J.K. Rowling: Johnny Depp & Amber Heard’s privacy ‘must be respected’

The European Premiere of 'Fantastic Beasts And Where To Find Them'

Many people believe J.K. Rowling is a goddess on earth, a brilliant writer, a wonderful tweeter, a passionate advocate for progressive causes, and more. I truly believe she’s all of those things and more – the world is a better place because JK Rowling exists. But no heroine is perfect, and no role model makes the right decisions every single time. As we previously discussed, Johnny Depp was cast in Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindelwald, based on Rowling’s screenplay. The fans were not and are not happy about Depp’s casting. The director, David Yates, already came out and tried to do some damage control, but Yates made it worse because he made it sound like Depp was only known to abuse just one woman, Amber Heard, and everybody gets one freebie at violent abuse, amirite? Many thought that Rowling should step in and say something. People were actually demanding that she speak about this. And now she has. From her blog:

When Johnny Depp was cast as Grindelwald, I thought he’d be wonderful in the role. However, around the time of filming his cameo in the first movie, stories had appeared in the press that deeply concerned me and everyone most closely involved in the franchise.

Harry Potter fans had legitimate questions and concerns about our choice to continue with Johnny Depp in the role. As David Yates, long-time Potter director, has already said, we naturally considered the possibility of recasting. I understand why some have been confused and angry about why that didn’t happen.

The huge, mutually supportive community that has grown up around Harry Potter is one of the greatest joys of my life. For me personally, the inability to speak openly to fans about this issue has been difficult, frustrating and at times painful. However, the agreements that have been put in place to protect the privacy of two people, both of whom have expressed a desire to get on with their lives, must be respected. Based on our understanding of the circumstances, the filmmakers and I are not only comfortable sticking with our original casting, but genuinely happy to have Johnny playing a major character in the movies.

I’ve loved writing the first two screenplays and I can’t wait for fans to see ‘The Crimes of Grindelwald’. I accept that there will be those who are not satisfied with our choice of actor in the title role. However, conscience isn’t governable by committee. Within the fictional world and outside it, we all have to do what we believe to be the right thing.

[From JK Rowling’s blog]

“… The agreements that have been put in place to protect the privacy of two people, both of whom have expressed a desire to get on with their lives, must be respected.” I understand that argument – who are we to incessantly bring it up when Amber and Johnny signed that mutual statement and worked out their deal? Except that he continued to be an abusive dick even after that, by withholding the divorce settlement money, and then donating the money to charity “on her behalf.” Not to mention the fact that OH RIGHT HE ABUSED HER. He abused her, gaslighted her publicly, sought to rip her to shreds in the press, had his friends call her a crazy golddigger, and then continued to financially abuse her after they were separated and divorced. This isn’t a situation where “oh well, we’ll never know what really happened.” We know what happened. Much of it happened in the public sphere.

Plus, if the argument is “well, Amber wants to move on too” – Amber was the victim. She wanted to get her abuser out of her life. Of course she wanted to move on. Her reasons for moving on and not wanting to live her life as “Johnny Depp’s Abused Ex-Wife” are completely different from the reasons why Johnny Depp wants to move on. Still, I end up having a sliver of sympathy for Rowling – she’s between a rock and a hard place and people are once again holding a woman accountable for the criminal acts of a man. Should Rowling have insisted that the role be recast? Sure. But let’s not pretend that she’s AS BAD as that abusive bag of scarves.

'Murder on the Orient Express' World Premiere - Arrivals

Photos courtesy of WENN.

 

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

133 Responses to “J.K. Rowling: Johnny Depp & Amber Heard’s privacy ‘must be respected’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Bex says:

    Didn’t Jo have to run from her violent first husband with her baby daughter? Surely she has the money and clout to do something about this. She’s the last person I expected to come out with a statement like this :(

  2. KJA says:

    Oh Jo….I guess everyone’s heroes are bound to disappoint them at some point. I just wish she hadn’t been one of them.

    • Alyce says:

      That is how I feel too. I am supremely disappointed by her statement. She knows better and can do better.

      I am not on the “she’s canceled” train because I think people are people and everyone is allowed to make occasional missteps. She has done more good than bad and I’m still a fan.

      But gosh it smarts to have someone you look up to be so wrong…

      • Sky says:

        @ Alyce

        I understand and agree that everyone makes mistakes. I’m not seeing this as a misstep though, she liked comments on Twitter that were calling Amber a liar and a gold digger and block people who question her on casting Johnny Depp. She allowed the director to trash Amber and calling her a liar in a interview. This for me is not a misstep, but JK blatantly choosing to ignore the photos and video and publicly supporting a abuser eyes wide open.

  3. Pyritedigger says:

    I will continue to not watch movies with Johnny Depp in them.

  4. Nicole says:

    I’m a huge HP fan. Huge. I’ve been reading this stories and watching these movies for most of my life now.
    She is not as bad as the abuser. She never will be. But again I’m not going to feel bad for holding men and women that work with abusers accountable. Because WHEN will they learn or feel consequences if people don’t STOP giving them pass after pass?!
    For this statement to be coming from a woman that created a world where the smallest of us can gather the courage to stand up to the biggest bully…she missed the mark big time.
    I’m done with Fantastic Beasts. She should’ve recast the role.

  5. Susan says:

    Oh, of course she’s not as bad as the actual abuser. But JK can consider herself cancelled too for this.
    Between this statement and Yates even if I were considering the FB series, they can forget seeing a dime of my money, which is all Hollywood cares about.
    Story should probably include Ambers response to this.

  6. laulau says:

    I’m a strong believer that domestic abusers can change through anger management, therapy, humility, sobriety and holding oneself accountable (obviously I’d still advise against dating that person). I have no way of knowing if Depp has done the work but he doesn’t seem sober or contrite. To me that is a huge warning sign of more bad behavior and egotistical nonsense to come.

  7. Annabelle Bronstein says:

    Hold Johnny Depp and all the powerful men that enabled him for years accountable. NOT JK Rowling, not Amber Heard.

  8. Maya says:

    Soo disappointed in JK. She is one of my role models so I hope she gets more information on the situation and gives another statement.

  9. Kata says:

    Oh man, I love JK nad am a huge HP fan, so I don’t know how to feel about this. And also, she often comes across as holier than thou on twitter ( which I don’t mind) which makes it even worse.

  10. Reef says:

    It’s all #MeToo, believe women, and let’s hold abusers accountable until it affects the bottom line or the abuser is someone they like. JK could’ve kept this statement.
    I don’t see how folks can see those pics of Amber’s face after he hit her and still roll with this he’s a harmless kitten narrative.

  11. Zapp Brannigan says:

    I just don’t get it, Johnny Deep is not that big of a draw anymore, the success of this film will not be relying on him so why not just recast. Hell recasting Kevin Spacey with Christopher Plummer is only delaying All the money in the world by three days.

  12. Lucy2 says:

    Her talk of respecting their privacy and the agreement…that’s all well and good, but you still don’t have to hire the guy!

  13. Josie says:

    She is happy to have him on board and I am happy to choose not to see any more of these movies.

    There are no words for my disappointment.

  14. klc says:

    If the shoe was on the other foot and a woman was cast in a high profile role and horrible stories came to light about her, she would be fired immediately.

    Now we are supposed to sit back and watch Johnny Depp play an annoying over the top character who is somewhere between totally wasted and way overacting.

  15. Natalie S says:

    Why is Rowling protecting Johnny Depp? “Based on our understanding of the circumstances, the filmmakers and I are not only comfortable sticking with our original casting, but genuinely happy to have Johnny playing a major character in the movies.”

    I feel like there are some Michael Jackson-type excuses being made for Depp -that’s he’s too “artistic” to be responsible (makes me rethink how clearly drawn he is to weirdo roles) and Heard used him. Predators are smart about avoiding consequences for their actions. They go after people without the same levels of protection and support. Even if Depp’s violence happened to only one woman, it doesn’t mean that Amber Heard caused it. IMO, it means that Depp targeted and used her.

    • Kitten says:

      That was unquestionably the worst part of her statement. She’s “genuinely happy”, not conflicted, not struggling, but genuinely happy. That’s really all we need to know.

      • Ankhel says:

        From her statements about this casting, now and earlier, I got the feeling she has a real crush on Depp. She seemed so tickled and fangirly when he was first cast. It’s disappointing that she’s still stuck in that mindset, and letting it dictate her view of Heard’s story. I thought Rowling was a kinder and wiser person than that.

    • Felicia says:

      The wording of that statement makes it sound like she’s privy to information that the general public isn’t and that has to do with whatever the terms of the Depp/Heard settlement was.

      That’s not a comment on Heard being a liar vs being a victim on my part, btw. Simply my interpretation of what Rowling seems to be saying. Whether she truly is aware of far more than was made public, if said information was substantiated, or whether she’s simply using that sort of wording to put up a firewall, I don’t know.

    • G says:

      Yes, exactly — it’s baffling to me that this article isn’t about that part of her blog post. I think we can safely assume that any further information she’s gotten has come from Depp or his camp, and talk about a questionable source.

      That said, I’m not ‘cancelling’ Rowling (God, I hate that term).

      • Geekychick says:

        That is even worse; with the tone and wording of this statement, JK is implIng that she is privy to some secret info that proves Depp’s innocence. And I find that the most disgustibg thing of all: That kind of passive-agressive attack is so insidous.:(

  16. Sparkly says:

    She was never one of my heroes, but I’m disappointed nonetheless. Even just aware of her from afar, I expected better than this.

  17. Mia4s says:

    This wasn’t a hard choice for me as I thought the first movie in this series was dull and derivative (so I had no interest in the sewer anyway) but I will be ignoring this whole series.

    I find it interesting that a statement was made at all. Why not just ignore it? Murder on the Orient Express did fine. They’re worried. Interesting. I can see that because I would not be at all surprised to see the domestic box office drop. I guess we know where J.K. stands when cash is at stake. Yuck.

  18. JenE says:

    Her stance is very disappointing. Further, I won’t spend my time or my money on movies with him in them. If all that counts these days is money, then I’ll start letting mine speak for me.

  19. Max says:

    What if she knows something we don’t?She basically said that they considered recasting him when the allegations were made and that was before anybody even knew about his part.Why didn’t they do it?I’m sorry but it doesn’t make any sense unless they know something.
    From my understanding it seems that Rowling actually believes him.She could have thrown him out since she’s a producer but instead she chose to voice her support especially in that time and age?Yeah unless she’s crazy she’s aware of something.

    • Zapp Brannigan says:

      So why not make that “something” public? If JD has evidence that he is not a domestic abuser why not release it and save his tarnished reputation, this is beyond gossip there is video evidence at him verbally abusing AH, photos of her bruises, witness statements that support her from mutual acquaintances, and his financial team have also admitted in statements relating to a separate legal issue that they were aware that JD was abusing AH, but sure JK Rowling “knows”

      All those issues were documented at the time on this site, all the stories are out there for a long time. The contract for the film was signed and now she is supporting her financial investment.

      • Char says:

        There is no way Depp would sign an NDA that kept him from being able to prove Amber was lying. He’s an abuser, if he weren’t & had proof he wasn’t, he would have leaked it to TMZ by now.

      • Max says:

        Have you ever considered the possibility of mutual abuse?Im not saying Depp is innocent of course but these situations are sometimes not so black and white.Their relationship was always in the blinds and the news of how toxic and crazy it was or for how drunk and high they were so it’s definitely possible that these 2 people brought out the worse in each other.I’ve seen it happening in real life but luckily not in my relationships.And it actually makes sense in this situation.
        Out of all the stories about celebs being outed as abusers this is the one and only that has troubled me cause I find believable info on both sides.That’s just my opinion.

      • magnoliarose says:

        @Max
        I would if he hadn’t been abusive to the other women he’s dated. He is a vile person, and I don’t think Amber told the entire story of life in h.ll with him.

      • Max says:

        @magnoliarose I’d love to know where you got that information from since several of his exes including Paradis and Ryder said that he was never abusive.Heard on the other hand was actually arrested for assault and when it came out her ex accused the officer of being homophobic while she is an openly gay woman.The officer says that what she saw was an assault.

      • Meggles says:

        Max that is a complete and utter lie.

        Go and re-read van Ree’s statement, nowhere does she say the “two individuals in a powerful position” who were motivated by homophobia were the arresting officers. TMZ and other tabloids reported it as “van Ree accused cops of homophobia” but that’s a flat out misrepresentation of the facts, van Ree never said it was a cop. It’s far more likely that she was referring to the male airport workers who called the police in the first place. The fact the cop sold her story to TMZ (a known Depp mouthpiece) also casts a lot of doubt on her as a source – is it even legal for cops to do that? There is not a shred of evidence that Amber was abusive and more to the point no one has ever claimed Amber abused them.

        Domestic violence rumours have followed Depp since the 90s. Winona Ryder went on the record (old interviews now wiped from the Internet) as saying her first boyfriend abused her; Depp was her first boyfriend and all the other details she gave about this abusive boyfriend match with Depp perfectly. There were very detailed rumours back in the 90s about their relationship and specific incidents where he’d attacked her, and she was majorly messed up by that relationship. There could be all sorts of reasons why she’s chosen not to publically disclose his abuse.

        When he was with Kate Moss the police were called because he was trashing hotel rooms during fights with her. That proves he was violent within the confines of the relationship. Even if he did not physically hit her (which is possible but frankly unlikely) he committed acts of violence around her during fights. Police and social services consider that to be a form of domestic violence.

        Allegedly he beat up Vanessa Paradis during a vacation to a specific small Caribbean island and was forced to leave the island as a result. This is all unverified but multiple people online who are verifiably from that island swear that it’s true. It would be very weird for a bunch of people all from the same obscure place to randomly enter into a conspiracy to accuse someone of something they did not do. And Depp is on the record as saying that Paradis had the ability to talk him down when he was having his “rage episodes.” Plenty of women don’t get hit only because of their ability to “manage” abusive men. Doesn’t mean the men are not abusive. Unfortunately a lot of women who “manage” abusive men can be judgemental towards other women who are less good at ducking punches. Perhaps Paradis blames or resents Heard for not “managing” Depp’s rages the way she did. Depp is also on the record as saying that his substance abuse during his relationship with Paradis was so bad his family staged an intervention. He also gave her $150 million (they never married so he didn’t need to pay her anywhere near that much), and they have a child. All very good reasons for Paradis to keep schtum.

        Finally, there is a document floating around somewhere where someone collated all the quotes Depp has given in interviews over the years where he talks about being violent, and it’s terrifying. This is a man who tells JOURNALISTS about how much he enjoys BITING PEOPLE, openly talks about how he sometimes gets overcome by “hillbilly rages” where he’s uncontrollably violent, and described going to prison for assaulting a photographer as “worth it to see the fear in the little maggot’s eyes.” His own words are more disturbing than anything else.

    • perplexed says:

      Wasn’t there video of him being abusive? For some reason, I thought there was.

    • Nic919 says:

      All contracts can be broken for the right price. This would be not different. If JK really wanted him gone she could definitely do something about it. She doesn’t care enough to try and pretends to believe Johnny. If pictures of abuse aren’t enough for her then I don’t know what is. It is not a court of law and no one is forced to employ an abuser.

    • Rose says:

      @MAX

      I just can’t take your comments seriously so your theory is that Johnny Depp has evidence that shows Amber was abusive towards him? He didn’t show this evidence in court, but show it to JK Rowling’s to prove that he was a victim too?

      There is no Non-disclosure agreement. He had his friends, security team and everybody call Amber a liar and trash her in public. You think he wouldn’t prove that she was abusive towards him to the public and clear his because he’s what decided to be nice?

      • Lady Fish says:

        Just for the record, Depp had a detailed evidence list filed with the courts as well as a witness list listing 23 witnesses. It’s possible that some of the items and/or some of the witnesses were on there to show exactly this.

        By all accounts, there really is no non-disclosure agreement but a confidentiality agreement between Depp and Heard in place; the difference is that, while with a non-disclosure agreement you are not allowed to speak etc. about certain information and such, with a confidentiality agreement you additionally have to actively prevent information and such from getting out – for example by having third parties sign separate confidentiality agreements. And I think this is basically what JK Rowling said: That she has information the public is not privy to but cannot talk about them, let them be known because of signed confidentiality agreements.

      • Lady D says:

        It would seem no matter the condition, NDA or CA, that Ms. Rowling has information she shouldn’t have. Her sleazy little ‘I have info I can’t share’ bs makes her a foul snake, and means someone broke their NDA. Isn’t that a matter for the courts?

    • Ankhel says:

      @Meggles,

      I don’t really want to defend Depp, but too many people are saying he’s been physically abusive to a number of women. There’s just no proof of that. Ryder and Paradis both defended Depp strongly, and denied he ever hit them. Ryder said her first boyfriend hit her, but Depp was not her first boyfriend, however well you think he fits. She started dating Depp in 1989, but she dated Rob Lowe from 1986-88, and was briefly involved with Charlie Sheen (!) and one or two less well known men in 1986. This isn’t my imagination, it can easily be googled. Moss has never said Depp hit her, and you can’t say smashing furniture is physical abuse, even if you could say it’s a form of mental abuse. But that’s not the same thing. The only woman who’s ever said Depp hit her is Heard.

      Also, if you’re going to be unpleasant and accuse others of lying, maybe fact check your own stuff? I can’t be bothered to do it for you, but even I know Depp and Paradis has more than one child, and that Depp wasn’t Ryder’s first boyfriend.

    • Karen says:

      Well with Winona Ryder you have her interview where she directly says Depp wasn’t abusive with her. But with Kate Moss? I don’t think she said anything.

  20. Jussie says:

    Cancelled.

    She’s a producer and screenwriter for this film. She’s heavily involved. She’s always been given an unprecedented amount of control by WB, and she’s not been shy about using it in the past. She knows how powerful she is. WB knows how powerful she is. Of all the people involved, she was in the best position to argue against Depp’s hiring, and she’s in the best position to speak out against him now.

    Secondly, she’s all but saying she and everyone else involved think Heard made it all up, and that the only reason she isn’t outright saying it is because she has respect for the legal agreements Depp put in place to keep Heard quiet. The wording is so carefully chosen to sound reasonable and ‘fair’, whilst simultaneously throwing Heard under the bus with the suggestion Rowling knows something about the ‘circumstances’ we don’t know. It’s an incredibly shady statement.

    Take her at her word. She’s happy Depp is in the film. If she wasn’t genuinely happy about it, there’d be no reason for her to make a statement like this. Again, she’s in a real position of power. WB absolutely could not get her to be publicly supportive like this if she didn’t very much want to be. The absolute most they could do is stop her speaking negatively, and even then, she’s wealthy and powerful enough that it would cause her no real issues if she spoke out anyway. She’s not, because she really does support Depp. There’s no need to make excuses for her.

    • Susan says:

      I think that may be the very worst part of the appalling statement she put out, that the effect has been to cast doubt on Amber’s story, as if there’s some super secret information that she, WB/Yates know that would totally prove Johnny is snow white innocent if ONLY she was allowed to share with everyone guys. /s

      I’ve seen multiple comments, not just here, where people are casting fresh doubt on Amber due to JKR’s statement, because she’s a beloved children’s author, and its reprehensible to me that she’s using her platform to do this.

      • Geekychick says:

        THIS! Even on this site, were Depp’s behaviour was reported with great detail, side with Depp because “JFK obviously lnows something we don’t”.
        No, this just show she is the worst: she is consciously implying a victim is not a victim, but a liar. And all for money, all because of her profit!
        We aren’t talking about a woman who has many mouths to feed and no income. We’re talking about bilionare who claimed that she escaped from domestic violence of her first husband with only her daughter in her arms, someone who sees and presents heraelf as champion of the victims.
        And that is why she’s canceled: I just can’t anymore with people who are making their profit and throwing victims under the bus, just for a little bit more money.

    • I Choose Me says:

      Exactamundo. She’s being so shady here that I instantly lost all respect for her. Instead of couching in it in fancy terms, she might as well just come right out and said she believes Amber is a liar and that Depp is innocent.

      Other than Dan Fogler’s expressive performance in Beasts, I didn’t particularly enjoy the first film and I absolutely thought that the Depp reveal in the latter part of the film was such a downgrade from Farrell that it left an actual sour taste in my mouth. Needless to say, the sequel will not be getting my money. And I will reserve a special side-eye for Ms. Rowling from now on.

  21. Valiantly Varnished says:

    Nope. She’s canceled. She has a considerable amount of power and could have gotten the role recast. She chose not to. She chose money and profit over integrity and supporting a victim. The sick irony of this is that JK herself is a domestic abuse survivor.

  22. Deadnotsleeping says:

    Well, this just saves me the $70 it takes for a family of four to get tickets and popcorn/candy at the movies.

    Also, I reread the HP series for the first time in awhile (I usually reread them every few years) and I love the series, but the 7th book isn’t aging well.

    Her statement still makes me genuinely sad.

  23. Really says:

    Rowling or the director were never respecting Amber, they are implying she is guilt and bad mouthing her to cover their cast choice.
    It is revolting that they are disrespecting Amber heard using her will to move on and get out of a abusive relationship against her, they are perpetuating the complicit act that give power to the abusers.
    Rowling was never in the hard place she is just trying to get people sympathy when they called her on her owl hypocrisy, she never sympathized with the real victim only with the abuser and the powerful manchine.

  24. yellow belly says:

    People like to position themselves as moral, but when it comes down to it, when it comes time to put your ego on the line, and admit you are wrong; Or when the time comes to give something up, a move forward in career, or cold hard cash, or giving up a ‘friend’. People don’t often follow through.
    I don’t care for her words. Her actions show me what I need to know – that allyship only runs skin deep in her.

    To the man whose statement is even worse, expected drivel. He’s not even skin deep.

    • Valiantly Varnished says:

      You put it perfectly. People talk a big game when all they have to do is talk. The moment s*it gets real we find out who the real ones really are – and they are few and far between. What the current climate is showing us (both in Hollywood and elsewhere) is who the moral cowards are. And unfortunately a lot of them are turning out to be people we admired or liked. JK has revealed herself to be a keyboard warrior. Only sticking her neck out when it all it costs is 280 characters.

  25. trollonthelosse says:

    I canceled her when she blocked someone on twitter for questioning her stance on JD. You can’t be picky when it comes to abuse. If we had to respect a couple where abuse/assault occurs then I guess if my neighbor was in this situation of daily violence I should mind my own business and be complicit.

  26. Ollie says:

    Didn’t she buy Depp’s yacht? I bet they have spend time with each other. He is known to be super nice and charming so i bet Rowling believes his stories that Amber was lying and ignores all the proof.

    I really don’t get it. If i were a friend of Depp and would watch that video of him destroying the kitchen… The way he talked to her! Damn that’s the moment even a friend of him has to realize that that is not normal!

  27. OSTONE says:

    This one hurts. While I would never hold Jo or any other woman accountable for the mistakes of a man, she created a world I adore that is based in love and good versus evil. She wrote how Harry and dumbledore were never believed that Voldemort was back. She is a victim of domestic abuse herself. So disappointed and sad, not only about Jo choosing the bottom line, which is money, but at the realization that women will not be believed if they are attacked. And if they are to be believed, it’s because they are a number in a sea of accusations against a perpetrator.

    • K (now K2!) says:

      She’s also donated millions to women and children’s charities, and stayed in a nation with high taxes instead of doing the usual non-dom to tax dodge, because she believes it’s right.

      This is genuinely upsetting. She seemed such a great person, and then she does a Lena Dunham. “He’s my friend, so she must be a liar.” Just really sad.

  28. Caty Page says:

    I’m sure Yates wouldn’t have the final say if Rowling were adamant and she said she’s happy to have him in the role, so I am holding her accountable. However, she also brought the world Hermione. It’s a sad and important reminder our heroes are human and won’t always come through.

    Though Rowling seems to think moral decisions can’t be made by ‘committee,’ I’ll just vote ‘no’ with my wallet. I love the series, but can’t justify buying a ticket to see this.

  29. lara says:

    Can anybody tell me, what the legal situation is? Is it possible to fire somebody for an offence he has not been sentenced for?
    At least in germany it is almost impossible to fire somebody, if it does not harm the company. I was shocked to find out, that we could not fire an employee who beat up his wife, since it happend at home, not during work times, and no other employee was affected. We had to pay a lot of money to get rid of him.
    And I do not know what is worse, to keep working with abusers or paying them to go away.

    • Chaine says:

      In the United States, private employers can hire their employees “at will,” meaning in most states that that they can fire them for any reason other than a discriminatory/retaliatory reason prohibited by law. So, yes, my employer could fire me for domestic violence I commit outside the workplace, just as my employer could fire me for being a smoker, or for being a Democrat, or for wearing the color orange. They cannot fire me for being female, or for being Caucasian, or for my religious belief, etc.

      However, an employee is different from a contractor. A contractor can only be fired for reasons specified in the hiring contract, and the firing would have to follow procedures specified in the contract. This is why someone like Matt Lauer can legitimately threaten to sue NBC for firing him—he is not an at will employee, he has a contract, so his employment termination can only occur if the contract allows for it and in the manner the contract allows for.

    • littlemissnaughty says:

      I’m German as well and it’s true that especially longtime employees are expensive to “get rid of”. They basically have to steal the silverware to be fired.

      But the movie business has nothing to do with that. Especially Jo has always made sure she retains an iron grip on her universe and if she had wanted to have him replaced, it would’ve happened.

      I have no idea what she’s talking about being genuinely happy that he’s playing Grindlewald. If only because this is a terrible message to young kids, who are part of the target audience.

      • jetlagged says:

        I wonder if Depp’s contract has a pay-or-play cause in it. At the time it was written, he was a big enough box office draw to demand that kind of guarantee. If they decided to re-cast after the contracts were signed they might have to pay him his entire fee regardless, which I assume is many millions of dollars. Maybe the producers crunched the numbers and figured taking a potential box office hit is less risky that actually paying him to go away.

    • Meggles says:

      In the movie industry you can fire actors for literally no reason, it’s the easiest thing in the world. Worst case scenario you still have to pay them. There is no circumstance where a movie contract can force producers to film and release scenes with a particular actor in them.

  30. starkiller says:

    This woman has always rubbed me the wrong way, so this doesn’t surprise me much. As others have mentioned, she has little to do with the writing of new material; she appears to feel that her time is better spent on Twitter doling out self-righteous barbs to the unwashed masses.

  31. QueenB says:

    Easier for me because I’ve never read Harry Potter (come at me!) but yeah good bye JK. I brought it up the last post how she was blocking people calling her out. When I heard about a statemetn I thought she was finally seeing the light. Nope. At least its pretty straight forward and we know on wich side JKRowling will stand.

  32. Moxie Remon says:

    Um, excuse me, but she’s been problematic for years now, I’m ‘glad’ she said these awful things because now we can take her off of the good people list.

  33. Skippy says:

    I personally think Jo has made a bad choice here. I have made a few bad choices myself in my life that were very stupid, so I forgive her as I have begrudgingly forgiven myself.
    Now as far as Johnny is concerned, I think he should retire from acting. He has shown that he wants to act out as an old school wanna -be -Rolling Stone, when the real Rolling Stones have matured beyond their collective past lives. So I think Johnny should carry on with that charade. One other thing- I am not burning my Johnny Depp movies on dvd. I like them and will continue to enjoy them. I haven’t seen a new good JD movie in many years. I have no thought of ever seeing a new one again as his treatment of women is deplorable.
    I also think Amber has continued to make bad choices (Elon Musk), but I hope she will do better in the future.

  34. Hannahforwardandback says:

    And because you like her, there are excuses being made.
    She’s canceled In my eyes. Of course she’s not bad as JD. We all know that, but people are holding her reasonable for her words and actions. Not his.

  35. Samantha says:

    What really surprised me is the fact that JKR and WB felt they needed to make a statement on this. It seems to me from what I see, outside few sites like this, most people seem to think Amber is a liar?
    Even with most of those sexual abuse cases, I don’t see the general public boycotting movies/shows over them unless they’re particularly bad. I’m honestly pleasantly surprised, it seems like people care more than I think.

  36. Savasana Lotus says:

    IMO. They waited to see how the 2017 Pirates movie did, and when it made $800 MIL before home release (which will double upon home release $$ income over the life of a film) and they moved forward with him. Obviously it’s a bottom line decision. Nothing new.

    I don’t care who’s in it. I won’t miss these HP sequels for anyone. This will sound callous, but the reality is that if you want to boycott the Hollywood abusers, cross every film you’ve ever seen off your list of viewing along with every film in the can. Including Heard in Aquaman and all her films before.

    • Tara says:

      It does sound callous, and like apology for just not trying.

      That said, Dead Man and The Tenant will be pried from my cold, dead hands, and I’m typing this on an iPhone. So I have my own “opportunities” with hypocrisy and social change accountability.

  37. Case says:

    Jo’s statement makes me wonder what we don’t know — if Amber was also abusive or if he has evidence that contradicts her accusations. But that’s neither here nor there, because even as a formerly huge JD fan (I’m never touching one of his films again), I have believed Amber from the moment she came forward. She had very little to gain by going up against such a huge star, and I admire her strength. The poor woman has been through the ringer since she came forward, and while I never felt strongly about her before, I respect the hell out of her now and will always be on her side. She just posted to Instagram the full joint statement, saying that people cannot just pick and choose from it. I think she meant to highlight the aspect that says neither party made false accusations.

    My heart hurts for Amber that she has to continue to put up with this nonsense.

  38. Tara says:

    I don’t even like Harry Potter, but I am SO disappointed in her.

  39. Ozogirl says:

    I’m disappointed in her, but in reading between the lines, it sounds like her hands are tied. I personally don’t understand the draw to him. He plays the same character in many of his movies and he’s not much of a box office draw anymore.

  40. ariel says:

    So disappointed in so many people. But this one stings. She is lovely. And she is doing damage control, and i’m appalled.
    Amber Heard was physically and emotionally abused by Johnny Depp over the course of their relationship and when she left him.
    She was beaten down by the press, by his “bros” at TMZ and everything was done to make us doubt her. Even as he continued to act in a controlling and abusive manner during the divorce settlement. Fuck him. And fuck JK Rowling for not giving a shit.
    And, I saw in the comments on the Dylan Farrow piece how some people were excusing the actors/actresses b/c there is only ONE victim. This seems to be similar.
    The logic on that is… fuck her, its just one woman, every man should be allowed to molest/beat/terrorize ONE WOMAN.
    As long as there aren’t more, he gets a pass.
    As long as his power allows him put use the media to confuse the issues, to obscure the facts, to gaslight the victim- then, fuck her. This is too hard to sort through and think about.

    This makes me angry. But that could be because its sleeting in the deep south.

  41. Megan says:

    I’m an unapologetic Potterhead, but the issue for me in watching Johnny Depp is that his private life has overshadowed everything to the point that I can’t watch him in a role and see anything except him. I literally have no intention of seeing this movie. We went ahead and gave the first one a chance, but it wasn’t worth it. It feels icky to support his movies. I’m not going to do it.

  42. pOOP says:

    A lot of people are saying that Jo must know something that the public doesn’t.

  43. Rose of Sharon says:

    I think she and people like her are worse than Depp. It must be crushing to Miss Heard to witness Rowling’s contortions and mealy-mouthed defense of Depp when we all saw the evidence of assault. She’s trying to get us to doubt what Miss Heard told us and what we saw with our own eyes.

    And what’s with the ridiculous proclamation that “Conscience isn’t governable by committee?” Of course it is. The values, ideas of common decency and how you are supposed to treat other people are defined by the mores of a society, which in a civilized one dictate that you do not beat your wife.

  44. Cali says:

    Amber responded on Instagram to it.

    I adored JK and her work until this whole Johnny Depp fiasco. :(

    I wonder if Depp ever coughed up the money to Amber so she could donate it. He probably doesn’t have it…

  45. Rose of Sharon says:

    I apologize for posting twice, but I am so deeply offended on Miss Heard’s behalf because after the shock and misery she’s already been put through, both during the marriage and divorce, I think she is now being abused in a different way – seeing Depp not getting treatment or penalized, but instead receiving admiration, great job offers and accolades!

    She put herself in danger trying to film an example of Depp’s scary instability, possibly because she knew what she’d be up against. I think she also felt she had to document in a magazine her damaged, bruised face in order to be believed. Made no difference.

    Rowling: You smugly asserted conscience isn’t governable by committee. We shall see.

  46. Ella says:

    Respect for violence victims> Harry Potter. Bye Jo, it was nice while it lasted.

  47. Eve V says:

    “JK has revealed herself to be a keyboard warrior. Only sticking her neck out when it all it costs is 280 characters.”
    **Completely and Totally Accurate**

    I am still in disbelief that that vile statement was actually released by/from JK Rowling. “Extremely disappointed” doesn’t even touch how mad her words made me.

  48. Annetommy says:

    Haven’t read her books. Didn’t like her anti- Scottish independence views. But I thought she had some principles.

  49. EM says:

    Ever since she made her money, she has sought to be a ‘voice’ on Twitter and then proceeded to use her position to politically indoctrinate her followers (.e.g her stance on Scottish independence). She has always been a sellout. It’s all about the money for her.

  50. vanna says:

    I came back for seconds, this article was just that good. Kaiser your writing on this perfect and I still love how you chose to frame this issue. Virtual hugs and awards (is der a pulitzer kinda thing for gossip reporting?)