Narcopolis

First of all, I think many of the reviews are so polarized is that this story has such potential. Unfortunately it's missing the complexity to make it work. It needs levels of depth, the kind of movie you watch the first time and generally get, but you know you need to watch a bunch more times to enjoy the complexity. I like the overall style, soundtrack, and cinematography. Sure, there's a healthy homage to Blade Runner and I'm OK with that. In this day and age it's pretty hard to come up with something truly new without a ridiculous budget. I will say one thing that bothered me production wise and does about so many films these days is the audio. Can we please have an audio mix not designed for headphones? Vocals are too low and sound effects too loud. I have a very respectable home theater system and it's still hard to understand dialog without turning the volume to silly high levels. Anyway moving on... SPOILERS AHEAD I won't get into lots of detail, so you can still watch the movie and enjoy it. The concept of a society that has essentially legalized drug use is a good one. We are pretty much there now. Without getting into what is legal and illegal, these days any illegal substance is essentially available in a legal alternative. It speaks to the time we live in, taking it one level higher, and a great way to pull us into the story. Now we need a pay off. The truly interesting part that drew me to watch this movie is the idea of time travel and that we are capable of it via drugs. This is a truly great concept for telling an amazing story and has so much potential for wonderful detail. Unfortunately, the story doesn't focus much on that. It was worth a watch and I hope someone takes the concept and truly explores it to its potential.

The film opens in 2044. Todd Ambro is the head of a drug company that want legalization of its recreational drugs. We next see a hacker and then the film jumps 20 years to the past. Frank Grieves (Elliot Cowan) is a narcotics agent called A Dreck, or Dreg, or Drex, or Treck depending on who says it. He is investigating unusual drug activity and is discovering things which are impossible, all the while his family life is being destroyed. We don't know how this ties into the initial scene, but Ambro drugs is involved. At about an hour into the film, we have enough information to figure out the initial scene. The film moved in a haphazard fashion. The mystery aspect was more frustrating than entertaining. The film appeared to have been a statement on the makers of addictive pharmaceutical drugs that have lead to the increase of illegal heroin use, but then that aspect got lost to the overall production. Too confusing for my taste. Guide: F-bomb. Nudity.

I love near future science fiction, Philip K Dick and 'Do androids dream of electric sheep' subsequently turned into 'Blade Runner' both are up there with my favourite book and film. This film wants to have the same atmosphere as 'Blade Runner' the story revolves around in the near future all drugs are legal and a corporation is hovering up the profits with the police in its pocket. A detective known as a DREK is there to take out illegal drug seller. A body he discovers does not have an identifiable DNA. So why a 4, the dialogue is messy the plot confusing, several scenes simply add nothing to the story. This film really needed a firmer and tighter director as the result is disjointed and at times just confusing.

I decided to watch this film, on a wet and windy day. Much as i tried it was very difficult to hear the dialogue, and this common problem persists with many films, on offer on film packages ( sky movies etc ). What makes this problem so frustrating, is that numbers of films are allowed to be made with this handicap. I gave up after 20 minutes, as it looked interesting. H B O or Home Box Office create wonderful drama programmes, and unfortunate mugs like me, suffer from great expectations, all because we believe that being able to hear the spoken word.should be possible Rating ....4

Drugs and time travel - that's like ham and eggs right? Can't have one without the other correct? a perfect marriage True but after watching this mess, even a liter of black coffee couldn't keep me from dozing off to slumber city in parallel universe Narcopolis ( "Narcopolice"? ) just loses itself in trying to tie too many loose ends that seem to be caught in a vortex of bad Sy Fy writing where no hack has gone beyond. Hate being hard on a movie - regardless of budget, it is still someone's creative sweat equity - but this is a real stinker But if you are suffering from insomnia...this might be the right drug for ya.

Justin Trefgarne has his first cinematic debut with the crowdfunded Narcopolis; a sci-fi drama about a future where drugs have been not only legalized, but are being pushed by corporate backers as being a safe alternative to street narcotics. There were several things I really liked about this film, despite being what most people would consider a low budget type of film. First, as a science fiction, it brings a very unique idea to the audience. Although the majority of the film is in the detective style of neo-noir films, the concept is a solid one. Imagine a future, where the majority of citizens are not only using, but encouraged to do so though advertising and product guarantees. Narcotics are available in every society I can think of, but very few of them have been privatized outside of the prescription drug market. There is some decent acting, and I was particularly impressed by Eliot Cowan's portrayal as the protagonist Frank Grieves; who portrayed a massive and daunting man, battling his own demons, while progressing through a series of bizarre events. The things that most people will notice are the poorly written plot twists, and dialogue. Some of the twists that are meant to shock the audience fall quite flat during this film, or are revealed at the wrong times. Perhaps due to poor direction or writing execution, it's hard to say, but there are several scenes that make little to no sense in the overall plot. A few of the actors are new, and you can tell in the way they exchange dialogue. Yet if you can look past these scene errors and look at the overall film, I think you'll be quite pleased at the end result. I encourage more films from Justin Trefgarn and hope he keeps to the same genre. I especially enjoyed the opening of the film, which set quite a pace that I wished that the rest of the movie kept up to. Needless to say, it's a very sound Sci-Fiction / Drama, but most viewers will hold it to perhaps too high a standard. An excellent first entry along the lines of 'Equilibrium' (2002). 5/10

I struggled from the beginning. Even if you can cope with, Legalised all drugs idiocy, (we would self destruct within a year if all drugs were legalized. There is a reason why no one in any form or authority should be on drugs, whether that is someone driving, to the leader of a country....all drugs legal... really?), but yes getting pass this premise. Its like all common sense left the scientific adviser. Car number plates with bar codes? Oh my. You can see it now, local law enforcement, "Excuse me ma'am, can you tell me the car number plate from the robbery."...."Sure, it was a thick line, with small space, followed by a thicker line, no...that's not right, it was a thinner line." Again, no common sense. Oh and his cool visor that sees temperature of the corpse....he moves around to see it from different angles, then cuts back to him having not moved at all. Sad to say, i couldn't get through this film......

SPOILER ALERT! Eh? How in hell would you spoil this film? It's doing fine on it's own. It would be like taking a pooh on a pooh. (not bear on bear action there, just trying to sideswipe the no swearing rule) SO: Last weekend me and a few friends listened to: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAmQ7RsNAE4 23 times in a row, laughing our tits off, and wondering "why?" My guess is this film is a low rent version of that record, and without it's wit or humour Somebody somewhere had a love of science fiction, a lot of bad drugs, too much money, and decided to build this folly. Unlike Ringo the result wasn't pleasurable in any way (i'm being over dramatic for effect - the camera is occasionally lovely, that's why this review isn't merely a complaint about why IMDb doesn't offer a drop down 0 out of 10) but still the same question remains; "why?" Did you see my last sentence? Did you see how it didn't quite work? Maybe it was because the brackets were too long, maybe it was irrelevant, maybe it was a smelling error, maybe it was just time travel or i've been a terrible father messing things up for no reason, maybe it was that I'M NOT A WRITER That's this film. It doesn't work on any level at all. it's a bit like someone with too much money and drugs just went "i've got this bag of half-erst science fiction thriller memes, let's just place them artfully in this vase", but the vase was made of Ketamine so when they opened the bag the memes just went EVERYWHERE at random, and the money would have been better spent on a flower arranging course. WHY? You can work the equipment, but as my friend Gregory always said "musicians should make music, plumbers should do plumbing" Whoever made this: Film- making is not your skill. Well done for trying, but maybe take that flower arranging course.