I haven't read the William Faulker novel this film is based on, but suspect it is way superior to this movie.
Some problems with this film: the annoying split-screen - which is very pretentious film-school-student-level and Goddard 1970s (this is what happens when you let an actor direct). Plus the fact I simply do not believe the James Franco character at all (maybe he just cannot act?). The long lingering on a metropolitan American imagining of what it is to be amongst the rural poor in the 1920s/30s - overdone really. And the use of monologues by characters - which clog up and lengthen the film (no film needs commentary from characters to tell us what is happening if it's filmed well).
Still, things to enjoy: the superb performance by the open-mouth rotten-toothed father character with the authentic dialect and accent (thank Faulkner for that). Some spooky sound and music. The atmosphere of the poor south. The 'disaster' scenes of various types.
For those who like wallowing in nostalgic poverty porn misery, this'll be like heaven.
For me, my reaction is 'neh'... it passed a couple of hours when there was nothing on the telly. Ho hum. 2 stars.