I was always under the impression that Quigley down under was a sequel.
It certainly seems that way from the title. It sounds like its the further adventures of...
I wish my hair was Emo so that it would cut itself
Don't you know what "down under" means? It is commonly referred to Australia since they are in the southern hemisphere.
It means Quigley in Australia. I don't know how that sounds like a sequel.
Yeah I know what down under is. THats not what I meant.
When you have a name like Quigley Down Under it implies that we already know who Quigley is and that he's had previous adventures.
This is something how I imagined the "Quigley movies" to look like before I knew Quigley down Under wasn't a sequel.
Quigley
Quigley returns
Quigley strikes again
Son of Quigley
Quigley Down Under (the one where Quigley takes it on the road and has a culture clash)
Quigley Triumphant
Quigley VS Bigley
Quigley reborn
In other words: "who the f*uck is Quigley and how does he have a film named after him when its only his first movie? Who is he and what difference does it make that he's not from down under? Is he not from down under? Oh where's he from then?
Just saying is all. Not saying its a bad movie or anything. Havn't seen it so I don't know.
I wish my hair was Emo so that it would cut itself
Did you think SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE was the sequel to a movie named SHAKESPEARE?
http://www.bumscorner.com
http://www.myspace.com/porfle
Interesting point. No I didn't but then again I was familiar with Shakespeare as is about 99.9999999999999999999999999% of the world.
I wish my hair was Emo so that it would cut itself
I understand what you mean, Bob, because I had the same impression. But I guess that's the way they wanted it.
shareI hope this person is kidding, but I'm not sure. After all, the title of, "The Madness of George III" was changed to "The Madness of King George" for American audiences because when test marketed, people complained they hadn't seen parts I and II.
shareI'm kidding to a certain extent but I was just saying that when I did originally hear of this movie I thought that Quigley may have been an established character in a movie or a series of movies that I wasn't familiar with.
I wish my hair was Emo so that it would cut itself
Don't feel bad. I thought the same thing at first.
"Look! Up in the sky...."
I will say the same thing, just because at a young age, Rescuers Down Under was the only other movie I had seen that was Down Under... so to speak.
I knew it was a movie taken in place in Australia, so I am aware its not just a word that meant "Sequel", but I will say, I too thought it was a sequel. Maybe I'm in the wrong for thinking that, but I truly saw the movie going...
"What ever happened to Quigley before he went Down Under?"
With all due respect to the movie, it would have made an interesting series, they have enough story from all the characters, situations and events in the movie to make One Prequel, at least. I'd have loved to see how he got the rifle he has in the movie, or the back story with the woman would be pretty cool.
Please Turn Me Over ~ Mr. Blue Sky
Really? That's hilarious!
shareI know this is an old thread, but I just thought I should add some support to your camp, since I always thought the exact same thing. The nature of the title always seemed to me like it presumed a prior knowledge of this character named Quigley. It seems just as if Quigley has already mixed it up in the American frontier in a movie simply called "Quigley," and now he was going down to jack things up oldschool in Australia in a sequel called "Quigley Down Under."
I remember seeing a trailer for this movie in a theater when I was maybe eight years old and thinking that this must be one movie in a series of cowboy adventures; just like "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" was one movie in a series of treasure-hunting adventures, and clearly presumed knowledge of this character named Indiana Jones. Enough people seem to feel this way that I don't think we are insane.
I know what you mean. Maybe it's a series of books and Quigley Down Under was the one the producers decided to make.
shareQuigley
Quigley returns
Quigley strikes again
Son of Quigley
Quigley Down Under (the one where Quigley takes it on the road and has a culture clash)
Quigley Triumphant
Quigley VS Bigley
Quigley reborn
Also if Crazy Cora and Quigley had a hot sex scene, then the title QUIGLEY DOWN UNDER can take on a different meaning.
Don't get me started on the name Cora Cobb.
And yes, I am kidding.
***********************************************
But, LAURA SAN GIACOMO is a HOTTIE.
Here are some photos of her:
http://images.google.com/images?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rl z=1T4GGLL_enUS325US326&q=LAURA-SAN-GIACOMO
***********************************************
Ye Olde Sig Line:
Liberals kill with ABORTION.
Conservatives kill with the DEATH PENALTY.
I kill with THOSE and WORDS.
I thought the same thing the first time I saw this movie on my dad's movie shelf.
GK: Every show is your last show. That's my philosophy.
Rhonda: Thank you, Plato.
You know, the first time I saw this movie, which was years after it was released, I constantly felt as I was watching it that they would have liked to turn Quigley into a franchise or a series of movies. It just seemed to me that they were laying the foundation for a character that would appear in multiple films. I don't know if that was ever the intention and if it was, the fact that this film barely recouped its budget probably killed that idea. But now that I read this thread, I do think that the title was part of the reason I felt this way. Quigley Down Under is a title that does make it seem that we should have some familiarity with the Quigley character and seems to lend itself to a series of titles featuring Quigley.
share[deleted]
Matt Quigley and Cora Cobb (lol) had potential to be a good tv series also (except westerns are dead and LSG probably wouldn't have agreed. Tom might have still had Magnum burnout also.) I would have loved to have seen a sequel or prequel around these characters... even a book(s).
share[deleted]
I was always under the impression that Quigley down under was a sequel.
It certainly seems that way from the title. It sounds like its the further adventures of...
I saw this movie when I was 14 years old. Never once thought the title meant a sequel. Just simply quigly down under.
share