Blu B
I'll give it this, it's a interesting concept and the end product is something that only could've come out during New Hollywood. A post apocalytpic society frozen over for unknown reasons where things are so bleak that people will play games of murder for thrills with Paul Newman starring sounds like a interesting idea, and it is. Problem is Altman's direction and the story just really don't execute it well at all. The cinematography isn't good but the most interesting part. 85% of this film the outer lens is blurred like were watching through a peephole and it does give an almost dreamlike feel to everything which I'm guessing was the intention. It's a bit weird at first but suprisingly I warmed up to it pretty quick and didn't even notice it half the time. If anything it just makes you focus on what's going on center frame quicker oddly enough. The sets are kind of cool. It reminds me of a early Blade Runner/Aliens style world frozen over. The camerawork can be too slow at times and the framing is very limited because of the outer blur constantly. Also, there are scenes where I just don't know what's happening because this has terrible pacing. It starts out a very slow burn which is alright at first to absorb the world but it also makes it drag out terribly when this turns into a murder mystery/uncovering the purpose of the game type thing. It's half decent when it's Newman arriving at his brothers but once everyone is killed it just feels like stuff just happens that gets borderline incoherent. The editing isn't good here and it really suffers in the second half when it becomes clear this can't figure out how to tell the murder mystery of how his lover and family was killed and the greater meaning of the game in a coherent fashion. And because the pacing is terrible it drags it out terribly. The music isn't bad though and probably the best thing in this though it can get a bit meandering at times. Newman is alright but he's almost forgotten about it feels like at certain points in the second half and everyone else is just alright and blends in and really isn't given any character. The end "fight" is a bit letdown also but the end explanation of everything is kind of interesting. Despite that, there really isn't anything here for Sci-Fi, Newman or Altman fans. Skip This. This has potential for a remake if they really gutted everything here.
Rated 2.5/5 Stars •
Rated 2.5 out of 5 stars
09/19/24
Full Review
Steve D
Bleak but interesting.
Rated 3/5 Stars •
Rated 3 out of 5 stars
08/15/23
Full Review
Charles T
Ice. Snow. Constant wind. Young women carrying children are celebrated. Wild dogs roam the tundra, eating the constant supply of the dead. Everyone drinks, everyone is depressed, and everyone waits to die. This is the world of Robert Altman's film "Quintet," or as we call it in North Dakota- "winter."
Essex (Paul Newman) and his pregnant girlfriend Vivia (Brigitte Fossey) arrive at a frozen city seeking Essex's brother, Francha (Tom Hill). In this futuristic ice age, the happy reunion is short-lived as someone bombs the family, killing everyone but the absent Essex. Essex chases the assassin, but St. Christopher (Vittorio Gassman) finds him first and kills him. Essex finds the body, and steals his belongings, assuming the man's identity- Redstone. This also brings the only decently shot scene, as Essex saves Vivia's body from a pack of dogs by placing it in a running river. Essex enters the local Quintet tournament. Quintet is a game that looks like a combination of Backgammon and Yahtzee, yet more boring than either. The game's adjudicator, Grigor (Fernando Rey), knows Essex is an impostor, but allows him in anyway. Essex also meets Ambrosia (Bibi Andersson), and the two generate a spark since Essex's grieving process over losing Vivia and their unborn child lasted a week. Men dressed like a road company version of "The Private Life of Henry VIII" skulk around and wax idiotic on the meaning of life, and life as a game, and the game of life, and then off one another.
For a science fiction/action/mystery, you would be hard-pressed to find either genre done well. There is no basis in time for the story to take place. The characters use items in the future without explaining them to the audience, but the device does not work like it did in "Soylent Green." The action is minimal- two graphic, unconvincing throat-slittings, and a stilted chase on a glacier. There is no mystery, since everyone knows everyone else's hidden agendas. You do not have to be Hercule Poirot to figure out what is going on, but Altman treats his heavy story like it was brand new to all of us. Paul Newman is trapped in this film. He reads his lines fast, as if that would satisfy Altman's penchant for improvisation. There are scenes of dialogue where Newman listens or observes, and the dumbfounded look on his face says it all. Gassman and Rey look too much alike, I kept trying to keep them straight. Andersson plays the helpful love interest too sincerely, she is hiding something and it is just a matter of (a long) time before Essex catches on. The dialogue is stupid. The film tries hard to be deep and meaningful, and it is not. An English major could have a field day sorting through all the allegories, metaphors, similes, double meanings, and other hoo-haa, but these elements are surface and glib, they do not warrant rapt attention. The loud, funny, Tom Pierson musical score (dig that flute!) serves as a device to wake up a snoozing audience. "Quintet" was filmed in Montreal, Canada. The barren location is the only thing right here. This is a boring, pretentious, directionless film. For the record, I fell asleep twice while watching this.
Rated 0.5/5 Stars •
Rated 0.5 out of 5 stars
07/18/23
Full Review
Audience Member
This is the worst film I have ever watched in my life. I really like some of Altman's movies, but this was pure torture. Everything about it from the art direction, costumes, music, etc. was poorly done and unimaginative. The story was incredibly dumb and stunningly boring from start to finish.
Rated 0.5/5 Stars •
Rated 0.5 out of 5 stars
02/24/23
Full Review
william k
Leftfield sci-fi drama with a star cast is fascinating to watch, but seems to be nothing more than a by-the-side exercise for its director.
Rated 3/5 Stars •
Rated 3 out of 5 stars
03/31/23
Full Review
kevin f
A classic end to the 70s dystopian science fiction films, with an excellent set of performances. Probably the reason this film is well regarded by science fiction buffs is because it highlights how most film critics are incapable of adequately reviewing any serious science fiction.
Be advised, this is not some comic book f/x extravaganza, but a brooding, atmospheric rumination on fatalism and faith in the face of relentless, implacable death. Itâ(TM)s a much less flashy (and less inspired) precursor to Blade Runner.
Rated 4/5 Stars •
Rated 4 out of 5 stars
03/31/23
Full Review
Read all reviews
>
