Palo Alto (2014)

Palo Alto is a high school coming of age drama, and like other coming of age films starring mainly teens, this film is quite similar with nothing much different or anything new to offer. Based on a novel, in which this film has the feel of a novel based upon it's characters and overall tone of the film. The plot of the film is quite thin and not something to watch for if you are looking for a deep complex plot. It is more so just a portrayal and 'real life' concept of teenagers and their everyday life and struggle, involving typical issues such as smoking, drinking, partying, depression, and peer pressure. James Franco is the headliner of the film being from the book of which this film is based on, though he only plays a small supporting character. Emma Roberts is the lead character in a role which she has played many times before (the shy, depressed, lonely teen girl). The other leads are two best friends, Teddy and Fred. Both have different backstories and appear very different in personalities yet are portrayed as best friends. Nothing too original or refreshing about this film. And in the end, we are wondering what the real point of the film was. Palo Alto reminded of several films by Harmony Korine, though his films have a more refreshing outlook in life, plot, characters and are overall more entertaining and interesting. Would recommend watching his films as opposed to Palo Alto.

Being that this is from a book of short stories (though inter-connected I believe) from James Franco, it's interesting that Palo Alto works as well as it does. At first I wasn't quite sure, and the first half of the movie appears like it'll be just a lot of aimless partying and following 'oh, whatever' teen angst and mishaps; as one girl (Emma Roberts) navigates her own feelings for the boys around her, another guy (Jack Kilmer) gets into car-crash trouble and has to serve community service. Meanwhile, Nat Wolf is like De Niro in Mean Streets transposed into sunny suburban California: a don't-give-a-f*** guy full of crazy - or just a little attention perhaps - and is very likely a sociopath at best.A lot of this is character stuff, and one could accuse Gia Coppola (daughter of the late Gian-Carlo, grand-daughter of Francis, the latter does a voice of the judge by the way), of doing some of the same middle-upper class navel-gazing as her Aunt Sofia has done in work like the Virgin Suicides or Somewhere. But the good news with Palo Alto is that, after kind of a rocky, ho-hum start, the characters gain some interest, some perspective. It helps that Robert's story involves her soccer coach with a romantic link and played by Franco himself and, whether it's due to his own material or not, he's really good here, subtle, damaged, creepy but not in an overt way, perfectly suburban. And Jack Kilmer's character - as does his performance - grows and deepens over the course of the movie through his work as an artist and in community service.Palo Alto edges out to be a satisfying experience, though it's more cumulative; you may wonder where this is going after the first half hour and if these self-important teenage-wasteland-ers will be worth following. But I think the creativity in Frano and Coppola's writing is that, meeting them halfway, there's more depth and heartbreak and genuine empathy you get for them as they experience more and more. The most original stuff? Maybe not. At the least it keeps things relatively low-key, and is a revelation for Nat Wolf as the live-wire of the group. It's less about 'oh, don't you feel bad for these well-off people, they have feelings too' than 'these are just people, they're pained, they're growing, give them time before they self-destruct.'Oh, and Val Kilmer's in it too as an off-in-his-world stoner step-dad. Which is awesome.

This movie had me bored. There was not one likable character. I was surprised to know that throughout the movie the main characters were supposed to like each other. There was absolutely no indication of it. Also what angers me is the amount of smoking. I can't help but think someone from the cigarette industry sponsored this movie. Isn't it enough of the smoking in movies. Actors lighting a cigarette in a scene has become a crutch to give them something to do. It's so overdone. I guess the movie is supposed to be a slice of life. The scenes were SO low energy. Also the music score was blah. If you haven't seen it yet, don't bother.If I had to say one word about the movie it would be YAWN.

OK, I get it. James Franco is a man of many artistic talents, which now include publishing short stories and having a film based on that book and starring in this movie. Also anytime a Coppola directs a film, you pay attention. Honestly the highlight of this film was that there were some very nice visuals. It was filmed like photographs being taken, which reinforced memories and nostalgia of youth. They had a good cast to work with Emma, Franco, and even Val Kilmer, but the characters were flat as was the plot and the story. It was boring. I felt like I was reliving some parts of my high school years- like the boring parts. I'd like to read the book of short stories- I bet they are very descriptive and poetic. But I bet there's not much plot, which is why I think it was a tall order to make a decent film out of Franco's first book using a first time director. Again, kudos for the cinematography. Maybe one day I'll try to sit down again and finish it but for now it was way too long and I couldn't get past an hour. Sorry Franco.