it just didn't resound with me in the same way as, say, the wild bunch, unforgiven, tombstone, once upon a time... The movie seemed rather insincere and cheesey in some parts - trying to be more than it was. Just my impression though, I don't, by any means, regret watching it.
You didn't mention the greatest western of all time - Lonesome Dove.
"There are a million fine girls in the world, but they don't all bring you lasagna at work."
I think that Quigley Down Under is more of a throwback to the more idealistic westerns of the 30's and 50's. I guess it's just a matter of taste within the western genre.
shareIt is not only a throw back to the old style of westerns but it is also a different type of variety. VIVA LA differance. It basically took an american cowboy and placed him in Australia where they had a simular but definately not the same type of frontier lifestyle. Him dealing with the Aussie culture and the aborigine culture is a good change of pace. It even had a good set of moral delemmas.
I'm sure this all old hat in Aussie films but it doesn't show up that many times in US westerns. We need more of it.
It also helps when researching information about guns for another film that i founded out that Quigley's rifle really did exist. Its a Long Range Sharpes 1874 Model Rifle. Mr Pedersoli made the modified one for the film.
"Its easy to win when you throw out the rule." from Hitchcock's "Saboteur."
Quigley is one of the better attempts at a "Western" in the modern era, IMHO. It is one of those that I have to seat down and watch anytime that it happens to be on. Tom Selleck fits the cowboy role better than any other modern actor, with the exception of maybe Robert Duvall or Tommy Lee Jones.
"Complicated as new plowed earth,
Simple as dirt"
[deleted]
Thanks for the information. But as for making things up, I was just reporting the information that was given to me.
"Its easy to win when you throw out the rules." from Hitchcock's "Saboteur."
Yeah, Quigley was cheesy in parts. And It's not nearly one of the greatest. But I never thought it was supposed to be some of the revisionist, thinking man's western. Then again, Tombstone wasn't a thinking man's western either. I loved Lonesome Dove by the way. It's long, being a miniseries and all, but it's worth the watch. Another good revisionist western is Dead Man's Walk, about the 20-something years of Gus and Woodrow Call as young, inexperienced Texas Rangers circa 1846. I have a hard time watching David Arquette, but Jonny Lee Miller is interesting as the young Call. And they get well-tailored support from Keith Carradine, Harry Dean Stanton, James Edward Olmos, Brian Dennehy, Tim Blake Nelson, and F. Murray Abraham. Wasn't the same caliber miniseries that Lonesome Dove or even Streets of Laredo were, but it had some thought-provoking moments.
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!!
--Michael Palin (Monty Python's Flying Circus)
Yeah, it was 2 hours, some of it should have been cut.
And this is ANOTHER movie with a Disney music score that cuts its knees off.
The major end sequence is rather beautiful and seemingly allegorical, to me.
I think Quigley down under is insulting. Its basically an American movie bad mouthing Australians for their ill treatment of the the indigenous population. Hum
Americans can really talk in that respect, Quigley was probably best pals with the Indians prior to the events of the film. And of course the villain is English(when in fact it was actually the English that kept white Australians on a leash, in terms of how they treated aborigines). You want to see a decent Western set in the outback watch The Proposition. It not only shows the brutality against aborigines it also undermines the myth about Bushrangers being Robin Hood figures.
Republicans dont watch stand up, theyre busy watching cartoons, trying to see who's gay.