Unreal that a film could rival Paranormal Activity for inducing yawns, but Quintet pulls out the stops. It's not only as boring as PA, but it tries to make points that are so vague they are meaningless to anyone able to stay awake through the entire film looking for some substance. Problems:First, that annoying filter! REALLY, this blur filter, as if the entire film is a dream sequence. Next, the music. It seems so out of place trying to make you think something is happening, while nothing is. Almost like the conductor had the band playing for another movie. Plot! Where was this thing going? I'm sure there might be fans of Altman or Newman who might like this just because, but if you're neither, this is a brutal and boring experience. Excruciating for someone hoping to see interesting sci-fi and a glimpse of someone's idea of the future.

Altman's most underrated work, Quintet's dreamy other worldly aesthetics are as mesmerising in their bleak detached white wash, as 2001: A Space Odesseys lush elegant space scape's were, only Altman's vision is one of despondence without respite, and it's that which alienates some from enjoying this slow, often perplexing near masterpiece. Well overdue a new critical appraisal with regards it's standing amongst Altman's other more celebrated films. Despite the widely held view its one of Robert Altmans lesser achievements, Quintet still enjoys a comparatively small but loyal cult following that will hopefully grow in time.

Fortunately, all films aren't for everybody. 'Quintet' is only for a few.I saw this picture twice when it first came out, and I was practically the only one in the theatre. Why? Because it is an exploration into existential possibilities, and when you're in such territory, it's not the type of film where everything is explained, which is what audiences want these days.The problem is, existentialism (in the Sartre sense) is way out of style, if anyone even still knows what that is anymore. Today everybody wants to be cool, so 'Quintet', which is a quiet study of a very controlled situation, probably makes people squirm, and so they can just say, 'what was THAT all about??' 'Quintet' isn't cool (even though the premise is freezing to death), and it just hasn't got the appeal that even supposedly broad-minded film buffs might consider worthwhile.What I don't understand is that, if people can praise, say, Bergman for 'The Seventh Seal', why would they not give 'Quintet' a bit of consideration? Altman was plainly shooting for somewhat of a Bergmaneque question, only on a less intellectual plane: what the hell do humans do when there are fewer and fewer options available for survival? Answer: they go on anyway.'Quintet' is what it is. If nothing else, it is a fine example of adventurous film-making, pushing the limits, in the period right before the blockbuster syndrome took over, once and for all.

This is one of the many very good performances by Paul Newman, who was always underrated as an actor because of his all-encompassing beauty. The main problem with this movie, in my opinion, is the huge Vaseline budget they had. The whole movie was shot with Vaseline at the edges of the lens. I find that very annoying. When I make the effort to remember not to be annoyed by that "Vaseline experiment", I find it is not a bad movie by a long shot. The cast is brilliant, the futuristic plot is innovative for the period and the decor is intriguingly apt. The smearing of Vaseline on the lens applied to a whole movie may have been innovative, it was certainly daring, but I, for one, like to be able to look at the part of the screen I choose, and not be forbidden to have a clear look at the edges. CH