Narcos, the Netflix series, which tells the story of Latin American cocaine and is already available on the platform, said that the United States is "the main problem" for drug trafficking and drug users that "no happy endings". This is Eric Newman, a series of American producers and a category creative official who, after three years, focused on Colombian maps Cali and Medellin, and figures such as Pablo Escobar have now taken place and another place. Miguel Ángel Félix Gallardo, a cartel by Diego Luna Guadalajara, "Narcos: México" travels in the late 1970s and early 80s before land became a worldwide epicenter of drug trafficking. Differences What distinguishes this series from Colombia's seasons? Mexico's experience of "drug problem" is very different from Colombia. The Colombian was somehow a victory because it deactivated major cartels and violence was at the beginning of the 90s. Mexico not only did not win the war, but everything is getting worse and worse. And to find this news, "Narcos" had to travel to the past. As I left for a series of research, I realized how many drug history sections in Mexico started in the late 70's with the growth of Guadalajara human traffickers. Felix Gallardo was great, he nationalized industry, which was previously a handful of different drug guidance. It was the real first supercart. What do you think of critics who say that this humanization "praises" the traffickers? At the end of Pablo Escobar there is no glory, blowing a birthday candle at the hideout m … away from his family. These guys are rich, but do not live their lives; The drug trafficking business has no happy endings. I think that there is no danger of humanizing monsters because what it would say is that a monster has been born and is not true. If we think we can lose the opportunity to prevent them before they are monsters.