Johnny Depp has made a powerful return to Hollywood with the dark Gothic reimagining of A Christmas Carol, marking a major comeback in his acting career.
In the world of Hollywood, nothing is more seductive than a comeback. For Johnny Depp, that moment has now come at a grand scale. The actor’s evolution from European art house cinema to a big studio production such as Paramount’s “Ebenezer: A Christmas Carol” is a remarkable twist in his career, combining his artistic roots with broad commercial appeal.
Set for theatrical release on November 13, 2026, the movie claims that it’s a “riveting, terrifying reimagining” of Charles Dickens’ 1843 classic novella. This version explores the eerie supernatural origins of the traditional tale and turns it into a thriller ghost tale somewhat reminiscent of more traditional holiday the theatre narratives.
From Ti West, the visionary behind the acclaimed atmospheric horror gems X, Pearl, and MaXXXine, comes this take that is sure to be a “technicolor nightmare.” West’s talent for infusing psychological terror into period pieces makes him the ideal auteur to reimagine Victorian London as a desolate, alien, and horrifying place.
Depp is set to take on the role of Ebenezer Scrooge, a character he has been a longtime fan of, particularly Alastair Sim’s 1951 version. But sources say Depp has a “different angle” in mind, emphasizing the internal haunting rather than the external, and the emotional heft of a “night of reckoning.”
Paramount isn’t just banking on Depp’s “bankability”; they’ve surrounded him with a “who’s who” of franchise royalty that it will surely cover all demographic bases.
Read More 👉 The Pitt Season 2: Everything You Need to Know About the 2026 Medical Drama
The timing of this release is a lesson in studio politics. Releasing in mid-November, Paramount sidesteps the December “family film” stampede and gives this supernatural thriller a chance to build a long-term presence on the box office. It also makes Depp’s return perhaps the key event of the 2026 awards season.
Strangely, this will set up a “Scrooge Showdown,” as Warner Bros. is said to be working on its own shadowy version with Robert Eggers (The Witch). Yet with West’s gift for “elevated horror” and a screenplay by Nathaniel Halpern, Paramount takes the bait as the “thriller” audience to catch.
The story of Ebenezer Scrooge’s turnaround feels especially powerful when taken alongside Johnny Depp’s career trajectory. It’s a curious layer to the film’s overall appeal, as moviegoers may be swept into a compelling fictional redemption arc while Depp makes a real-world career comeback, merging storytelling with the actor’s personal and professional revival. This two-faced approach not only adds narrative depth but also gives the marketing strategy an extra layer of tactical complexity.
Depp has a busy schedule and Ebenezer has only one date. He just finished the Lionsgate thriller Day Drinker with Penélope Cruz and the makers of his directorial effort, Modi, are seeing the light of theaters.
Ebenezer: A Christmas Carol doesn’t have the feeling of being a routine adaptation, as much as that can be said about any retelling of that story. In bringing together Johnny Depp’s long-promised return to studio filmmaking with Ti West’s unsettling vision, Paramount is going to go with atmosphere over nostalgia, and introspection over sentimentality.
The film’s darker perspective along with the prestige-laden cast and strategically timed release makes the film a commercial risk and an awards season conversation piece.
More to the point, it turns a well-worn ghost story into something deeply resonant and of the moment — a story of reckoning, isolation, and second chances. If it sticks, it won’t just be Depp’s comeback, it could be a way of reimagining how classic literature can be adapted for modern, thrill-seeking audiences.
Fandomfans is providing celebrity updates on their upcoming movies, our goal is to focus on film story and cast.
Learn how Galactus and Lady Death could reshape the MCU with a cosmic Gothic era leading to Secret Wars, redefining Marvel's future beyond traditional villains.
If you feel the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) was a bit all over the place lately, well, you’re not alone. With multiverse shenanigans, quantum realms and whatnot, things have become a bit messy. But there’s a pattern if you look at the Phase Six schedule along with Fantastic Four: First Steps and the latest spoilers in Agatha All Along. Marvel is turning its back on political thrillers and sci-fi brawls to focus on high-concept metaphysics and passion plays.
The two players at the center of this shift? Galactus, the Devourer of Worlds, and Mistress Death, now unveiled as the fierce and compelling Rio Vidal.
Casual fans might view them as two separate “Big Bads” (the first a sci-fi giant, the second a supernatural weird witch), but comic history and deep lore reports tell us they are really the “parents” of the next cosmic saga. If you want to know why their eventual encounter is going to change everything, read on!
In order to understand why this matters, we need to examine the source material. Comics-wise, particularly the legendary Fantastic Four — the relationship of Galactus and Death is described in terms that boggle the mind.
Death refers to Galactus as her “husband and father, brother and son.”
It seems like a contradiction, but it’s a statement of cosmic truth. They’re not enemies; they’re symbiotic. Galactus is the “Great Filter” of the universe. He isn’t randomly demolishing worlds because he’s malevolent; he’s doing it to tend the cosmic garden, so that life does not turn into a cancer on the face of existence.
He makes the nutrition that feeds Death’s being. In an eternal, symbiotic dance, his job is to create and hers is to eat. They form a deep, quasi-sacred union, vastly more complex and profound than Thanos’s adolescent crush on Death that can best be described as a momentary juvenile fantasy.
The MCU seems to be aiming for a particular aesthetic in this union: “Cosmic Gothic.” For one, we’ve got Ralph Ineson cast as Galactus. Known for his bone-chilling, folk horror work in The Witch, Ineson lends a weight that implies that Galactus will be more of an Old Testament god than a mechanical antagonist.
Then there’s Aubrey Plaza’s Rio Vidal. Rather than being the quiet skeleton featured in the comics, Plaza’s Death is loquacious, possessive, and chaotic. She is rooted in “Green Witch” tradition, seeing death as a natural return to the earth. When you combine Ineson’s golden, high-tech horror and Plaza’s rotting, totemic witchcraft, you end up with a cinematic mood we’ve never seen in Marvel.
So how do they come together? The latest rumors about The Fantastic Four: First Steps suggest a particular catalyst: Franklin Richards.
Galactus is arriving on Earth not for a bite but to enslave the reality-warping son of Reed and Sue Richards as a long-term power source, according to leaks. The speculation is that Sue Storm dies to stop Galactus and then that Franklin uses his god-like powers to bring her back to life.
This is where Rio Vidal enters the chat. As established in Agatha All Along, Rio hates when people cheat death. If Franklin tears a soul back from her domain, he is an enemy of nature. So you’ve got a really interesting three-way battle forming here: Galactus wants the boy for energy, Death wants the boy stopped for violating her rules, and the Fantastic Four are in the middle.
In the end, the union of Galactus and Death is what leads to Avengers: Secret Wars. As the multiverse shatters through “incursions,” the universe requires a means by which to cull expiring timelines in order to preserve others. Galactus and Death are more than villains to beat up, they’re the cosmic immune system.
We’re beyond the age when heroes battled to save a city. We are now living in a time of modern mythmaking where the basic drivers of reality, Hunger and Entropy have faces, names and story lines. When Ralph Ineson’s Galactus and Aubrey Plaza’s Death at last share the screen, it won’t just be a crossover, it will be the pulse of the new Marvel Universe.
Read More 👉 Everything we know about The White Lotus Season 4 — Cast Details And Expected Storyline Updates
Lady Death and Galactus are far from just two scary forces – they are the core of what Marvel’s next cosmic era is going to be. Their clash lays the groundwork for a deeper, darker and more mythic MCU, one in which the fabric of reality bends, souls are traded, and the heroes we know go toe-to-toe with adversaries older than time itself. If Marvel honestly commits to this “Cosmic Gothic” era, the MCU could finally begin telling the ambitious, cohesive stories fans have been clamoring for.
Fandomfans keep your energy exciting with your favorite movie characters’ breakdowns of the biggest moments in movies, TV, and pop culture.
Explore all James Bond movies in order, iconic fight scenes, unforgettable villains, and how 007 evolved across six decades of cinema.
James Bond fighting is so much more than flashy action sequences. It is a six-decade journey through the evolution of fight choreography on film, changing global attitudes toward violence and the increasing complexity and artifice of stunt choreography in the movies. Ian Fleming once described Bond as a “blunt instrument” of the state—a man made to achieve results, not to be elegant while doing so.
It prefers its action to be muscled, aggressive, and violently blunt rather than graceful or theatrical. While Bond in Fleming’s novels was taught boxing and judo to mirror commando skills of the Second World War, cinematic 007 has evolved into more of a living painting, adapting to the martial philosophies, political climates and cultural sensibilities of the era.
The best fight scene in No Time to Die is the punishing stairwell brawl in Safin’s lair, where Bond is up against three armed adversaries in a narrow slab of concrete. Filmed in long, fluid shots, the scene is relentless and tiring, highlighting Craig’s older, injured Bond relying on instinct on the battlefield.
There’s a weight behind each punch, every gunshot is earned, and being in a tight space doesn’t bring with it any glitz. It’s Bond the hardened survivor, not the dazzling hero—pragmatic, efficient, and potently human. This moment perfectly embodies the movie’s themes of sacrifice, perseverance and the physical toll of being 007.
Spectre contains a loving nod to the From Russia With Love train fight, with Bond facing off against Mr. Hinx (Dave Bautista). It’s destructive, shattering several train cars. Bautista was starting to be “gentle,” but Craig told him to be more brutal.
Bautista complied, hurling Craig so violently that he left the actor with a serious knee injury (meniscus tear), forcing him to wear a brace for the rest of the shoot and ultimately having surgery. This fight, then, features real pain and injury from both players.
“Casino Royale” jolted the audience with its unsentimental brutality right from the start of the film. Shot in high-contrast grainy black & white the fight isn’t clean, it is chaotic and crude and Bond ends the fight bleeding. Bond attempts to drown his quarry, Fisher, in a sink, the quarry fights back. There is no elegance here.
The cinematography is in keeping with Cold War noir and spy fare such as The Ipcress File while confirming that this Bond is a “blunt instrument” and implying that he’s still coming to terms with the emotional cost of killing. The scene was intentionally to feel unchoreographed, to ball the struggle and the fatigue of taking a life.
Die Another Day is widely derided for its use of terrible CGI (the invisible car, the tsunami surfing, etc.), but the fencing match between Bond and Gustav Graves (Toby Stephens) at the Blades Club is a rare moment of hands-on stunt work. It begins as a civilized fencing bout and ends with a full-on broadsword brawl, wrecking the club set.
Trevelyan is Bond’s equal—a fellow “00” agent with the same training. The battle is a mirror match. Most importantly, the sequence mutes out the bombastic score and all we can hear is the metallic thuds, the heavy breaths and the wind. This sound design decision highlights the brutal intimacy of two friends attempting to kill each other.
The fight is a combination of technical grappling and dirty fighting (headbutts, biting), Bond finally throwing Trevelyan to his death. The classic line “For me” in response to Bond’s “For England, James?” that he answers shortly after meeting Trevelyan, signals a personal change in Bond’s motivation.
In The Living Daylights, the tussle between Bond and Necros clinging to the outside of a cargo plane is a marvel of aerial stunt work. Withstood the strain Unlike the green-screen-laden sequences of later times, this was shot with stuntmen (BJ Worth and others) actually hanging from a plane over the Mojave Desert.
The physical struggle, as well as the roaring wind (sound design has a significant role in that), make it all very disorienting and high-risk. It’s a battle dominated by gravity, not martial arts moves.
Licence to Kill is the bloodiest of the pre-Craig Bond films, and was the first to be given a 15 rating in the United Kingdom. The Bimini barrelhouse brawl is a highlight for its raw brutality. Bond isn’t trying to get away as he fights; He’s trying to do as much damage as possible. They refer to pool cues, broken bottles and a brawl that seems more at home in a western saloon than a spy movie.
The scene is staged and lit to highlight the fearsome Jaws, playing with shadows (the train closet) and jump scares. Bond is completely physically impotent; he punches Jaws in the jaw and breaks his hand — a world away from Connery’s crushing blows to Grant’s neckline. This makes Jaws a supernatural entity.
The resolution Bond stabs Jaws with a jagged lamp, delivering an electric shock is a variation on the Oddjob demise that includes a comic bounce, as Jaws endures and then departs. The sequence was choreographed by Bob Simmons, maintaining the trilogy of train fight masterpieces.
The beach fight and the hotel room brawl with Draco’s men reveal a new editing philosophy employed by director Peter Hunt. Hunt used quick cuts, jump cuts and a little bit of speeded up footage to make the fights more energetic. This gave the film a visceral, almost frenzied feel that anticipated the “shaky cam” mode of the Jason Bourne series by several decades.
The brawling judo fight is a demonstration of this transition from the chaotic to the slightly more stylized fighting in Dr. No. Bond uses the environment, a sofa, and a large statue to fend off the sumo’s size, continuing the message that Bond has to change his fighting style to whatever culture he’s invading.
When you ask people who know what they are talking about when it comes to the Bond movie library what the best is, it’s almost always From Russia With Love that is named, the duel between Bond and Donald “Red” Grant (Robert Shaw) on the Orient Express stands as a cornerstone moment in action movie history. It took the genre away from the bloodless fisticuffs that defined 1950s action films to a more visceral, claustrophobic reality.
The development of James Bond’s style of fighting is indicative of a narrative that’s about more than just choreography or spectacle. Every punch, wrestle, and fight for life is a product of the time it was made, informed by global politics, shifting definitions of masculinity and what audiences want to see in it. From Connery’s primal, rough-and-tumble fights to Craig’s brutal, Krav Maga–inflected efficiency, Bond’s battles have always stripped away the suave disguise of the gentleman spy to expose the lethal truth beneath.
Fandomfans is focusing on delivering movie details from old to new, stay connected for more updates.
