Johnny Depp showed off his photography skills as he attended the photocall for his latest film Minamata in Barcelona on Friday.
The actor, 57, used the vintage camera as a prop in reference to his character, American photojournalist W. Eugene Smith, whom he plays in the biopic.
Johnny had a smile on his face just a day after it was reported his court battle with ex Amber Heard will be explored in three new documentaries.
The actor showed off his distinctive scruffy sense of style as he arrived to the photocall during the BCN Filk Festival in a grey corduroy jacket, pinstripe baker boy hat and blue tinted sunglasses.
He layered the jacket atop of a polka dot shirt and slogan T-shirt. Johnny teamed the look with checked trousers and military style boots.
The biopic begins in the 1950s, long past his ‘glory days,’ with Smith’s Life Magazine editor Ralph Graves convincing him to investigate the widespread mercury poisoning in the coastal town of Minamata, Japan.
The film follows Smith some thirty years after his photographic account of the US offensive against Japan during World War II, notably the Battle of Okinawa, earned him a reputation as one of the most significant photojournalist’s of his generation.
With the war long since over Smith has become increasingly reclusive, but a commission from Life magazine tempts him back to the far east, where he draws attention to the plight of a humble fishing community decimated by mercury poisoning.
Gaining their trust, the photographer endeavours to bring their story to the world’s attention, and by doing so begins a lengthy quest for justice against the corporations responsible for causing the disaster.
Johnny’s ‘downfall’ is reportedly set to be explored in three new documentaries after he lost his bid to overturn a UK High Court ruling that he beat ex Amber Heard.
It has been claimed that the upcoming shows are currently being made in the US and UK with production company, Optomen, working with ITV on a ‘Depp vs Heard’ programme since last summer.
In March, Depp was refused permission to bring an appeal against a damning High Court ruling that he assaulted his ex-wife Amber with his lawyers claiming that he ‘looked forward to presenting the irrefutable truth’ to a US libel court.
The actor has already had to pay £628,000 ($861,000) in legal fees after losing the first libel trial, and now faces paying an even larger bill for costs and damages following the judgment.
In addition to the millions’ worth of spending, the actor also lost his role of Gellert Grindelwald in the Fantastic Beasts franchise following the High Court judgment, and the damage to his reputation risks him losing out on more roles in the future.
A source told The Sun: ‘They will make for excruciating viewing for Depp who’d probably wish the whole disastrous saga would go away.
‘But the story of how a multi-millionaire who was box office gold was the author of his own downfall is just too sensational a subject not to explore.’
MailOnline has contacted both ITV and Depp’s representative for comment.
In March, Depp was refused permission to bring an appeal against a damning High Court ruling that he assaulted his ex-wife Amber with his lawyers claiming at the time that he ‘looked forward to presenting the irrefutable truth’ to a US libel court.
Depp’s £35m ($50m) US libel case against Amber- which will also be extremely costly – was recently delayed until April 2022.
Lawyers for The Pirates of the Caribbean star had asked two Court of Appeal judges to grant permission for him to challenge the ruling, with the aim of having its findings overturned and a second trial ordered.
They claimed the judge in Depp’s initial libel trial had not ‘factually’ considered all the allegations of violence against him and that they had ‘fresh evidence’ Ms Heard had ‘lied’ about giving her entire £5.5million ($7m) divorce settlement to charity.
They said that the charity claim influenced how her testimony was viewed, but the Court of Appeal ruled that it did not have an impact on the judge and that he would have reached the same conclusion on Ms Heard being the victim of domestic violence.
Following an explosive three-week trial last July at London’s High Court, Mr Justice Nicol dismissed the Hollywood actor’s libel claim against the publisher of The Sun, finding that a column it published in April 2018 that the actor was a ‘wife beater’ was ‘substantially true.’
The judge ruled that Mr Depp assaulted Ms Heard on a dozen occasions and put her in ‘fear of her life’ three times often while on drink and drugs binges, which he said turned the actor into a ‘monster’, in one of the most high-profile libel clashes of this century.
Dismissing Depp’s permission to appeal, Lord Justice Underhill and Lord Justice Dingemans insisted that the initial libel hearing was ‘full and fair’ and that the judge had not made any errors in law and was not influenced by Ms Heard’s charity claim.
They concluded: ‘We would accordingly dismiss both Mr Depp’s application for permission to adduce further evidence and his application for permission to appeal.
‘As we have said, it is not easy to persuade this Court to overturn the findings of a trial judge on purely factual questions. We do not believe that there is a real prospect of it being prepared to do so in this case.’
During the hearing before the Court of Appeal, Depp’s QC Andrew Caldecott accused Ms Heard of giving away ‘a fraction’ of the huge sum of her divorce settlement as part of a ‘calculated and manipulative lie’ to make herself look better.
Mr Caldecott argued that if ‘the truth about the charity claim emerged at the trial, it would have materially affected Mr Justice Nicol’s consideration of Ms Heard’s evidence as a whole’.
But in turning down Depp’s application, the Court of Appeal declared that issues relating to how much of the money she had donated were not relevant because ‘his [Mr Justice Nicol’s] focus was squarely on the evidence relating to the alleged assaults themselves.’
The judges added: ‘We do not accept that there is any ground for believing that the Judge may have been influenced by any such general perception as Mr Caldecott relies on.’
Referring to the grounds laid out by Depp’s lawyers that Mr Justice Nicol had not fully considered all the allegations of violence against him, the Court of Appeal judges ruled that they had ‘no prospect of success.’
In a statement, Mr Depp’s solicitor Joelle Rich from the law firm Schillings said: ‘The evidence presented at last week’s hearing further demonstrates that there are clear and objective reasons to seriously question the decision reached in the UK court.
‘Mr Depp looks forward to presenting the complete, irrefutable evidence of the truth in the US libel case against Ms Heard, where she will have to provide full disclosure.’
A spokesman for Ms Herd said: ‘We are pleased – but by no means surprised – by the Court’s denial of Mr. Depp’s application for appeal. The evidence presented in the UK case was overwhelming and undeniable.
‘To reiterate, the original verdict was that Mr. Depp committed domestic violence against Amber on no fewer than 12 occasions and she was left in fear of her life.
‘The verdict and lengthy, well-reasoned Judgment, including the Confidential Judgment, have been affirmed. Mr. Depp’s claim of new and important evidence was nothing more than a press strategy and has been soundly rejected by the Court.’
The Sun said: ‘The Sun had every confidence that this leave to appeal application would not be granted and are pleased with today’s decision.
‘The case had a full, fair and proper hearing, and today’s decision vindicates the courageous evidence that Amber Heard gave to the court about domestic abuse, despite repeated attempts to undermine and silence her by the perpetrator.
‘The Sun will continue to stand up and campaign for victims of domestic abuse.’