Apparently because of the UK court judgement which found Depp couldn't claim libel for being called a wife beater in a newspaper because it was "substantially true", Warner Bros have asked him to resign and he's agreed.

The whole thing with him and his wife is pretty much a mess, where both sides are slinging accusations and there's no way of knowing the truth. So its probably not a bad thing for the franchise that he's resigning.

I'm also not unhappy about it because I thought he was a bad casting decision anyway.

Any thoughts on who might make a good choice to replace him as Grindelwald?

 

My First choice?

Karl Urban.

Spoiler

Dude has crazy range as an actor and legit charisma.

I can see him going toe to toe with Jude Law's Dumbledore.

 

I could see it, Urban could definitely do a decent job I think.

 

He’s a little old for the range the movies are going for, but no one plays charismatic, crazy, and pure evil quite like Christoph Waltz.

 

Here's a crazy, way out of left field idea.

Jamie Bower, the guy who played young Grindelwald. He's 31 now.

 

#BringBackFarrell

No, seriously. I’m probably in a minority, but I actually liked Depp’s performance in TCoG. One of the few redeeming features of it as a film, actually.

As for a possible replacement, I’d like to see Orlando Bloom give it a go. He does a good anti-hero (see Carnival Row and his 2018 performance as Killer Joe in London) and is still a household name in the industry.

Concerning the lawsuit and its fallout, I guess something like this was to be expected. That was just a whole load of awful from all sides, and Depp’s ex-wife probably won’t come out of it sqeaky-clean either. I guess that’s what happens when two high-profile individuals with self-destructive tendencies come too close to one another.

 

All the evidence points to them both being pretty awful, abusive, and just generally toxic to one another.

Honestly, I wouldn't be shocked if Fantastic Beasts 3 didn't even happen. The franchise is already on pretty shaky ground thanks to the second film underperforming and Rowling's brand getting pretty toxic thanks to her public and extreme transphobia. If not for the fact that they might be too far along in the production process to stop it without losing serious money, just dropping the project would seem pretty tempting.

 

I don’t who’s correct or not in that shitshow of a lawsuit.

I do know that Depp was a terrible cast for Grindelwald, so silver linings.

 

I always felt Grindelwald should be like Dumbledore but less essentric. Wise, refined, charismatic, maybe a little cold.

Anthony Hopkins back in the day would of been a good casting.

 

Whilst CoG wasn't the run away success they wanted it to be, it was far from a failure. It made over $654 million on a budget of $200 million. No way do the write the franchise off when they can milk it for a few hundred million per film.

 

Hulk Hogan, of course.

 

My headcanon for Grindelwald is just Dumbledore but lacking the warmth and eccentricity, and thus my number one choice for a young Grindelwald has always always always been Paul Bettany. He can do the cold and unfeeling thing so well.

 

Agreed, Paul Bettany would actually be fantastic for the role!

 

Happy to hear this since Depp was totally miscast.

I think Mads Mikkelsen would be absolutely amazing for the role he has the look, the presence and a sense of dignity about him which I think is essential for Grindelwald which Depp totally lacked, always imagined Grindelwald to be more of a politician who could get the majority of wizards behind his cause.

I also think the actor for Jamie in GOT would be pretty good too has the look, charisma and can even as a villain evoke symphathy.

Even going back to Collin Farell would be dope he was suprisingly good in the first movie and I was severely dissapointed that we got the downgrade of circus clown Grindelwald.

 

You know, I actually liked Depp as Grindelwald so fuck all y'all.

 

Had they just swapped Depp and Farrel's roles in the first movie, we wouldn't have this problem... I mean, seriously, Farrell would've been such a good Grindelwald.

 

I remember everyone hating on Farrell hardcore.

Series should have stuck with as many unknowns as possible and there wouldn't be as much trouble.

 

There’s definitely a big difference between performing below expectations and losing money. The third movie is probably still going to happen unless more things go wrong. It’s far enough along that WB’s spent real money on it, and they wouldn’t want that going to waste unless things look dire.

However, I would imagine there’s some concern about the film’s prospects given the second movies relatively cool financial and critical reception, COVID uncertainty, and Rowling’s own controversies. It’s enough potential issues that I wouldn’t be shocked if WB gets cold feet about the original five movie plan, or at least wants a way out if the third movie doesn’t amaze.

 

Nah, I reckon they'll go for the intended 5 movies, but we might well see budget cuts in movies 4 and 5 - especially if the 3rd film has a similar financial performance to the 2nd one.