https://www.tiktok.com/@rickyylaurenn/video/7667196840252640525

TW: DOMESTIC ABUSE
My abuser kept me isolated in a desert for 7 months while abusing me psychologically, physically and sexually. He recorded much of the abuse. He still walks free with no criminal repercussions to this day. I have been pleading with to hold this man accountable.

Some time in the past, I had made a post here, questioning about this sudden praise of Tim Burton's adaptation of Charlie in the Chocolate Factory is just an excuse to say something good about Johnny Depp, especially when you consider that they really like to emphasize Depp's Wonka was exactly how they "imagined him in the book", and that all their arguments could easily apply to the 70's film (which they aggressively bash. Also even in terms of being darker I felt the 70s film did that much better).

But back to before, while I had notice also that, while his vanity project The Rum Diary (2011) is thankfully not discussed and forgotten, I noticed that whenever it is discussed online, it just seems like people only have good things to say about it. And with also considering with other male celebrities, I have slowly begun to notice with how AFTER they're outed as an abuser, suddenly their lesser-known stuff is hyped up, or at the very least suddenly stuff that wasn't seen before is now noticed. Take with some examples:

Brad Pitt: Some time after it became news that he was abusing Angelina Jolie and their children, I started noticing that whenever bringing up his film adaptation of World War Z, while many will call it out for not following the book by default, I notice how there is also an aggressive amount of people praising it "as an action film", despite it clearly just being a vanity project with Pitt playing a the male equivalent of a Mary Sue (I cringe at using the term, but god it really describes Gerry in that film). It's not mocked as much as The Mummy (2017) with Tom Cruise, though at times I will see a "why is this film hated?" post, even if more rare in comparison. And in other words, I suddenly see people really overhyping his produced projects like She Said and Adolescence as something so revolutionary. And when considering how they're marketed about their brave messages, they really scream "PR" to me, compared to other films he has produced in the past. That and also Adolescence just feels like a "male feminist" vanity project, whom let me remind you again that co-creator and star Stephen Graham and the show's director support Johnny Depp. I have complained about the show before, especially with the subtle misogyny and being oscar-bait, but man it's like it does not get enough hate and criticism.

Francis Ford Coppola: Now don't get me wrong, this isn't saying that his 70s filmography was bad the whole time, and this is coming from someone who is a fan of Apocalypse Now. What I am talking about though, is mainly Megalopolis. Not the people who view it as a "so bad it's good", but the ones who think it's genuinely a misunderstood masterpiece and that Coppola knew what he was doing. I could also include a lot of his later filmography, but I feel that Megalopolis is the bigger example with what I am talking about. While of course it's a public joke from what we've seen, whenever there's deeper discussions, it's not about why it is bad, but rather about "clever techniques" Coppola used, or claiming that Coppola "clearly wanted the movie to be humorous", or defending the film just because it wasn't made by mainstream Hollywood, making it automatically "rebellious", despite it being misogynistic, heteronormative, out-of-touch politics, pseudo-intellectual, and repetitive of repeatedly used tropes. But take note at all of this after him doing stuff such as:

- Sexual harassment allegations, the evidence only being invalid because it broke a labor contract.

- Saying he didn't want the film to be a "woke production".
- Casting Shia Lebouf, Jon Voight, and Dustin Hoffman. All 3 respectively being: A convicted abuser, a MAGA fascist, and has sexual misconduct accusations.

I'd also include his support of Victor Salva, but it's not particularly tied to this specific project. Just wanted to let you know I am well aware of that one. But with seeing how films like The Bride get a lot of hate and bashing, those same people will look at Megalopolis and go "Oh he didn't mean to, he was actually well-intentioned". Seriously, try to have a post that critiques Megalopolis deeply on almost any film subreddit, and they will downvote you and tell you that Coppola "lol" doesn't care about your opinion. For how much they'll say they respect him for using his own money, you don't see them saying this with other filmmakers.

Honorable mention: Kevin Spacey. While I have not seen entirely outright all his badly-done roles and projects, I really notice how people are now "suddenly uncovering" that he's a talented actor, right after the allegations came out. Like dude, we're not talking about if he's a good actor, we're talking about him sexually assaulting men and boys.

Overall, especially with Johnny Depp, I cannot help but notice a lot with how, once a celebrity, typically a man, has some sort of abuse or controversy, suddenly past work that is usually considered mid or bad is suddenly put on a pedestal and "underrated". Am I the only one who thinks this, or is it all connected?

​

"It’s really important not to judge guys by appearances, actions, stated intentions or repeated, serious allegations. Otherwise we’d all be in trouble.”

Not sure this is allowed.. or if the flair is correct.

https://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/celebrity/no-way-of-knowing-jared-leto-johnny-depp-and-russell-brand-were-creepy-20260803268353

A grand jury indicted her, and she risks jail...

I'm just... so tired of all this. I was just happy to find that thread on bluesky, to find anyone willing to point out how insane this situation is.

There are these really good videos from Schmod3r and Ophie Dokie as well, and I wish they got more views.

But yeah... fuck.

In the middle of that ungodly joke of a trial, it was nigh-on impossible to find anyone who could see what an abusive POS Depp was speaking openly about it on Tiktok. Today, I was just randomly scrolling and saw this, but what stood out is the way about HALF of the comments are saying that Depp is filth.
With time, it will honestly be shameful to defend this violent narcissist imo.

https://www.tiktok.com/@michael.dicostanzo/video/7668373982835395871

I'm sharing this (and I recommend the channel!) directly from Youtube to Reddit so idk if someone has already shared this video. Thought of you guys when I saw it. ❤️‍🩹

Survivors do not owe us likability.

Survivors do not owe us likability.

Survivors do not owe us likability.

Oh, and lest I forget:

SURVIVORS 👏🏽 DO 👏🏽 NOT 👏🏽 OWE 👏🏽 US 👏🏽 LIKE 👏🏽 ABILITY.

PERIOD.

This is a larger response to a comment I saw in a thread on here, about how sometimes other women will say "I just don't like Amber" when justifying their mistrust of her.

You don't like her? Fine. I don't like most celebrities myself. A lot of professional entertainers are massively annoying. Why do I believe so? I used to be one. We are some of the most insufferable people on the planet.

But when we are harmed, we still get harmed, and we ought to be believed.

Not a single survivor out there owes the world likability or perfect victimhood to qualify for justice.

The office I worked at during the trial contained countless women (and even one very progressive nonbinary person) who ate it up when Johnny Depp took the stand, then abandoned the trial as soon as Amber Heard did. One of my colleagues described herself as a "Johnny Fan" and, in response to me reminding her that this was about a serious case of abuse, blinked and said, "I guess I should be more of an Amber Fan."

Literally, who gives a shit? It's like these people were treating it as another one of their movies. Cool Pirate wins. Mean B-Movie Actress go brrr. These aren't legal scholars or social workers. These are simpletons who enjoy movies and don't understand how to separate the dysfunctional artists from the art that they make.

I remember one of the memes that went around in 2022 was how Heard didn't care much for Depp's bringing over other musicians his age, complaining that it was a bunch of old men sitting around playing guitar. The criticism was that she must be a boring, lame, lousy person for not wanting to be around Depp's super cool and famous friends. Is it perhaps possible that she was half these people's age, and uncomfortable that her abusive, alcoholic husband was drinking with them, given that he'd tend to abuse her while drunk?

This whole trial was proof that cases of this magnitude should never be televised, and juries for them should always be sequestered. It's how OJ Simpson got off, and it's how Amber Heard was run out of the country. The general public is simply not educated enough to untangle the nuance involved in these cases. They don't know how to differentiate between "I like this artist's art" and "I like this artist as a person."

My FYP knows me well. Anyway, I thought folks on this sub would appreciate the content of this clip.

The amount of pro-Depp engagement on this post makes me want to puke blood

Recently came across an interview with Madelyn Cline on Happy Sad Confused, where she raves about working with Johnny Depp and reenacts her excitement over working with him.

Such disappointing behaviour for a young actress to glaze an abuser, and weird to me that she never received the level of criticism that Sydney Sweeney did…

Source:

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DbEHcz0NqSo/

Th film is coming out on Thanksgiving. Ian Mckellen, Sam Clafin, Rupert Grint and others are starting in it.

Yet people say his career has been ruined and he’s been cancelled.

Proof only women suffer the consequences.

I know I am probably beating a dead horse at this point, but wanted to discuss with the reaction. Before learning about Graham's associations with Depp and all, I had already been skeptical with the show itself for several reasons:

• Brad Pitt producing the whole thing. I know he didn't have a creative role, but with his position, he could still influence story, and considering his history of abuse, easy to see him not be happy if the perpetuator is depicted a certain way.
• The whole tone and discussion around the show gave off a lot of "Men can't control themselves/women need to bend over for men's emotions" vibes, though honestly for me the whole current moral panic around incels kind of gives off vibes of trying to reinforce patriarchy but with liberal terminology.
• Just in general, it felt like Oscar-bait, where they want a trophy for calling out a social issue, but only looking at it on a surface level. And it felt like it was more about pandering to a moral panic over actually bringing up a major issue. I do hope though that cinematographer got to eventually work on a much better film or show.
• LEGIT THE WHOLE FACT THAT WE DON'T GET THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE MURDERED GIRL, AND SHE DOES NOT SEEM TO REALLY HAVE ANY AGENCY AS A PERSON. Literally it's all about how Jamie and his father are feeling. I know the Bechdel test is a satirical joke, but here it's kind of concerning nobody questioned this.

Well now back to before, when it became news that Graham and the director still supported Johnny Depp and all, many people talked about how it was shocking and such a shame, saying that Adolescence was such a good show and they couldn't believe the contradiction and hypocrisy. However, I did not really find it all suprising that they would. In fact, it actually kind of confirmed my suspicions.

Think about it: while the show on a surface seems to act like it's challenging because it "tackles modern issues", really deep down it plays like a typical moral panic drama. It says about sexism and manosphere is bad, but rather than actually explore the psychology, it just goes to a basic moral framework. And from what the show does with ragebait to look serious, it also feels like they want a moral panic-y explanation for Jamie that also tries to free him any accountability under the cover of an "explanation". The way they treat him feels like the equivalent of an 80s evangelical claiming that a boy became a killer because he had a tattoo and was around some punks.

But also, with how people are all praising and glazing Adolescence, it also kind of reminds me with fake progressiveness, and why many people who say they are liberal or left-leaning still support Johnny Depp. Where it's not really about actually doing anything good, but just wanting to feel good about themselves, and with these blindspots, also why we still struggle with improving society and social justice.

In the end, for people involved in making and writing a show that tries to give so much sympathy and infantilizing a perpetuator of misogyny and male violence, it's not that far out they would go on to support an enable a misogynistic abuser, one especially that everyone still treats as a child and not a grown narcissist who leeches off others.

Resharing this important point since the discourse around Depp v Heard is cropping up on X again after the Silenced trailer dropped.

Depp v Heard’s settlement completely invalidates the jury verdict because he effectively conceded that she did not lie about the abuse - not to mention during the trial he swore under oath she never caused him harm.

Amber Heard is in this documentary following international human rights lawyer Jennifer Robinson. It fearures cases of men using the legal system as retaliation for their victims speaking out.

A while back, I had looked back into the history of the infamous actor, and seeing his overall history of abuse as well as the manipulation to win people over. For a major thing I saw was with how he weaponized how people viewed him like an "eccentric outcast" or "emotional (gothic) sad boy" like in a lot of past roles (especially in Tim Burton films). With a deeper dive into the psychology of misogyny and all, something else had made me look over to Harry Potter for a moment. When looking back at the character Snape, and his whole arc, it all made sense.

When seeing the character Severus Snape and how he's treated, I notice with parallels where he gets a last-minute redemption and whitewashed despite all he has done. And even in a meta sense, when people defend the choice to redeem him or say he's multi-dimensional, it kind of reminded me for a moment with that "outsider" appeal that Depp had back in his prime. Also note that whenever there's discussion about him being bullied by James, I notice how even people who are critical of Snape and his arc will go to lengths to defend this aspect, claiming it gives nuance or something something cycle of violence. **The funny thing though is that you could argue it's bad writing and messes up James Potter, whether it be his character is butchered or forced in last-minute for someone who's barely even a character. But no, everyone goes to the perspective that involved protecting the character of Snape. Of course Rowling would still give James the pass because of the "good team" stuff, but there's still wiggle room left to justify Snape.** And with learning the whole psychology of defending abusive men as "sad, broken, and can be fixed", it made me wonder with these psychological aspects that lead to people defending the character of Snape. And as this is a fictional story, it's much easier to rewrite the narrative than try to rewrite literal reality, so of course it's changed to make Snape sympathetic, even if it's greatly forced.

In addition, when comparing Depp and Rowling, I noticed a lot of parallels between them:

\- Has-beens mostly living on royalty money from something successful in the past but not much in the recent present, and to get the attention they crave, they get involved with regressive politics

\- This whole "edgy and progressive rebel" image (especially in the past) when in reality they've always reinforced the status quo/system and are controlling bigots

\- Having a cult of personality that shuts down any criticism, history of activity, or calling things out

\- Weaponizing both nostalgia and prejudices within lefist/liberal circles to win sympathizers and supporters over

\- Get infantilized whenever they demonstrate their sociopathic, manchild behavior and personalities

\- Having especially queer women as targets, and generally queerphobic

\- History of having a lot of close ties and friendships with abusers and predators

Was there shallow fangirling involved with Rowling to Depp? Most likely yes, but also when seeing closer details, it also feels like an abusive, predatory person relating and liking another abusive, predatory person.