You keep accusing me of being an Amber believer for being able to use imdb and google to find information (that everyone else can look at, by the way). And for pointing out that Johnny's career was already on the fall before her. Which is also easy to see.

I haven't put things in your mouth, it is you who claim things like "Johnny Deep has more charisma (implying than the Rock which is one of the actors I mentioned)" and now that his acting in Harry Potter was "refined". Well, most people would disagree with you. In fact, most people would consider that he played the same role in Harry Potter as he did in Charlie and the chocolate factory or as the Mad Hatter. He put on heavy makeup and overacted, again. Unsurprisingly, people preferred Mikkelsen.

You, on the other hand, have labeled me several times. The historic of the conversation is still there for people to see. Most recently, you have decided that I'm a blogger.

I'm not a blogger, I'm an average viewer who has pointed out box office (a measure of how many people have gone to the cinema) as a way to show that my opinion is shared by many people. No, I'm not an influencer neither I care to be. But I do spend money on cinema and know that it's been a long time since I wanted to spend it on Johnny's movies. And I do know that there are many people like me.

You might want to dismiss Johnny's failures ad "he did Mordecai because he wanted", but the fact is that his reasons for doing that film (and other terrible ones who were failures) are irrelevant. The important part is that they are part of his filmography. And for an actor that is his CV. Well, you complained that he is not getting roles at blockbusters? Well, the success of blockbusters depends on many people just like me "average viewers", since the loyal fans you claim you don't belong to and that goes for all Johnny's films, didn't make Mordecai a successful movie. And that is exactly the point, he doesn't have enough fans to make up for the lack of interest of the average viewer and when he wants a blockbuster role, he is against successful actors that chose to do films that were successful instead of the films they wanted. Or that chose films they wanted that happened to be good and ended up being successful regardless. So in doing those unsuccessful films "because he wanted", he was making a choice that hurt his career. It was his own doing.

You want to dismiss my argument by labeling me. "Amber believer", "just a blogger", whatever. But your actual attempts at rebuttal are based on claims like "Johnny take on Grindewald was refined". And people can go and actually see a clip on their own to see that it is, best case scenario, only some hardcore Johnny's fan would say.

The fact that the movies I mentioned weren't blockbusters is the reason he is not considered for blockbusters. After all, who is considered for blockbusters? Actors who have already been at blockbusters or that are way more popular among young people than Johnny. Like Chris Prat or Hemsworth. Or maybe the Rock.

I'm not negating the evidence, I'm pointing it out. Johnny hasn't done a good movie in years. It is all there on imdb. Hell, I have even pointed out where you can find the information.

Now, you bring up the London's trial, where he actually lost against the sun, let me tell you that this is something that plays against your side. I mean, the paparazzi had pictures and the sun proved that they weren't lying. That means that it was the sun, not Amber, who revealed that he was an abuser. But neither Amber nor the sun made him do the things that the sun published. That was Johnny's. So logic says that Johnny was the one responsible for his loss of reputation. After all, if it had been false, he would have won the trial and cleared his name.

Disney is a private company. Private companies want to make money. You don't need to work there to know that. Not you need access to confidential information to see that Caribbean Pirates has been replaced by Marvel as far as blockbusters go.

Your problem with me is that everything I say is easy to confirm. Anyone can go to imdb and check which was the last movie they went to see and which was the last they actually thought was good. Then check the date. And they can look at google how big or small was the box office (how many people went to see it). Hint: if many people like a movie, it has a huge box office, if there is a big drop at the box office, it is considered a failure. You don't need to work at Disney to know that.

Be honest, your argument is based on the idea that Disney would have made another Caribbean pirates movie even if it was expected to do even worse than the 5th, and they could use the same money to make another star wars or marvel movie. At a time when an Indiana 5 is being produced with beloved Harrison Ford in it. Do you actually think they would prioritize saving Johnny's career? Really? And you can claim that and at the same time claim that you are not a hardcore fan?

Either you understand nothing about business or you are lying because it is there in plain sight, Johnny can't compete with the other stars anymore. He was replaced about a decade ago.