The website's consensus reads: "Retreading a sordid saga without fresh insight, Depp v Heard offers little to recommend for anyone already familiar with one of the most publicized trials of the century.
"[5] Daniel Fienberg of The Hollywood Reporter wrote, "For viewers coming out of a 10-year coma, Depp v. Heard is sure to be vaguely enlightening and disheartening, but otherwise, it's hard to know who the ideal audience would be.
I'm sure some of the most vocal and flamboyant of online Johnny Depp supporters will be happy to see themselves represented with so little pushback, so maybe it will be a fun time capsule for them?
"[6] Pallavi Keswani of The Hindu wrote, "Cooper's attempt with Depp vs. Heard remarkably manages to dodge anything that would have made it meaningful...
"[7] Rohan Naahar, writing for The Indian Express, called the documentary "the cinematic equivalent of armchair journalism" and "typically well-produced, but frustratingly shallow".