Time to catch up with another round of Jane Got A Gun tidbits. Doesn’t seem like this film is going to be in the conversation for too long. Considering the long drawn out production and release, that’s definitely a shame. If you want to catch it in the cinema you better hurry up. Thanks to Belerofonte.

– Let’s kick things off with a nice summary of the troubled production, as I’m sure there are a lot of you who aren’t aware of how it all went down. At one point it was set to be Natalie and Michael Fassbender starring in the next film from the incredibly talented, Lynne Ramsay. So here’s how it all went up in smoke.

– The film pulled in $800k this weekend and the worst opening weekend screen average of Natalie’s career, although not that surprising given the lack of marketing available.

– Forbes covers the wipe-out but offers a positive spin on things.

And the sad irony is that, after all the fuss, it’s pretty good. It has some rough edges and it’s very slow (west), but it’s well acted, and its third act is awfully effective. If I may, Portman in full western gunfighter mode does cast an iconic image. I get why Weinstein didn’t spend much of a fuss on the film, as the financial Straight Up Films handled the marketing and the film has the whiff of damaged goods. But it’s not remotely a calamity and it’s a darn shame that this $25 million western drama is barely going to crack $750,000 for the weekend in 1,210 theaters. It earned $277k yesterday. I’m not saying you need to rush out and see it right now, but it’ll be one of those you stumble upon after theaters and feel a little bad for not giving it the theatrical support it could have used when you had the chance.