Eli Zeal is just minding his own business as a convenience store owner when Thaniel Battle, a kid mixed up with the wrong crowd accidentally shoots Eli in an armed robbery. This prompts his mother, Tyree Battle, to take Eli and her son back to her hometown to escape trouble with the law. Basically a hostage, Eli meets Tyree’s eccentric family in a backwards small town, who try to heal his wound using their own sort of medicine. Will Eli ever be able to escape the crazy house he’s stuck in?
Production Quality (1.5 points)
As an early 2000s\late 1990s production, Waterproof tends to have an air of looking archaic most of the time. This mostly pertains to the odd video quality, even though camera work is professional. Audio quality is okay except for the loud soundtrack and some random background noises. For the most part, sets, locations, and props are realistic, thus making for authentic historical surroundings. The editing is fairly good throughout, and other elements show improvement as the film goes on. In the end, this is an average production, which is pretty good for the time frame.
Plot and Storyline Quality (.5 point)
Unfortunately, Waterproof begins in a very odd manner, with a very eccentric tone and premise that dominates nearly three-fourths of the film. The circumstances presented are almost unrealistic as they come off as cobbled-together and forced. This story is mostly a return-to-hometown plot combined with a prodigal plot, only it comes with extremely off-the-wall characters that are trying too hard to provide comic relief. Sometimes the story comes off as downright crazy as it is quite hard to take seriously. For the first half of the film, it tends to meander along with no real purpose, and then near the end, it suddenly produces a profound message that is tied to an important character backstory. However, for most audiences, this gem will be too late into the movie for it to be found due to the unusual beginning. On the whole, it is very difficult to understand the true meaning of this story, apart from the good ending.
Acting Quality (2 points)
With professional cast members, this cast is mostly fine, even though some actors and actresses tend to be a bit forceful and stilted with their line delivery and emotions. Other cast members are being purposely eccentric to fit their characters, but I guess they didn’t have a choice. In the end, this is an above-average acting job that makes the film at least half-palatable.
It is hard to know or understand what this movie was actually going for. Was this intended to be a satire? If it was meant to be realistic, the eccentricities needed to be packaged a little differently. It seems like there were many different and better ways the important message at the end could have been presented. We may never know what was meant by this film, but perhaps someone can make an improved version of it one day.
Final Rating: 4 out of 10 points