It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Interesting, good casting if it happens.
I really feel they could have avoided all of this when, when Colin Farrel received such a positive and popular reaction from fans. They should have just kept him in the role.
It will continue, sadly.
They're gliding down a slippery slope. Ban every actor who's ever done something inexcusable or said anything sensitive, boycott every director or producer who's ever likewise done something that apparently makes him worse than Satan, and you've got a very small Hollywood left indeed. No Finding Forrester, no Jeepers Creepers, no The Ghost Writer.
I'm surprised they'll make another FB in the first place. Wasn't J.K.R. the worst person on Earth for her "women" statements?
But hey, Depp can be replaced by worse actors than Mads. I just don't think Depp should've been replaced in the first place.
I'm not sure what to say on this matter, sad to see him go. It seems that the decision is based on the recent trial, which was Depp against a tabloid for trashing his name. Those cases are rarely ever won in the UK due to their laws. After losing out on Jack Sparrow, at least he had this, now they've cowered away. Meanwhile, Amber Turd is getting her paycheck for Snyder Cut scenes and maybe Aquaman 2 as well. A lot of fans have came for depp support, although it's not going to change anything. The more woke they go, the more broke they will become.
You are seriously calling her "Amber Turd"??? Or was that a typo??
That's completely wrong: they're quite often won against tabloids. You're much more likely to win a libel case in the UK because the burden of proof is on the journalist to prove what they wrote is true (and they often lose), unlike in the US where the person bringing the claim of libel has to prove that what they say is true. I think in this case it just seems a lot of the allegations were true. If you feel you can prove otherwise, go for it.
Thing is, after everything that came out in the trial regarding his extreme behaviour I can well imagine them being worried he's likely to get himself sent to jail or maybe even accidentally kill himself halfway through them filming the thing, which isn't any sort of moral judgement but just a purely financial one when you have movies costing this amount of money. You may also have insurers saying they won't insure his participation in the film or will only do so at a higher price, so again: money. And yes, also you have the risk of more stories or some other skeleton coming out of the cupboard when you're trying to promote the movie, overshadowing the whole thing.
I don't know if these are their reasons for ditching him, but they would seem like not unreasonable possibilities. It might not be the morally puritanical crusade you see it as but just a financial one.
The burden of proof was on Depp to prove what they wrote was wrong, he sued the paper for printing those lies about him, in this particular case there is a lot of links between the judge and Amber’s legal team. Another thing is, the judge’s son works for Dan Wooton with Murdoch media. Dan Wooton was the man being sued by Depp for using the phrase “wife beater” in an article he wrote for The Sun.
There was actually no proof whatsoever that Depp ever abused her, physically or otherwise. But the case wasn’t about that, it was about whether there was enough to prove that he DIDN’T abuse her. The judge ruled he was unable to prove he hadn't done the things he was accused of - that’s not the same as proving he had done it though, it just suggests there wasn’t enough evidence that he hadn’t and that it’s just his word against hers. The problem is, he still had way more evidence than Heard (including a recording of her literally admitting to abusing him and saying "she can’t promise it won’t happen again"), and the judge was incredibly biased and inconsistent with his rulings, making allowances for Heard’s testimony that he didn’t make for Depp and dismissing valuable witness testimonies for no clear reason. I don't think this judge care, haven't you read the verdict? He discredited every johnny's witness by claiming to be loyal to him but he found her 4 witnesses(all friends and freeloaders) very reliable. The court ruled that Johnny didn't prove he didn't hit her. So instead of the accuser proving the guilt, the accused has to prove their innocence. I don't think they proved abuse, only that there was not libel from the Sun since her accusations could have been true at the time. The 12 out of 14 proven accusations aren't exactly proven, they are proven on the base that the accusations were made before they had proof of innocence. Meaning they never proved Johnny abused her, they proved that they could legally smear him on that basis of ignorance of evidence. That means the abuse wasn't proven, it just means they had proof they could smear him from 12 plausible accusations.
As for firing him,the rules that applies to him for being fired also applies to her for extremely abusive behavior. If you feel otherwise you can support her and prove he is wrong, go for it, more power to you ;) . From a political standpoint, Depp suing WB for firing him or opposing Court's decision too much would also likely end his career permanently, and cause studios to blacklist him. It's a "choosing the lesser of two evils" type of situation. After watching this judgement i fear he might even lose the actual case as well. In any case, i didn't watched the last film in theatre, i was going to watch this one but after reading so much about this case i don't think i will, so it's better i stop here :)
"News Group relied on a legal defence of truth, with the civil burden of proof on it to show that the claim was substantially accurate on the balance of probabilities."
"Defamation law is slightly different between England and Scotland but, in general terms, the onus is on the party who is accused of damaging someone's reputation to defend the words they used."
"Truth: The meaning of the words are factually accurate and cannot be disproved. This is The Sun's defence against Mr Depp - the newspaper has sought to prove that the allegation that Mr Depp is a "wife beater" is justified. In Scotland this defence is called "veritas"."
The Secrets of Dumbledore (Dutch Translation: De Geheimen van Perkamentus)
Also movies release date is pushed back to 3 months earlier. Half April 2022 insteed of July 2022.
Books (from what I remember):
Prisoner of Azkaban
Goblet of Fire
Order of the Phoenix
Chamber of Secrets
Quidditch Through The Ages
Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them
Love them all. I need to try and find a copy of the Tales of Beedle the Bard sometime.
The films (based on some less hazy memories):
Prisoner of Azkaban
Order of the Phoenix
Deathly Hallows Part 1
Chamber of Secrets
Deathly Hallows Part 2
Goblet of Fire
Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald
the top 6 are solid, the rest...not so much
I think the first four are significantly better than the last four, so I'd probably stop there... :P
Hopefully this will be an improvement on the first two films.
I wonder if Tom Riddle will appear in this. The events of the new film are set ten years after The Crimes of Grindlewald.
Now is a good time to rewatch my Boxset, there are some good films in this series.
It really took a nosedive once they appointed David Yates!
I've only read the first three books, I started Goblet but my young self was intimidated by it's size.
Really want to check out the Fantastic Beasts films even though I've heard they're not great.
The books are awesome, a gift that keeps giving. So are the films. I didn't really care for the first FB. I don't like Redmayne to be honest. He does a thing with his mouth like the guy from 'Some Mothers Do 'Ave 'Em' that I find repulsive. But the second one is pretty good. It goes back to Hogwarts and all.
I didn't realize he was mentioned at all in the mainline series, but I caught his name towards the end this time.
Still not really sure the implications of Grindelwald on the end of the mainline HP series, though. When he was young, he was messing around with the wand guy? Can't really remember.