Cringworthy acting. None of the characters were likable. The story and the decisions made by the characters are illogical. But the B/W cinematography was decent. Unfortunately, the film in whole fails for me.

The photographer Eugene (Peter Flaherty) is perfectly cast. He does a good job as pervy, creepy kind of guy with his fetishes. Black and white can be a good medium in many films (Schindler's List as prime example), but in this movie, I think not. It did not appeal to me as a "feature" of the film. WARNING - there is a rape scene.... Overall, I found the movie disturbing and it seemed to fall flat in telling the story completely... seemed to leave a lot of moments that were incomplete. I think only a certain type of audience would watch this movie and appreciate it. Myself, I did not.

On the face of it , this film has a potentially interesting story and nice B&W cinematography. A photographer becomes involved in the life of one of his subjects. The movie seems to want to examine photography itself, voyeurism, morals, prostitution, illegal immigration and even the art world, in fact quite a few subjects get covered here. The problems are many, the movie is just not well made or well acted and ultimately the story becomes unrealistic and itself exploitative. As the movie progressed some scenes seemed to specifically exist to titillate, going against what this film seemed to want preach. The lead actor is very unappealing and as a photographer myself, I never believed him as a photographer, he literally came across as a sick voyeur. There were scenes involving him that were just nonsense. The dialogue in the film is not well written, and many scenes are too staged. Even actors hired to play background addicts don't come across as believable. Very bothersome is the fact that there is obvious bad dubbing, I assume the scenes were not well recorded to begin with. In the end the film makers took a very serious subject about human exploitation and exploited it themselves. Nice try, it didn't work.