comScore Daniel Radcliffe Doesn't Buy Defending Johnny Depp's Casting | The Mary Sue
The Mary Sue

Daniel Radcliffe Doesn’t Buy the Excuses Defending Johnny Depp’s Casting in The Crimes of Grindelwald

There’s been an uproar ever since Johnny Depp, who was allegedly emotionally and physically abusive toward ex-wife Amber Heard during their marriage, was cast in the titular role of Grindelwald in the next Fantastic Beasts film, The Crimes of Grindelwald. Now, Harry Potter himself, Daniel Radcliffe, has something to say on the matter.

In an interview with Entertainment Weekly, Radcliffe finally broke his silence on Depp’s casting, and doesn’t seem convinced by what Warner Bros. and his former producers have been saying about the situation. He said:

“It’s a very hard thing for me. [They] gave me a great start in life and an amazing job. [But] I can see why people are frustrated with the response that they were given from that … I’m not saying anything that anybody hasn’t already said — and this is a weird analogy to draw — [but] in the NFL, there are lots of players arrested for smoking weed and there is other people’s behavior that goes way beyond that and it’s tolerated because they’re very famous players. I suppose the thing I was struck by was, we did have a guy who was reprimanded for weed on the [original Potter] film, essentially, so obviously what Johnny has been accused of is much greater than that.”

Radcliffe is referring to Jamie Waylett, the actor who played Vincent Crabbe and was dropped from Deathly Hallows after he was arrested for growing marijuana plants.

It’s weird how people and companies will draw a hard line at drugs, but if someone allegedly abuses a woman, they’re all but he’s so nice, right? Because one would hate for kids to emulate doing drugs. Abusing women, though … ? That’s standard, I guess. *sigh*

In any case, Radcliffe is saying what most reasonable people already know: If you’re going to reprimand someone for growing weed, you should probably also include alleged wife-beaters in the category of “punishable offenses,” too.

But that’s different, you say. Waylett was arrested for his crime, whereas Depp wasn’t. You wanna talk about legality? Let’s talk about it, then. Heard tweeted this at the end of last year, after J.K. Rowling defended Depp’s casting by citing their joint statement.

The most important line to me is this: Neither party has made false accusations for financial gain. There was never an intent of physical or emotional harm.

You know what those two lines in this statement that both Heard and Depp approved tell me?

  1. Heard wasn’t lying. If “neither party” made false accusations, that means that Heard’s accusations were true. Which means Depp did what she said he did.
  2. There was never an “intent” of harm. That doesn’t mean there wasn’t any, only that Depp “didn’t mean it.”

Intentions don’t mean a whole lot when you’ve got a face full of bruises, brah.

It’s too bad Radcliffe doesn’t have much pull with the franchise anymore, now that he’s no longer playing Harry. He seems to be one of the few involved with this franchise who fully gets it.

(featured image: screencap)

Want more stories like this? Become a subscriber and support the site!

The Mary Sue has a strict comment policy that forbids, but is not limited to, personal insults toward anyone, hate speech, and trolling.—

© 2018 The Mary Sue, LLC | About Us | Advertise | Subscription FAQ | Privacy | User Agreement | Disclaimer | Contact | RSS RSS
Dan Abrams, Founder

  1. Mediaite
  2. The Mary Sue
  3. RunwayRiot
  4. Law & Crime
  5. Gossip Cop