Dynamixor The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

Myron Clemons A film of deceptively outspoken contemporary relevance, this is cinema at its most alert, alarming and alive.

Leoni Haney Yes, absolutely, there is fun to be had, as well as many, many things to go boom, all amid an atmospheric urban jungle.

Marva-nova Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

sddavis63 The thing about this movie is that you have to have some "stick-to-it-iveness" to see it through to the end and really appreciate the story. The first time I tried to watch it I failed. I gave up about halfway in. It had put me to sleep a couple of times and I just wasn't able to focus on it. It seemed overly slow-paced; it dragged. But there was something there. Something needed to be revealed. And that's the key. There is, indeed, something there. Jane (played by Natalie Portman) is actually a very interesting character, and her story is slowly (very slowly) revealed in a series of flashbacks. In the present, she's married to a man (Noah Emmericah) who was once an outlaw and is being hunted down by the outlaws he used to run with, and she has a five year old daughter. With her husband shot and wounded and the outlaws coming, she needs help, and she runs to Dan Frost (Joel Edgerton) - the man to whom she was once engaged, who by happy (perhaps too happy and therefore too contrived) just happens to live in town. Together, they take on the Bishop Boys.Jane's past is what makes this movie work. If you can wait for it to be revealed, it makes Jane a much more interesting and sympathetic character. Without giving anything essential away, let's just say that in the past she and Dan had a life and a future that was thrown into turmoil by the outbreak of the Civil War. The rest of the flashbacks stitch together what happened to both Jane and Dan and eventually do lead you up to an explanation of what's happening in the present. Her past is slowly revealed, so you have to be patient as you watch, but I thought (the second time I watched this) that it was worth the wait.If you go into this expecting a typical western full of gunfights, you will be disappointed. It really is more about how Jane's past led to the present, and there's really very little gunplay in this until the last 20 minutes or so of the movie. There were apparently a lot of production problems involved with this (cast changes, etc.) and there are some who might be evaluating the movie because of its production history rather than its actual quality. The sets are also fairly minimalistic. There's nothing really fancy about this movie. With a budget of about $25 million, it's fairly low budget compared to some of the well known movie released around the same time, and that does show in the sets, which are limited and bare. But the performances - especially by Portman and Edgerton) are very good. (7/10)

Leofwine_draca JANE GOT A GUN is a disappointingly grungy western that goes through the motions without ever engaging the senses. It's another film that's full of flashbacks but unlike in, say, BRIMSTONE, these feel padded and drag the snail's pace down to a crawl. The film has a murky and digital look to it which I didn't care for and indeed it feels quite depressing. Natalie Portman is the erstwhile heroine but she ends up making way for Joel Edgerton's tough gunslinger for most of the film. The film builds and builds to a climax, but when it occurs it takes place in the dark so that you struggle to see what's going on. Altogether this is rather disappointing and certainly not the mini-epic I was hoping for.

etherashe It's a fine movie. One of the best I've seen in a while. Natalie Portman's performance is impeccable. She's not only one of the most beautiful women in Hollywood, she's also the best actress. Ewen McGregor plays a subtly sleazy bad guy that almost makes my skin crawl, if only because of his confidence and surety that he will never face justice. All the other actors carry their parts well. The story is simple, but reads true. Nice cinematography, and dialogue. There's really not much to criticize. I guess most people just over-think things too much these days, rather than just relaxing and enjoying a nicely done film.

tom-43722 I literally didn't recognize Ewan McGregor throughout the entire film. I didn't know which of the outlaws was John Bishop until I looked it up on the internet later. Sadly, that's not a compliment to Ewan's acting but simply a note of how much he's changed since Revenge of the Sith. He's a talented actor - I think he actually surpassed Alec Guinness as Obi-Wan Kenobi - but John Bishop didn't stand out as a character. The only thing I can remember about him is that he never killed children. That showed a hint of honour, which is good, but apart from that, there was nothing notable about the character. I couldn't even tell which villain was which because on the back of my DVD case it said Ewan was playing a guy called Colin. I kept waiting for someone to call him Colin so that I could know that the guy playing him was one of the three greatest actors in the Star Wars prequels, the other two being Christopher Lee and Samuel L Jackson.As someone who actually liked the Star Wars prequels, even though I know they're flawed, I feel like Natalie Portman wasn't as good in this film. For example, when she found out that her daughter was presumed dead whilst Jane was a prostitute, she was way too over-the-top. Yes, I get it, Jane was upset that her daughter was presumed dead but good god, could she have opened her mouth any wider in that scene? When Padme found out about Anakin's crimes on Mustafar, she was just as distraught but she didn't look ridiculous. It doesn't help that the only reason Jane stood out at all in the film was because she was the only woman who had any real presence in the story. She wasn't a particularly interesting character.The flashbacks were annoying too and it's partially because of them that the plot was so incoherent. Half the time, I didn't know what the hell was going on and only managed to make sense of it by reading a summary on the internet.Ewan McGregor and Natalie Portman have both done great work in the past, including Star Wars and I have no doubt that they will do great work in the future, but sadly I think this movie represents a low point in their careers.