Is Quigley Down Under Worth Watching?
Answer: Yes, Quigley Down Under is definitely worth watching if you enjoy Western movies.
It features a runtime of 119 minutes and offers a standard storyline that appeals to general audiences.

Verdict:Quigley Down Under is a confirmed HIT based on our analysis of audience ratings and box office momentum.
With a rating of 6.7/10, it has delivered a mixed experience for fans of the Western genre.
Answer: Yes, Quigley Down Under is definitely worth watching if you enjoy Western movies.
It features a runtime of 119 minutes and offers a standard storyline that appeals to general audiences.
Last updated: January 18, 2026
Released in the dynamic cinematic landscape of 1990, Quigley Down Under emerges as a significant entry in the Western domain. The narrative core of the film focuses on a sophisticated exploration of American Matt Quigley answers Australian land baron Elliott Marston's ad for a sharpshooter to kill the dingoes on his property. Unlike standard genre fare, Quigley Down Under attempts to deconstruct traditional tropes, offering a conventional take on its central themes.
The success of any Western is often anchored by its ensemble, and Quigley Down Under features a noteworthy lineup led by Tom Selleck . Supported by the likes of Laura San Giacomo and Alan Rickman , the performances bring a palpable realism to the scripted words.
Performance Analysis: While the cast delivers competent and professional performances, they are occasionally hampered by a script that leans into familiar archetypes.
In summary, our editorial assessment of Quigley Down Under (1990) is mixed. With an audience rating of 6.7/10, it stands as a highly recommended experience for genre enthusiasts.
Quick Plot Summary: Quigley Down Under is a Western film that presents a compelling narrative that engages viewers from start to finish. This summary provides a scannable look at the movie's central conflict and narrative structure.
Ending Breakdown: Quigley Down Under concludes its story with a mix of closure and open interpretation. The finale presents its approach to western resolution.
The conclusion addresses the core thematic questions, offering viewers material for post-viewing discussion.
The final moments of Quigley Down Under reflect the filmmakers' creative choices, offering an ending that aligns with the film's tone and style.
Worth Watching If You:
| Metric / Region | Collection (Approx) |
|---|---|
| Worldwide Gross | $21.4M |
| Trade Verdict | CLEAN HIT |










MGM Plus Amazon Channel
Apple TV
Amazon Video
Apple TVAnalyzing the audience sentiment, IMDb rating of 6.7/10, and global collection metrics, Quigley Down Under stands as a successful venture for the creators. It remains an essential piece of the 1990 cinematic year.
Quigley Down Under has received mixed reviews with a 6.7/10 rating, making it a moderate success with the audience.
Quigley Down Under is a mixed bag. It might be worth watching if you're a fan of Western movies, but read reviews first.
Quigley Down Under is currently available for streaming on MGM Plus Amazon Channel. You can also check for it on platforms like MGM Plus Amazon Channel depending on your region.
Matthew Quigley: Sharps Shooter. Quigley Down Under is directed by Simon Wincer and written by John Hill. It stars Tom Selleck, Laura San Giacomo and Alan Rickman. Music is by Basil Poledouris and cinematography by David Eggby. Plot sees Selleck as Matthew Quigley, a Wyoming cowboy and sharp shooting rifleman who answers an advertisement to go to Western Australia as a hired sharp shooter. If proving his worth, he's to work for Elliot Marston (Rickman), but when Marston outlines his sick reasons for hiring Quigley, the pair quickly become on a collision course that can only see one of them survive. It was written in the 1970s by John Hill, where it was hoped that Steve McQueen would take on the lead role, but with McQueen falling ill and Clint Eastwood allegedly passed over, the project sat on ice until 1990. In came Selleck and the film finally got made. Just about making back its money at the box office, Wincer's movie deserved far better than that. It's competition in the Western stakes in 1990 were Costner's beautiful and elegiac Dances With Wolves and the Brat Pack bravado of Young Guns II, both vastly different films from each other, and both considerably different from Quigley Down Under. If those two films contributed to the average response to the Selleck picture? I'm not completely sure, but viewing it now one tends to think that the 1990 audience just wasn't ready for such a delightfully old fashioned Oater, one that features a straight and simple narrative to tell its tale. It's safe to say that anyone after deep psychological aspects will not get that here. There's some serious themes in the story, such as the horrid genocide towards Aborigines, while the deft kicks at the British are fair enough even to a British guy such as myself. But in the main this is old time Western fare, where it may be as predictable as a horse doing toilet where it pleases, but it's fun, brisk, gorgeous to look at, and there's never a dull moment within. Wincer (Lonesome Dove) directs with assuredness and the trio of cast leads are great value. Selleck cuts an impressive figure of a tough guy high on principals and with a comedy glint in his eye, Rickman is suitably attired all in black and bang on form for sneering, cocksure, villainy, while Giacomo is pretty and works neatly alongside Selleck as a spunky, lively, sidekick type who carries along some sad emotional baggage. There appears to be quite some division amongst fans and critics as regards Poledouris' (Conan the Barbarian) score. Whilst I agree that it does at time veer close to being too boisterous, it sits well within the type of film the makers are going for. It carries with it a sort of Magnificent Seven flavouring, imbuing the story with a rightful sense of adventure. It also flows freely with Eggby's classical capturing of the Western Australian locations. Eggby (Mad Max/The Man From Snowy River) utilises the scope format on offer to deliver some truly gorgeous back drops, while the brown and yellow hues are most appealing to the eyes. Costuming and sets are spot on for period detail, and Quigley's Sharps Rifle is an absolute beast of a weapon. The simple structure and telegraphed nature of the story stops it from being a true classic of the genre. But it's got so much going for it and is high on rewatchability factor, to make Quigley Down Under (not the best of titles either) essential viewing for fans of old fashioned Westerns. 8.5/10
_**“Maybe the dingo ate your baby”**_ In the late 1870s, a famous sharpshooter from Wyoming (Tom Selleck) travels to Australia for a gig with a land baron in the Outback (Alan Rickman), but things turn sour when he learns what the job really entails. Laura San Giacomo is also on hand as Crazy Cora. “Quigley Down Under” (1990) is a Western taking place in the desert wilderness of Australia. The title suggests that Quigley was meant to be a Western character in the manner of Indiana Jones with sequels of him visiting other continents, such as “Quigley in Africa,” “Quigley in South America” and so on. Unfortunately, its lack of success at the box office put the kibosh on that. It’s not as goofy as some of the Indiana Jones yarns and I appreciated the realistic vibe behind the typical hero shenanigans. For instance, we know personal hygiene wasn’t the best in the late 1800s and, especially, in dry areas of the Old West and most of Australia where washing clothes was infrequent; “Quigley Down Under” shows this reality. Selleck of course makes for a great Western protagonist, likewise Rickman as the odious antagonist. Meanwhile petite Laura San Giacomo is an amusing spitfire. She was 26 during filming. The film runs 1 hour, 59 minutes, and was shot entirely in Australia (Warrnambool & Apollo Bay, Victoria, etc.). GRADE: B/B-
This analysis is compiled by our editorial experts using multi-source verification and audience sentiment data for maximum accuracy.