'Depp v. Heard' docuseries: A chronologically curated collage of the trial’s ‘most shocking moments’

A three-part documentary series, Depp v. Heard, recently dropped on Netflix examining what has been described as the world's ‘first trial by TikTok’. The infamous defamation case between Hollywood stars Johnny Depp and his ex-wife Amber Heard was watched and analysed globally. Audiences worldwide had even dissected Johnny and Amber's looks and expressions during the on-camera trial, which was trending on TikTok and Twitter. Since everyone loves ‘factual entertainment’, this trial was bound to come back on screens. But really, what’s the core focus of the documentary series and more importantly, what does it accomplish?

The three-part series is a chronologically curated collage of the two week long trial: the courtroom scenes, video and audio evidence, past interviews, news stories, and an array of ‘user-generated content’ (YouTube and TikTok clips). These elements are garnished with ongoing insights from fans, legal experts, and podcast hosts. Surprisingly, like the regular documentary format, there is no narrator weaving all these elements together. Perhaps, the omission of a narrator is aimed to create the illusion of ‘impartiality.' But is the series really ‘neutral’?

If you remember, during the trial the judge allowed cameras in the courtroom. It resulted in realtime trolling, public getting divided and narrative building. The Internet, and social media, were not just observers but assumed the role of proverbial ‘judge, jury and executioner’. So, is the documentary succeeding in addressing the role of the Internet?

I felt that similar to the trial, here too, the viewers are simply taking pleasure in the sensational details all over again. It is merely repackaging the trial, juxtaposing the accounts of Depp and Heard one after the other, leaving room for ‘viewers to judge’, which is exactly what transpired during the trial. It was a distressing and gruesome display that had unfolded across social media, salivating viewers. The odds seemed tilting towards the powerful, with #JusticeForJohnnyDepp amassing 20 billion views during the trial, while #JusticeForAmberHeard had only 77.5 million views. Depp v. Heard consistently highlights this clear disparity on social media and skepticism towards Heard's allegations. The verdict had a broader impact and was also seen as a setback for #MeToo movement that could discourage women from speaking out against powerful men.