Theory #15

By March 25, 2013Nat-news

 
Since Lynne Ramsay left Jane Got A Gun we’ve heard many possible reasons for her exit. From over controlling producers to directors cut arguments to struggling to meet deadlines to falling out with her star. Well it was only a matter of time before Natalie got dragged into it. Previously we had heard that Natalie might not have even known about the conflict between Ramsay and producer Scott Steindorff, which seemed dubious, and now The Observer is reporting hearing that Natalie and Ramsay also had a falling out. I think that’s more likely given that Natalie is a producer, and that we haven’t heard anything from Natalie’s camp, but at this point we’re all clutching at straws. Let’s just hope we get a good film out of this mess.

The short piece is well worth a read and I thought the final paragraph was interesting.

“She’d been in control all the way, but the last week of pre-production became a series of calamities for a film-maker as precise and visionary as Lynne. It’s a shame to think Hollywood can’t accommodate a talent like hers, but maybe she was naive to think it wouldn’t be a rough ride.”

That strikes me as probably being close to the truth. A talented artist who just doesn’t have the experience in the Hollywood system to navigate those compromises that are unfortunately a necessity. Thanks to Kitten for the find.

Dazza

Author Dazza

More posts by Dazza

Join the discussion 10 Comments

  • Arrow says:

    Having a conflict with Natalie Portman gives a much better headline than a conflict with Scott Steindorff. Considering Steindorff’s behavior since Ramsay left, I have little reason to believe he isn’t somewhat involved in this.

    And I find all the efforts to spin Ramsay as a victim pathetic. Conflicts in Hollywood happens every day; you just don’t leave on the first day of shooting. She put the production in so much trouble, it will be a miracle if she didn’t singlehandedly kill the project.

  • toto20 says:

    @ Arrow …… Well said

  • doesthepoohdance says:

    Na-duhhhh, she meant to kill the project. She’s lux luther to Natalie’s super hollywood jew. The mark Natalie made in Hollywood is super polemicized. Now, you won’t catch the pooh trying to explain it to y’all right here on Natalie Portman .com, but plenty of talent in Hollywood are…. confounded by Natalie’s talent. She’s good and bad. Super-sized. A lot of her following are just blinded by her beauty, plenty of which is showcased here. “Oh Nat, what a good person.” etc. Remember when the author of V opted out of name recognition in the movie. I wager that he was smelling what she was cooking rather than just being upset with the way past projects were handled by hollywood, said spin regurgitated here.

  • Ming Choo says:

    acutally, pooh, a lot of people here are aware of her lack of talent, but you see, this is a fan site, and people here try to keep it positive. So, alright, she’s no Meryl Streep, but does she have to be?

    a) she’s nice to look at
    b) she brings attention to important causes and social injustices
    c) she really HAS worked hard to get where she is, and many people in her industry acknowledge and appreciate her work ethic
    d) despite her often wooden acting performances, her warmth and charm do shine through, and this makes her a kieable and in-demand leading lady

    so you see, fans here know that she’s not as great as she is lauded to be, but i don’t think it really matters, because people are more into her persona/image than her acting chops. at least that’s what i take from the majority fans.

  • starprincess66 says:

    out of the leads in the cast, who is left?

  • Adonis says:

    I read that Jake Gyllenhaal will probably get the role, since he is currently on the set of “Prisoners” veers off his last scenes first and then has no obligations. I want to hope so, because he is a very good actor really – I would say exactly the right person
    And now let’s finally start the movie, Natalie has no time for such trifles … let’s go to the Wild West!

  • Arrow says:

    Alan Moore’s battle with how big corporations treat his work pre-dates the V for Vendetta movie by years and continued after when he refused to have his name attached to Watchmen. People in Hollywood have a life outside of Natalie Portman and not every conflict in there has to do with her.

    And while I don’t deny some guys are probably just there for the pretty pictures, it’s pretty normal that most people visiting the fansite of an Oscar winning actress thinks that said actress is pretty great.

  • lh458 says:

    i like Jake Gyllenhaal reallly, but i think he and Natalie on Screen together is boring. i don’t really know why. Maybe its because they are very close friends an i know about it. I hope so much they find an actor which is very unique and special even like Fassbender.

  • Garcy says:

    Nice post, Ming Choo.

    Adonis – Is that just wishful thinking that Jake will get the part, or do we have some concrete evidence apart from that quick mention in that article?

    All this off-set drama has got me even more intrigued in the actual film. Really want to know how the rest of the cast pans out.
    Just saw “Warrior” a few days ago, and I was surprised just how deeply I reacted to it.

    I had some sort of weird premonition that Black Swan would turn out to be such a big success for Nat when I first heard about it. I have that same feeling about this, and I really hope I’m not wrong.

  • Adonis says:

    Look Garcy, so sure I’m not even with Gyllenhaal – but …
    If I so look at the other candidates (Jeff Bridges, Tobey Maguire), I believe that Gyllenhaal somehow the favorite for the film, and a very good actor, he’s also.
      So what better after the resignation of Fassbender.
    Natalie certainly would not say no …