“Retaliatory violence” doesn’t make her any less a victim. You shouldn’t have to be a saint to get sympathy for being abused.

Saint Johnny, striking a blow for all his rabid stans who defended him against the vicious perjurer Amber Heard by bullying her with litigation to empty her bank account.  What a fucking asshole he is.

The idea that she’s a good enough actress to fool the entire UK court system but not good enough to be in Aquaman 2 is pretty funny.

I assume then you have thoughts on why her claims that he abused her held up to “realistic scrutiny” in a UK court that found it “substantially likely” that Saint Johnny abused her? my favorite responses from the Depp stans have been (1) the UK courts aren’t as good as US courts (whatever that means); (2) the judge…

Contrary voice here.

Tarantino’s whole career has been about him ingesting, digesting and regurgitating his takes on the entertainment film industry.

BuT iS he GUILTY oF A crIMe?>?

What article did you read? What I read suggests that the author finds Depp gross (hence: blegh) and questions what the connection is between Depp and these events. I might not care for Depp, but I don’t bat an eyelash if he gets cast in a movie to act. Appearing at the VMAs and the Savage X Fenty show is just random.

Maybe the lesser of the two is hoping to benefit from confusion in that people likely won’t bother to get their money back after they’ve paid to sit in a theater and Ashton Kutcher shows up onscreen instead of Michael Fassbender.

God, I wish more people had the sense of mind to do the same. So much is endless copies.

Seconded! And if it causes a lot of racist brains to explode, I’m all for it.

Changing minds is overrated. Better to neutralize chuds.

William Jackson Harper is awesome - watched Love Life S2 and The Resort recently and between those roles and The Good Place, it’s clear he’s a super talented dude who can and should be a much bigger star.

[Already posted this as a reply to someone else on a different article, so apologies to anyone reading this twice.]

Check the headline -  there is difference between the emotional connotations of ‘bitter’ versus ‘bittersweet’.  Saldana clearly said “bittersweet”.

I would definitely rather take that tone for every superhero movie over Snyder’s or even the Marvel house style.

TFA was always a too-safe rehash of ANH with too much fan service and too little attention paid to its ostensible protagonists. It's just that a lot of people--me included--were willing to grade it on a nostalgia-tinged "first decent Star Wars movie in 30 years" curve that they're less willing to apply now that…

“Rian Johnson changed everything!” = “Rian Johnson didn’t adhere to my nebulous idea of what was supposed to happen after the first movie!” Abrams gave Johnson a STOCK STAR WARS PROTAGONIST, a STOCK STAR WARS SIDEKICK, a STOCK STAR WARS ROGUE TYPE, a STOCK STAR WARS WACKY DROID, and a STOCK STAR WARS EVIL EMPEROR.…

The middle of the story is exactly where you change things. It’s called a twist, or a development.

I’m not sure what Johnson changed, exactly. By my recollection he changed very little; Abrams set up a bunch of stuff with no intention of paying it off himself (which is kind of how he writes everything) and left it to the next guy to resolve those plotlines. Well, Johnson did what he was hired to do and resolved…

“I didn’t like The Last Jedi (stay with me for just a moment) because I didn’t like Rian’s directorial approach of changing everything simply for the sake of changing it.”