51
Metascore
12 reviews · Provided by Metacritic.com
- 70Time OutTime OutAussie director Wincer handles the action convincingly, and Rickman's splendidly snide villain is a real treat.
- 63Chicago Sun-TimesRoger EbertChicago Sun-TimesRoger EbertQuigley Down Under is a handsome film, well-acted, and it's a shame the filmmakers didn't spend a little more energy on making it smarter and more original.
- 60Washington PostHal HinsonWashington PostHal HinsonWhat's missing in Quigley Down Under is precisely what is missing in its star. Selleck is a skilled light comedian -- he's at his best delivering a wry put-down to a British officer -- and he handles John Hill's bantering dialogue deftly. But for all his burly authority, Selleck lacks dynamism on screen. There's no danger in him, nothing unresolved or mysterious. He's likable, but something of a lug.
- 60The New York TimesJanet MaslinThe New York TimesJanet MaslinThe director, Simon Wincer, makes Quigley Down Under an unapologetic homage to the formula western at its most pokey, complete with Wagon Train-style score. All things considered, this could be a lot worse.
- 60Los Angeles TimesPeter RainerLos Angeles TimesPeter RainerA film with an intriguing premise and likable performances but not much excitement. [13 Oct 1990, p.F13]
- 38The Seattle TimesThe Seattle TimesThere must be dozens of film buffs out there with an unsatisfied hankering for Cinemascope Westerns. It's too bad, then, that Quigley Down Under fits the label, but doesn't deliver the goods.
- 25TV Guide MagazineTV Guide MagazineAnother failed attempt to make Tom Selleck a movie star, this is a handsomely mounted but vapid western that lumbers across the screen for two hours, providing little entertainment.
- 16Entertainment WeeklyOwen GleibermanEntertainment WeeklyOwen GleibermanVapid, cutesy, knockabout Western.