Panopticon

Acting was decent for a low budget flick. The movie had some great ideas, but they're not fully developed at all. Instead, we see the hint of some of those ideas repeatedly given over and over. Nauseatingly so. Editing is a severe problem in the movie. The vast majority of it could have been excised and it would have been a far better movie. As it stands, it is best watched on fast forward with some parts skipped entirely. I have this movie 4 stars because of the hints I mentioned above. I honestly don't understand why the director didn't develop any of those ideas. Some could have easily been done on the cheap. I would recommend this movie for people who are looking for science fiction ideas to develop; for those who love literal science fiction (and don't mind having to fast forward), and low budget directors looking too see how others have done it.

People wanting action sci-fi, big budget flicks, or cohesive/well scripted movies... give this one a pass

I watch every half decent high, low, no budget scifi film I can find. I've reviewed many of them on IMDB, I believe that the no budget type films are well-suited for intellectual script-driven scifi such as Jeff Thelen's "Panopticon".

While at times exceeding it's grasps, Panopticon is exceptionally well-made and is extremely ambitious for it's $5,000 budget. Yes, the pace drags at times, but on the whole, it is a very well-mad movie, with very well-done sound, good cinematography, good lighting(which is usually not no-budget films strength's), decent acting, and a solid and well-developed idea. Maybe the script could have taken the ideas further, and could have done with a bit more editing, it is still well-done and well-executed by and large. It deserves between a 6 & a 7 for sure, but it is not for everyone with it's dream-like disjointed sequences and deliberately confusing narrative style and structure; this is a movie that is meant to disorient and confuse, it is clearly not intended to give solid answers by the end, and one is largely left wondering, what does it all mean?

I can't tell you why I like Panopticon, I believe it is because it strives to carve out it's own path, it doesn't succumb to cliches, although one might argue it is a little too convoluted for it's own good, but I am just not sure that's accurate, simply because the narrative structure is a direct result of the storyline, it isn't just a choice to confuse, the narrative structure and story are really one and the same. This is not to say I wish there were not a few things done differently, some of the dramatic parts drag on too long, with long drawn out conversations, so yes, some more editing to tighten the pace of the movie would have strengthened it for sure.

All in all though, I would love to see even more movies like this that dare to do their own thing, that try to make the most of their resources and turn out a pretty solid product. I think the acting is well-done, and I'm really not sure why some people say it is awful, it is nowhere close to awful, not even close. Stilted in a few spots? Sure, but awful? No.

If you have patience, and you enjoy thought-provoking sci-fi that isn't afraid to verge into the confusing and weird, give Panopticon a try, otherwise, I'd probably avoid this, you'll likely hate it.

I've been trying to find online sources discussing this movie but have come up with nothing. For me this is a no budget indie mindbending sci fi gem that nobody watches, let alone reviews or discusses.

Panopticons budget was most likely next to nothing and it appears as if what little they had was all blown on production with nothing at all left for marketing. In 2018 they should at least have come up with some online social media campaign but it looks like they just made it and then wandered off to do something else leaving the movie to be viewed by next to nobody.

Panopticon tells the story of two software entreprenuers working on a method of downloading memories. One is the actual software engineer and the other takes care of more of the business side of things looking for financiers and investors whose girlfriend is also used as the first guinea pig. The software engineers father is a dementia patient and this dynamic gives a good outlook on the effects of real world memory loss and as someone with a mother suffering from advanced dementia, I can relate.

A power struggle unsues when the software engineer sees the potential for misuse of their product while the other partner is seeing the potential for millions of dollars in investment.

I wont give any spoilers away but if you're into mindbending movies that are abit 'out there', definitely pretty trippy and can forgive the obvious low budget then this movie really does deserve a look.

Definitely not to everyones taste though, but if you're into more black mirror'esque sci fi this just may be for you.

I thought it was a great movie for what it was since it appears that it had a shoestring budget. But not having money to spend doesn't make this a don't watch. I think not having a budget makes the execution of this so much better

Bill (the lead character) has got to be the worst actor I've had the misfortune to watch. He just walks around as if he's spaced out. The lights are on but no one home. The lead woman is equally as bad. How they both get work is beyond me. There are so many unacceptable breaks in dialogue (dead air) if the actors were up to it maybe , but the fact it had little budget doesn't impress me as it's so bad it shouldn't have been made in the first place.