Here’s one for you: What’s worse? A movie with Jude Law boning domestic abuser Johnny Depp, or a movie with no gay boning at all?
Fans were faced with a moral quandary today when Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them director David Yates announced that Jude Law’s Albus Dumbledore would not be “explicitly gay” in the sequel The Crimes of Grindelwald, despite Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling’s acknowledgement in 2007 that Dumbledore was, in fact, a proud gay man.
But really, do we want to see Jude Law play with Johnny Depp’s wand? Sure, Depp was fun in Pirates of the Caribbean, but he’s also a flaming hot mess. The dude has already made headlines for beating up Amber Heard, and now he seems to have become a greasy, boozy cretin who shows up to movie premieres totally hammered.
We think the best move here would be to cut out Depp altogether — a la Kevin Spacey in All the Money in the World — and replace him with someone sexier. Not Christopher Plummer. We’re thinking Dan Stevens, perhaps. Then we could finally see Jude Law do gay stuff on screen — a fantasy we have all had since The Talented Mr. Ripley came out in 1999. (We are not counting the chaste kissing in 1997’s Wilde.)
Also, what does the Crimes of Grindelwald director David Yates mean when he says Dumbledore won’t be “explicitly gay?” Will we just have to settle for well-lit flashbacks in which Jude Law and Johnny Depp stare at each other meaningfully for a longer period than whatever was socially acceptable in the late 19th century? Or will Jude Law just open up his closet at one point to reveal a line of sequined red crop tops — right before the camera cuts away? Or will none of this happen, and the movie is just about Dumbledore and Grindelwald broing out and making fart jokes over buffalo wings — just, like, being as straight as possible?
In any case, we’re not a fan of either Johnny Depp or this straightwashing. Should we all just boycott this film altogether?