I truly love this movie, but the more I watch it, and realizing at the end of the film how proficient Quigley was with a handgun, it makes ABSOLUTELY no sense as to why he wouldn't have used a handgun earlier in the film, as we was virtually fighting for his life.
Again, I realize that this is a movie
If you dint want him dead, why yall leave him with me?-Mouse
At some point earlier, Marsten asked the same thing, why he didn't use a pistol
Quigleys answer was "Never had much use for them."
Then of course after killing three men in the last gunfight Marsten, just about dead wants to know how
Quigleys responce
"Said I didn't have much use for them, didn't say I didn't know how to use them."
In a world where a carpenter can be resurrected, anything is possible.
Yes, I know what he said. But in the context of the film, it's ridiculous.
Quigley has a limited amount of ammunition. He kills many men whose weapons and ammunition he could have taken to defend his life, if it came to that.
Still really love the movie, though.
Wait here. I get dressed, I kill them, I come back.
Just a question of preference
He did arm up with pistols when the Britishers arrived
And left pistols and a rifle for Cora when he left to get help
In a world where a carpenter can be resurrected, anything is possible.
It's called suspension of disbelief. If you're going to watch movies, you will have to learn to do that
shareYes, but his point was WHY Quigley didn't have much use for one, and didn't carry one. A high=powered rifle is great, FOR ITS PURPOSE -- but is rather useless if you are in a gunfight, especially with more than one opponent. Yeah, so he hit everything he aimed at, pretty much .... but in reality, this wouldn't happen with several attackers that had any kind of cover or concealment.
And a pistol can be drawn and fired so much faster, especially if your rifle is, as Quigley's usually was, stored in a saddle scabbard. The pistol, in a holster, is always instantly available. The Sharps .... not so much.
Which is why most Westerners, when they had any inkling of trouble, would be carrying a rifle AND a pistol.
Quigley's supposed non-interest in pistols was, to say the least, pretty damned silly, especially considering the odds stacked against him.
I still love the movie, but that's definitely a bit of illogical weirdness.
Quigley's supposed non-interest in pistols was, to say the least, pretty damned silly, especially considering the odds stacked against him.
Is very bad to steal Jobu's rum. Is very bad.share
Quigley was obviously an expert gunfighter. Perhaps he had some tragic incident in his past which made him give up gunfighting, and maybe vow never to use one again, so he wouldn't be reminded of what happened. He did react extremely aggressively when Marston told him his job was to kill people with his rifle. Maybe Quigley switched to using a rifle to hunt down game and nuisance animals ONLY (no killing humans anymore).
shareLet's examine the gun fighting he does in the movie:
-Goon riding off in the wagon after dumping them: Has no pistol and at that range it wouldn't have been effective.
-First encounter with goons: Has no pistol and at that range it wouldn't have been effective.
-Goons running aborigines off cliff: He might have scavenged some pistols from the previous encounter but again, at that range the rifle was the only effective weapon. (You may recall that they never managed to hit him)
-Shootout in town: He had left the handguns with Cora (both for her protection and to save weight to speed his journey to town) The old man offered him a single shot muzzle loading pistol that would have been far less effective than his rifle. He also had no trouble winning the fight with just his Sharps.
-Sniping Marston's ranch from the mountain: Pistol would have zero use.
-Shootout on the mountain: I question whether a revolver would have had much of an impact on the outcome of that fight considering how well he did without it anyway...and the fact that he only lost because he was shot from behind (or at least from an angle he wasn't looking).
-Duel with Marston: Literally the only time the revolver was the better choice which is ironic since Marston forces him to use it and it was the only reason he wasn't gunned down by the two remaining goons.
-From a cinematic point of view: That last gunfight scene certainly had more of an impact with the abrupt revelation of Quigley's pistol marksmanship. Besides it was funny in a Raiders of the lost Ark kind of way to see the 'expert' get trounced and a witty quip shot at him afterwards.
The argument could also be made that the real star of the movie was that big Sharps buffalo gun and as such it stands to reason that it would be hogging the action.
At least that's how I see it...
I'm genuinely convinced that every movie would be better with Arnold Schwarzenegger in it.
The argument could also be made that the real star of the movie was that big Sharps buffalo gun and as such it stands to reason that it would be hogging the action.
It's the same with Lucas McCain. In a few episodes of "The Rifleman" he proves himself very proficient with a revolver, but he never carries one. Like Quigley, a rifle is just his preference.
share