State Property kept me interested all the way through. It was basically the same story as Scarface, but set in Philadelphia: a guy with nothing decides he wants to make a lot of money, so he starts killing people until he is the main drug dealer in his area. I want to say the movie was well written, but I feel like it's hard to tell if there was a script or if the actors were mostly improvising. The dialog feels very natural, and I believed pretty much every performance. Beanie Siegel carries the story as the no-nonsense central character. He is very straightforward and blunt about confronting every obstacle to his business. As the story progresses, I felt like there was a logic to most of his decisions, even when he was doing something crooked. For example, if he decided to kill other drug dealers to get them out of his way, it wasn't too shocking, since they had to know it was a dangerous lifestyle. But when Beans threatens a character named Ceasar, it felt like a turning point in the movie. Beans meets Ceasar in his detail shop and tells him he has to work for him. Ceasar comes off as being very straightforward, telling Beans that if he did this, it would put him in the middle of him and another dealer, explaining that he couldn't just change allegiance without endangering his own life. Instead of seeing it from Ceasar's point of view, Beans just guns him down. It felt different from the rest of the violence in the movie because Ceasar wasn't arguing with or disrespecting Beans, he was just explaining what would happen if he did what Beans wanted. It seemed like a very unprovoked response, and it ends up leading to Beans' arrest and conviction. Ceasar lives and goes to court, but is blackmailed into changing his mind about testifying against Beans. The judge still sends Beans away, and the movie ends, but I already have the sequel going, so I'll let you know where it goes from here. Hopefully it's more of the same, because I never got bored watching part 1. One minor disappointment: I didn't feel like they made much use of the setting. I would've like to have seen more details specific to Philadelphia.
I've noticed that a lot of these low budget straight to video movies set in the hood seem to find a lot of actors and actresses who give performances that feel very naturalistic. I don't feel like I can see them "acting," they just seem to "be" their characters. The dialog doesn't have a cadence that sounds recited-- It seems like a common thread I am finding in movies from this genre. I'd be curious to know if the filmmakers are casting people they know and everyone is just naturally talented, or if the people in the movie are even real actors with careers. Maybe they are actually from the city where the movie is made and it's just easy to be themselves on screen. For whatever reason, I feel more like I'm watching real people than when I put on, say, an indie drama or a J-horror.
I've noticed that a lot of these low budget straight to video movies set in the hood seem to find a lot of actors and actresses who give performances that feel very naturalistic. I don't feel like I can see them "acting," they just seem to "be" their characters. The dialog doesn't have a cadence that sounds recited-- It seems like a common thread I am finding in movies from this genre. I'd be curious to know if the filmmakers are casting people they know and everyone is just naturally talented, or if the people in the movie are even real actors with careers. Maybe they are actually from the city where the movie is made and it's just easy to be themselves on screen. For whatever reason, I feel more like I'm watching real people than when I put on, say, an indie drama or a J-horror.