Very well executed

Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

I wanted to like it more than I actually did... But much of the humor totally escaped me and I walked out only mildly impressed.

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

Palo Alto follows two teenagers specifically as they live their lives at the end of their high school years, as they and their friends develop relationships and attempt to balance their stress with everything else. Gia Coppola does a great job with the directing here. There were several scenes that proved pretty to look at or just plain flattering for the actors or sets. It was nice to see someone putting effort into the movie. As far as acting goes, Emma Roberts shows herself to be a talented actress that simply hasn't found the role to make her one of the greats. There's an Oscar winner in there somewhere, she just hasn't found her yet. Jack Kilmer most notably pulls off a solid performance as the other leading teenager. He pulls off the whole stoner persona really well, while still bringing depth to his character. And James Franco also manages to pull off a note-worthy performance here as a high school soccer coach. He's genuine, no matter what the material is that he's given. As for the rest of the acting, it ranges from bad to okay. The main child actor is pretty terrible. Every line he's given is just an atrocious read and it's so blatant that this kid has no idea what he's doing, nor any concept of how to act. I know he's a kid, and thankfully his role was small, but I don't really care. He sucked. There was also this voice over of a judge reading something to one of the characters and he's just monotone for the entire thing. Nobody talks like that. It's like he was literally reading off the script. Nat Wolff was kind of off and on here. Sometimes he was pretty good, and other times he wasn't so much. Some of the writing was good. It resonated with me and I was able to relate to some of the feelings of the characters. But a lot of the time it was way out there. Coppola didn't seem to know how to make these characters hook up romantically, because a lot of the time they just start making out and hope for the best. And it works a lot of the time. Like apparently there's no such thing as relationship made organically, people just mack and pray. Some of the characters are kind of dumb sometimes. They jump to conclusions and overreact. Furthermore, the movie attempts to cram as much relatable high school junk in as possible, and as a result none of it receives nearly as much development as it should. There's the whole soccer thing, then there's graduation and relationships and partying and volunteering (no working apparently) and as a result multiple of these things take a backseat to each other. And while some of them did receive plenty of attention, many didn't. Also there's this metaphor for life that gets briefly mentioned at some point in the movie and then gets brought up again at the end as if it's a huge deal and has huge significance to the entire movie and all that, when in actuality the metaphor is poorly presented and doesn't make a whole lot of sense with the rest of the movie. It's pretty pretentious. And the pacing is just flat out bad. When the movie seemed to be wrapping up it'd only hit halfway, and from then on I was losing interest with every minute. And it doesn't help that the movie is super repetitive. It's a lot of the same scenarios with the same characters dealing with the same stuff. It gets pretty boring after a while. Overall Palo Alto kind of sucks. I like the concept of taking two very different teenagers and showing their story from their perspective and how they interact with each other and all that, but a concept alone isn't enough to save an entire film. It's often poorly written, poorly acted, and boring. Sure the directing and some performances are saving graces, but they simply can't support the entire film. In the end I wouldn't recommend it.

I do not recommend this movie. I didn't have high hopes for this movie considering its ratings but it seemed like at least watchable teen movie. Oh, how wrong I was... The movie has a great cast but the story is weak, barely linked and developed, but also very weird and creepy at times. I like Emma Roberts but her acting in this movie was mediocre. I was hoping that the story will eventually get better or have a good ending at least. During the movie I was thinking should I continue watching or just quit. I watched the last half hour just because I knew it will end soon (and still hoping that something will improve). When the movie ended, I felt regret because of losing so much time on it 'cause the ending was as bad as the whole story or even worse, I can't even decide. I wanted to give this movie a 3 but it would be too generous.

As aimless as the teens it portrays, Palo Alto see's yet another Coppola enter into the movie making business, this time Gia, Francis's (The Godfather) granddaughter and Sophia's (Lost in Translation) niece who in adapting James Franco's collection of short stories of the same name has created an at brief times realistic and insightful look into modern day teenage hood yet stumbles in actually saying anything of merit in a tale that starts depressing and ends there to.Palo Alto clearly wants to be a showcase for the Los Angeles brackets of teenagers, the type that party first and study later and the type that have fun by chopping down trees with chainsaws late at night. Palo Alto actually feels like more of a fever dream of a cautionary tale or look into this life as to be honest it never really connects on a level that feels wholly realistic. There type of films work best when scenarios and characters feel real or relatable and while Palo Alto can for brief moments do this, a majority of situations and players either do things that feel utterly ridiculous (like a lot of teens do, just not to this level) or downright unbelievable. This would largely stem from the source novel from Franco, who seems to make his business in being weird/alternate but Coppola shows enough here to suggest that he could've done more to make the material better.What Coppola does succeed in is in her direction of her young cast, while supports Nat Wolff and Zoe Levin don't do a lot to suggest they've got a career ahead, with Wolff in particular an incredibly annoying presence (how his been cast in so many movies since this effort is beyond me), young leads Emma Roberts and son of Val, Jack Kilmer show a real talent in their field. Roberts has long been a talent to watch (and much more bearable than her relative Julia) and her portrayal of confused April is a great piece of work while Kilmer as similarly wondering Teddy suggests he may one day to achieve the success of his father, with hopefully his father's weight gaining fall. Author of the novel himself Mr. James Franco also makes an appearance in what is on face value an on screen version of himself as creepy older guy looking to gain a much younger girlfriend.There are some nice touches to this film by Coppola, a keen eye for a nice shot makes you think she has a career ahead of her and some great lead turns by Roberts and Kilmer, but nothing could help such a cold and un-relatable piece of work ever become anything more than acceptable. We've been blessed over the years to have countless and memorable entries into the young teen/coming of age drama catalogue and with Palo Alto you're much better off to find one of these, instead of watching this instantly disposable offering.2 Grand Theft Auto playing Val Kilmer's out of 5

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.