Life has no meaning, so fool yourself. This seems to be the protagonist and filmmaker's philosophy, and as a result you don't get much concrete meaning out of the film. While we don't gain insight to any of life's big questions posed endlessly throughout, this isn't the filmmaker Jim Akin's intention. I can only speculate that his intent was to come to terms with his own childhood in creating a portrait that was honest to him, and avoiding answers felt right.
However, I don't want to downplay this work by labeling it existentialism and leaving it at that. It certainly fits into that category, but there are delicate characters here with genuine philosophical needs. The protagonist's relationship with her father is intriguing as it shows the lack of security and comfort in her state of mind, having the constant influence of an irresponsible, nihilistic, but loving parent.
There is very little narrative to this film, and instead it just flows. It feels like a bunch of deeply personal and brief thoughts from a journal. They have little ties to one another and are very in the moment. I would say, however, that it's strange to hear the characters deliver these lines, as it doesn't feel natural, and monologues will come up out of no where that don't feel entirely motivated with the context. The things that the film wants to be "about" are merely ideas stated repeatedly but not investigated. For example, the film is about death because the protagonist contemplates death, but not because the film explores it through story or experience.
The film is visually interesting. As another reviewer said, there isn't one uninteresting frame. This adds to the poetic allure of the film as a whole and often to the individual scenes and how we're supposed to read them. I feel like the actual beach where the film is located would be unrecognizable from the film, as it's given a very distinct look and feel due to the cinematography. Conversations were nicely staged and often featured characters not making eye contact. My only complaint is that the visual style felt a bit too a la carte and employed all kinds of camera movements and shot types where it might have benefited from a more narrow palate.
Personally, I didn't get that much from the film. Certain people will, I think, who are secular and self-absorbed (not necessarily a bad thing). I used to be both those things but am not anymore, so this film was familiar but contrived for me personally.