I did not like the movie and had to suffer through the whole movie before I could decide how to rate it. I would have liked to award 10stars based on the efforts they made with such a low budget. It is a very fine job for $30,000 and these days low budget movies should be encouraged but just because i like the idea, still, the star rating is for entertainment value not for intentions. The acting was just fine, that they got no money for it, or deferred , shows how much can be done on hope of a pay off if it is successful. More movies should do this. However well they performed and seemed to fight with the bad audio and disjointed editing and confusing message(s), if there were more than one.I was most frustrated by having to crank the volume and adjust just to hear what often turned out to be meaningless. It just needed more work in continuity, editing-post production tasks- to make it really viable as a whole effort. It just didn't make all the connections. good scenery, some good shots but lost in confusion. other shots of a guy urinating and flushing had no apparent value yet survived the cutting room. if there were some abstract water connections , it was not enhanced by watching and hearing a urine stream. I nearly stopped right there. 4 or 5 stars is generous to a good attempt but ,still, lousy movie experience. I did watch it to the end and still have that conclusion...fine acting by novice amateurish group of young people that was not helped by shoddy post production efforts and bad audio- music, songs, continuity.