no more unprofessional behavior onset, no more lazy performances that rely on makeup, no more personal bad publicity, no more room for the self-indulgent self-destructive likes of Depp! The latest personal issue merely marked the time they decided that franchise continuity wasn't enough to make him worth the trouble, because the new Hollywood is lean and mean, with an emphasis on MEAN.
FB3 was never going to cost 300 million to make, but if they were going to cut costs and that was their goal then Depp is far from the only person they should cut. Frankly if cutting costs is all that matters they could trim costs much further and not notice much at all... Find someone to just reuse the old music from past movies would cut about 1 to 2 million from the budget by eliminating a full composer and orchestra... Dump Jude Law, I mean for the love of god Dumblefdorf has already been played by 3 different people so why not a 4th... and on and on.
shareWell firing Depp reportedly saves $20 mil a film, a significant savings. Especially since nobody liked his makeup or his performance.
shareIt might save 20 million on 4 and 5, and it will eliminate the backend payments to Depp... But I don't know if it will cut the up-front cost on the one in current production. It really depends on how the contract was written. It is possible that Depp will still get the 20 million he was supposed to get upfront. Frankly I would expect that to be the case or he wouldn't have been so willing to step aside when Warner asked him to. Remember this wasn't a case of Warner saying you're fired it was one where they apparently asked him to step aside and then he did. I doubt someone would agree to walk away from 20 million, I suspect if he didn't get the full 20 he probably got a big part of it or he wouldn't have walked.
shareSpecially taking into account that Amber Heard is probably gonna ask for more money. Nowadays, when you hear the world "abuse", you know the following word is "money".
And btw, what's the point of alimony here? Alimony made sense when we were talking about a housewife that had been taking care of her family her whole life and suddenly got divorced, so she didn't become homeless.
But Amber Heard has a salary way higher than any user here, and she never has been a housewife in her whole fucking life.
It was never really an alimony payment in the normal sense of the term alimony. The 7 million payment was a settlement to end the marriage, it was classified as an alimony payment for tax reasons. Depp could write off the 7 million on his taxes no questions asked. While a settlement would likely be deductible as well, it would not be guaranteed to be accepted by the IRS like the alimony payment. It would have been possible for the IRS to see the 7 million settlement as simply splitting assets from the marriage which would not have been deductible by Depp. Of course Amber's lawyer in this instance wasn't on the ball because they should have been making every attempt to get the payment classed as the result of assets being split up because when it was classed as alimony she would then be liable for the taxes on the money.
However what I just said does not apply to any divorces now because the tax laws changed at the end of 2019 and alimony is no longer deductible by the person paying nor is it taxable to the person getting it.
People like Heard don't get alimony.
They get community property, and they get hush money.
Hey "woke" person,if Depp was fired only for money like you claim,he would have been fired before they started to film!
shareThis isn't the case with other expensive, A list actors. Think about what you write before you start accusing people of being nutters. The timing is not an accident.
shareThe timing implies it was not about the money it was only about the trial. Otherwise the accountants at Warners would have told the management to eliminate him and save even more money way back in the summer. I suspect that Warner thought Depp was actually going to win the trial like everyone else that followed it, otherwise they would have asked him to leave prior to October when they started back to work filming. Now they are going to have to reshoot any scene he was in which is going to cost them more money and push the completion of the film back even further.
shareServes him right!!!
shareAnd yet we still have Roman Polanski making films and living freely....
Disgusting.
Because what Roman Polanski did isn't that bad, he just sexual intercourse with a minor, and that girl want it.
Roman Polanski didn't beat women.
Would you want a 44 year old man to drug and then rape your 13 year old daughter? He drugged her, that says she didn't want it.
shareThat drug story isn't true, if that is true, her attorney wouldn't plea bargain for unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor.
shareYou have no clue. Attorneys will plea bargain all sorts of things away just to get an easy conviction. The fact is Polanski said in court that he was guilty and when he entered that plea he admitted that the facts against him were accurate. Those facts included drugging the 13 year old, he didn't use a ruffie like Cosby he gave her a valium and alcohol. He never denied that, he was just stupid in thinking that the judge wouldn't sentence him to prison for what he had admitted to doing. But in any instance where a person enters a guilty plea the judge will always take the what was alleged in the initial charges as facts. Those charged included the drugs and alcohol along with the age of the victim. Polanski's lawyer was an idiot for not explaining up front that he was going to prison.
shareYouโre going on about oppression of women and undoing the patriarchy and then you make this statement that what Polanski did by sodomomizing a 13 year old female child (who he gave wine and a quaalude to) while she sobbed and begged him to stop was not that bad?? This was after he lured her into the house with promises of making her a star. ๐คฎ
shareBecause what Roman Polanski did isn't that bad, he just sexual intercourse with a minor, and that girl want it.
Roman Polanski didn't beat women.
He fucked a little girl. And that IS bad. share
So slapping a woman is worse than raping a 13 year old??
GTFO.
And btw, since you are so keen on woke agenda, equality, etc then beating a woman is not worse than beating a man. And we shouldn't believe a woman over a man. Equality, bitch. So, again, GTFO.
She won so he is now blacklisted.
To be honest I thought he sucked in the role anyway.
To be honest it wouldn't have matter who was in the role, the movie would still have sucked. It only seemed to be a big deal because when the first one came out it was able to pull in the die hard Potter fans... but when the people that went to see it really thought about it they realized it wasn't that good. Their was potential for the series but frankly the lead was not a very good choice, Redmayne had all the charisma of a corpse in the movie.
shareAgree completely. I like the Grindelwald character, but I don't think he is written or portrayed well in the film.
shareWarner Bros is straight garbage for this, meanwhile she gets to continue working and shitting in peoples beds? Crazy world we're living in.
The reality is she is an admitted abuser, so the woke warriors need to boycott any actor or actress that ever appears in any new films with her until she is relegated to making porno movies where I'm sure she can help fill that twist niche for skat films.
share