Review for Avatar

Avatar (PG-13)

Release Date: December 18th
Director: James Cameron
Starring: Sam Worthington, Zoe Saldana, Sigourney Weaver, Michelle Rodriguez, Stephen Lang, Joel Moore
Rating: 5 out of 5 stars

James Cameron, who is most known for his success in directing movies like “Titanic” and “Terminator,” has topped the box office again with this visually stimulating, thrilling adventure known as “Avatar.”

The movie takes place on a planet called Pandora in the year 2154, a planet that is populated by a 10-12-foot-tall race of blue cat-like people known as the Na’vi. The U.S. military sets up a base on this planet because they have discovered an expensive mineral that lies underneath the Na’vi’s beloved home tree. They are set on forcing the Na’vi to relocate but are met with opposition, and what happens when Americans don’t receive what they ask for? That’s right, they take it anyway. Jake Sully (Sam Worthington), a paraplegic, takes on the mission to inhabit an avatar body in order to enter into the world of the indigenous people and earn their trust. What starts out as a mission motivated by his curiosity and the dream of being able to walk again, turns into an internal battle that ultimately leads to him switching sides. He meets Neytiri (Zoe Saldana) and learns from her the ways of the Na’vi—their language, their customs, and their love and connection with nature. As he gets lost in the beautiful world and wonders that Pandora brings and strengthens his trust and relationship with Neytiri, he realizes that he might be fighting for the wrong side. Indeed, he is, and this is shown when the ruthless humans bust in and try to destroy everything that is essential to the life of the Na’vi.

The visual effects of this movie are breathtaking. It is hard not to get lost in the beauty and bright colors of this imaginary world. The Na’vi are portrayed as a beautiful animal-like race that blends in with the fluorescent nature around them. As for the 3D experience, especially, you will get so immersed in the world that a 162-minute long movie will suddenly feel like it’s not long enough. However, the story is quite simple. It has a very predictable plot, which leads to a no-surprise-ending for the audience. But even with a plot as simple as this one, the movie does not disappoint. “Avatar” is one of the few movies of 2009 that actually lived up to its hype. The new dimension of special effects used in this movie was worthy of the large budget Cameron had to make it.

It is obvious that a lot of effort was put into the making of “Avatar,” and it would almost be a sin not to acknowledge how spectacular it was. Of course, you can complain about the dialogue or the not-so-unique plot, but a movie that can engulf an audience in its picture and visual effects even though the story is so simple, is definitely one to be recognized and applauded. An entirely new complex language was created specifically for this movie. Some of the best CGI ever seen in a movie was used in this one. Everything seemed so real—from the Na’vi, to the animals, and the flying prehistoric-like birds, to the bright trees and plants. Basically, the effort was noteworthy and should not be overlooked.

Even though the acting is sometimes easily overlooked in a movie like this one, it was convincing and very well managed considering most of the actors in this movie were playing imaginary creatures instead of real people half, if not the whole time. Sam Worthington, who was most recently seen playing a part-human, part-machine in “Terminator Salvation,” has officially earned a “career take-off” from his role in this movie. Zoe Saldana has also claimed her fame and shown off her noteworthy acting skills in this one as well as her most recent film, “Star Trek.” Sigourney Weaver dominated her role as Dr. Grace Augustine, making her enjoyable to watch every time she appeared on-screen.

“Avatar” has turned out to be a “must see” film of 2009. It is a fantastic escape to an adventurous, imaginary world and will keep your attention from beginning to end. Even after sitting down for two and a half hours, you might even find yourself sitting there wanting to still be immersed in the amazing visual effects for an even longer period of time. The story may not be the best you have seen all year, but the movie as a whole, is worthy of the title “Best Movie of 2009.”

Trailer:

Long Overdue Review for Brothers

Brothers (R)
Release Date: December 4th
Director: Jim Sheridan
Starring: Tobey Maguire, Jake Gyllenhaal, Natalie Portman, Sam Shepard
Rating: 4 out of 5 stars



A remake of the 2004 Danish film “Brodre,” “Brothers” is an emotional film that portrays the reality of what can, and sometimes does happen, when the effects of war are brought back home.

The film delves into the lives of a committed soldier and his family. Tobey Maguire plays Sam Cahill, a soldier husband who is being shipped off to Afghanistan, away from his wife, Grace (Natalie Portman) and his two daughters. Before he leaves, he picks up his brother, Tommy (Jake Gyllenhaal), who is being released from prison. Tommy does not endure a very warm welcome from his father (Sam Shepard) whom clearly favors his marine son due to the fact that he was also once a marine. Upon arriving in Afghanistan, Sam encounters a helicopter crash and presumed dead when they cannot find his body. However, he survives (no spoiler there) and is picked up by the Taliban and held prisoner. After being tortured and having to endure an incident that leaves him guilt stricken, he returns home. Meanwhile, Grace tries to hold her family together with her two daughters whom are strangely unaffected, even for their age, by their father’s supposed death. Tommy helps Grace get through her loss by coming around often to redo her kitchen or play with the girls. Once Sam returns, everything changes. He is not the same person he was before he left and even his daughters are scared of him. He becomes paranoid at the idea that something went on between his wife and his brother and he lets the paranoia and guilt take over him, making you wonder what crazy thing he might do next.

“Brothers” is a step up on the performance scale for Tobey Maguire, who is most known for his character in “Spiderman.” He shows a very different side of him that was never seen in any of his other movies. Maguire does not exactly seem like the kind of person that can pull off the role of a soldier crazed by guilt, but he did it better than anyone else ever could. The acting by all of the characters including the young girls was superb. It is almost impossible not to really feel the emotion that is happening here. Gyllenhaal serves as a comic relief most of the time in order to lighten the mood of the film. It also has to be said that no two actors make a better pair of brothers on screen than Maguire and Gyllenhaal. The two of them not only have that brotherly chemistry on screen but they also look like they could be brothers in real life.

The best part about the movie is that it is not overly dramatic. Despite what the trailers show, it is not all about a man coming home from war and going ape-sh*t on his family for a reason he manifests in his head. The movie is steadily paced to the point where the audience should have no trouble understanding where the bottled up anger and guilt is coming from. This is a film based on emotions and events that are very real to soldiers suffering from post-traumatic stress from war. The main message of the film is forgiveness. One brother screws up and ends up in prison but learns to forgive himself and change his immature, unreliable ways in order to help his brother’s family, while the other brother who is normally a responsible, loving family man strays toward the path of self-destruction. His manic tendencies come about because he cannot forgive himself.

“Brothers” is a movie worth seeing. It is not as fast paced as the trailers make it seem, and that is effective in engulfing you in the story because it slowly builds up different emotions instead of hitting you out of nowhere so you walk out thinking you just watched some crazy movie about a crazy soldier. It serves as an understanding for why some soldiers will never be the same after experiencing certain things during war in the Middle East, and it brings a message that anyone can learn from. This film is beautifully acted with a great story, definitely one that is worth the money.

Trailer:

Review for The Twilight Saga: New Moon

The Twilight Saga: New Moon (PG-13)
Release Date: November 20th
Director: Chris Weitz
Starring: Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, Taylor Lautner, Ashley Greene, Michael Sheen, Billy Burke, Peter Facinelli, Dakota Fanning
Rating: 2 ½ out of 5 stars


Vampires, werewolves, and one overly emotional teenage girl caught between the two worlds—a movie that could not have possibly turned out any better for die hard “Twilight” fans. For the movie lovers out there who have not yet been sucked into the black hole of emo-vampire fanaticism that is “Twilight,” you’ll find that it is not quite as good as the raging fan girls make it seem.

“New Moon” continues the relationship between Edward (Robert Pattinson), the 109-year-old vampire, and Bella (Kristen Stewart) where “Twilight” left off right up until Bella’s 18th birthday. Bella gets a paper cut opening a present, which then leads to danger involving some suddenly thirsty vampires. Edward then decides, stupidly I might add, to abandon her for her own protection, overlooking the idea that there are other vampires out there looking to kill her. The movie then drags on for what seems like forever, as Bella mopes around and stares out her window at nothing. Fortunately, the movie picks up again when Bella’s buffed up friend Jacob (Taylor Lautner) comes into the picture, as he pulls Bella out of her depression. The two develop chemistry together the more time they spend with each other. It should be noted that the chemistry seen on screen between Bella and Jacob is about ten times more convincing than that between her and Edward this time around. Everything seems fine until Jacob disappears with a secret. The secret being that Jacob is…wait for it…a werewolf! Didn’t see that coming, right? Of course you did, even if you haven’t read the books the movie trailers already completely gave it away. Poor Bella, first she falls in love with a vampire and now her best friend is a werewolf—and vampires and werewolves do not get along so well, whatever will she do? If you’ve read the books you already know whom she chooses. One of the last scenes of the movie is probably one of the best. The reason being that we finally get to watch some people who can act. Bella and Edward meet the Volturi, the “law enforcers” of the vampire world. Michael Sheen plays Aro, the leader of the Volturi. You also get to see Dakota Fanning’s new look with crimson eyes and a devious smile when she says, “This may hurt just a little,” as she attempts to torture Bella with her mind. The rest of the movie involves Bella’s attempt to convince Edward and his family to change her into a vampire too, so she won’t end up an 80-year-old grandmother dating a forever-17-year-old vampire.

“New Moon” is definitely a step-up from the first “Twilight” movie, however. I would imagine it might have something to do with the lack of the movie’s first director, Catherine Hardwicke, whose failed attempt at interpreting the first book turned out to be a movie full of bad acting, horrible make-up and plot, and cheesy special effects. The fact that she did not return to direct “New Moon” was probably the best thing that could have happened to this pop culture phenomenon, and instead, Chris Weitz stepped on board giving higher hopes to those of us who were not satisfied with “Twilight” one year ago. Weitz managed to pull off some entertaining scenes with the werewolves using special effects that were convincing enough. He even managed to get somewhat of a decent performance out of Stewart this time, whose acting skills usually involve nothing more than blank stares, and a total, emotionless, monotone voice. The plot was not bad, although it dragged in some unimportant parts and then it rushed through some more significant parts of the movie. Most importantly in the eyes of “Twilight” fanatics, the movie stayed very true to the book. These are the positives to “New Moon.” The negatives, however, include cheesy dialogue that was, at times, unintentionally laughable, and hilariously terrible entrance scenes that include Edward walking towards Bella in slow motion. Also a rather important scene involving the vampire villain, Victoria, was ruined and drowned out by the sound of pop music playing while werewolves chased her through the forest in slow motion. The scene was mistakenly rushed through when it shouldn’t have been, seeing as how she will have an important role in the third movie.

Although “New Moon” does not appeal to everyone, it did not fail to deliver to “Twilight” fans and teenage girls that like to scream over the eye candy. “New Moon” was better and much more entertaining than the first so if you’ve already seen “Twilight” a year ago and liked it, you will definitely like this one more. Not to mention, the ending was a perfect cliffhanger for those who haven’t read the books and maybe even for those who have. If you haven’t seen the first movie or read any of the books and you usually spend your time watching movies that have some depth to the plot, you probably won’t want to waste your money on this one. Don’t let the teenage hype fool you into thinking you’re going to be watching an award-worthy movie because it’s not quite at that level, and probably never will be.

Trailer below:

Review for 2012

2012 (PG-13)

Release Date: November 13th
Director: Roland Emmerich
Starring: John Cusack, Amanda Peet, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Thandie Newton, Oliver Platt, Danny Glover, Woody Harrelson
Rating: 3 out of 5 stars

With all of the talk, movies, and books made about the end of the world, “2012” takes the cake. As a disaster movie, it does not disappoint. Who wouldn’t want to pay money to see the coast of California sink into the Pacific, Yellowstone National Park turn into an active supervolcano, or the aircraft carrier USS John F. Kennedy conveniently crush the White House while being carried by a huge wave?

Chiwetel Ejiofor plays the president’s scientific advisor who learns of the impending apocalypse early on in the year 2009. Danny Glover portrays the part of President Wilson. He meets with other worldly leaders to discuss the plan of survival, as if survival is even possible at all. That plan, which the audience does not know too much of until the end of the movie, is to build large ships like a modern day “Noah’s ark.” There is even a scene in the movie where helicopters can be seen carrying animals such as giraffes onto these ships. In order to preserve the human race, the government lets important, rich people onto these ships while everyone else is left to die, typical. Oliver Platt plays your typical jerk politician who actually likes the idea of only rich people being allowed to survive. John Cusack plays the heroic role of Jackson Curtis, a divorced man who is trying to salvage whatever kind of a relationship he can with his two kids. There’s nothing like the end of the world to bring you closer to your family. Amanda Peet plays his ex-wife whose current husband is a plastic surgeon as well as an amateur pilot. How convenient is that considering their eventual situation in California where their only way of survival is to fly away from the crumbling earth? Cusack also meets a hilariously crazy man in Yellowstone who is played by Woody Harrelson. He fills Cusack in on the inevitable disasters that are about to take place and even provides him with a map that leads him to the governments’ secret ships. In a nutshell, the apocalypse is supposedly caused by neutrinos from the sun heating up the Earth’s core, which causes its crust to shift, which then leads to earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, and tsunamis. The government, of course, keeps it a secret from the world way up until the very second people start falling into the cracks of the Earth. Important people are saved while the rest are out of luck. Then there’s a lot (almost too many) close calls for the main characters.

The movie has to be looked at in two different ways: an action-packed, over-the-top destruction movie and then, of course, a regular movie with all the basic elements—plot, picture, acting, etc. As an action movie it was amazing. “2012” had some of the best special effects I had ever seen in a movie. It would be almost cruel not to award major points for the amount of detailed effects that were used in order to destroy the entire world convincingly. About one and a half hours of nothing but the destruction of cities and important landmarks will not leave you bored for a second. However, as a movie movie, “2012” did not live up to its potential. Although the acting was not horrible, the weakest point of the movie was its basic plot. The script rushed through the science and explanation of how and why the world is coming to an end, and even though the description and trailers for the movie emphasize the prediction of the Mayan calendar, it is hardly mentioned in the movie at all. The dialogue had no complexity and was, at times, very cheesy. About an hour into the never-ending destruction you realize that the movie was not made to present logical facts that prove any kind of theories about the controversial, oncoming apocalypse, but only to entertain with crumbling cities, earthquakes, tsunamis, and a poorly developed storyline of a divorced couple and their two children. But I guess Emmerich couldn’t waste too much time on facts when there is more hell to unleash upon the planet, something he never hesitates to do in almost all of his movies. Towards the end, the movie drags on, some of the scenes are utterly ridiculous and there is a bit too much cheesy dialogue where it is not needed nor wanted, especially in a situation when the people are minutes from death. Stop talking and save the ship already, for the love of God!

I definitely recommend seeing “2012.” It is a step up from Emmerich’s previous films like “The Day After Tomorrow.” It is a bit long but not boring, the action scenes make up for most of the weak plot, and even though you won’t be learning much about the predictions of the real 2012, you’ll still enjoy watching the world end with superb special effects that will keep you on the edge of your seat.

Trailer below:

Review for Pirate Radio

Pirate Radio (R)

Release Date: November 13th
Director: Richard Curtis
Starring: Philip Seymour Hoffman, Bill Nighy, Rhys Ifans, Nick Frost, Kenneth Branagh, Tom Sturridge, Emma Thompson, Jack Davenport
Rating: 3 ½ out of 5 stars

Imagine living right now in a world where the Internet and iTunes didn’t exist, and the radio only played your favorite music for no more than thirty minutes a day. If you weren’t alive and living in Britain during the 1960s this is hard to imagine. But for them, it was real. When it comes to music, however, you will always have some crazy outlaws that will go as far as to anchor ships off the coast of Britain and broadcast music from there 24/7. This is what “Pirate Radio” is all about.

In this movie everyone’s life is centered around rock ‘n’ roll, as it was for a lot of people in that time. After all, the 1960s was an era of some of the best rock music to ever hit the airwaves. So it is understandable to enjoy the story of a group of DJs that broadcast rock ‘n’ roll from a ship out in the ocean even though most of them are egotistical and a bit insane. The group includes Philip Seymour Hoffman who plays the role of “The Count,” an outspoken American who is more or less one of the leaders of the group. Gavin, played by Rhys Ifans, is a womanizing British superstar who joins the crew and participates in making their lives a little more interesting and provocative. Bill Nighy plays Quentin, the man that owns the boat, and he is also the most level-headed and professional of the men. Carl is Quentin’s godson, played by Tom Sturridge, who boards the boat early on in the movie after being kicked out of school. He is a shy, virgin who seeks guidance from the men who introduce him to new things, sex, drugs, and rock ‘n’ roll, of course. The rest of the group includes Dave, a chubby guy who is a great contribution to the humor of the film. Bob, a DJ that takes over the early morning hours of the radio and who keeps to himself so much that the crew forgets he even exists. Simon, the guy looking for true love who has a short marriage gone bad. Thick Kevin, a man who is just that—thick-headed. Mark, who is claimed to be the sexiest guy but hardly ever says a word. Felicity, the only woman that lives on the ship who is the lesbian cook. Many others also contribute to life on the Pirate Radio boat. Kenneth Branagh plays the antagonist, a government minister named Dormandy whom, it seems, only goal in life is to shut down Pirate Radio. Emma Thompson also makes a short appearance, playing the role of Carl’s mother.

The group lives their lives aboard a boat anchored out at sea and broadcasts rock music 24/7. They keep themselves entertained in a way that any group of men stuck on a boat would—by drinking, listening to music, broadcasting, making fun of each other, and having women who worship them shipped out to board their boat every now and then.

Director Richard Curtis makes a wise choice throwing these men together on a ship. All of them have their own different personalities. The clash of variety here makes the relationships on the boat entertaining. They all contribute a little something of their own to the plot. The carelessness and charisma of the group make the characters enjoyable to watch. Not too much even has to be happening at once. Conversations and jokes that go on between the different characters are satisfying enough because it’s easy to laugh with them. They bring humor, wisdom, and sentiment to the film.

“Pirate Radio” is the kind of movie that shows unity through music. Cut scenes show the people of Britain jumping around and dancing in their bedrooms and workplaces as the songs broadcasted from Pirate Radio are heard through their speakers. Without ruining it, I will say the ending is also a perfect example of this. Britain united by a group of crazy men who devote their lives to bringing music to their country.

The humor is great, the characters are developed enough for a movie that has so many characters, and the acting is excellent. “Pirate Radio” is a movie that will entertain and make you laugh, as well as make for a very good soundtrack.

Watch the trailer:

Review for The Fourth Kind

The Fourth Kind (PG-13)

Release Date: November 6th
Director: Olatunde Osunsanmi
Starring: Milla Jovovich, Elias Koteas, Will Patton
Rating: 3 out of 5 stars


“The Fourth Kind” is a thriller involving alien abductions, split-screens with the “reenactment” by the actors and the “real” footage, the occasional make-you-jump-in-your-seat scares, and at the end will leave the audience thinking, “Is it real?”

The movie begins with actress Milla Jovovich standing in a gloomy forest claiming that the film you are about to see is based on true events that can be supported by 65 hours of archived footage. The movie switches back and forth between the actors and the alleged documentary footage, sometimes via split-screen. Jovovich plays the part of Dr. Abigail Tyler, a psychologist whose own mental health is questionable due to her husband’s murder by unknown forces. She, of course, thinks she is in the right state of mind to be helping patients of Nome, Alaska with their issues involving sleeplessness and the vision of an owl staring at them through their window. Through the use of hypnosis, the patients visit their blocked memories of mysterious entities coming into their bedrooms at night, an act that eventually leads to their insanity.

The film accomplishes two things: the first is scaring the pants off those who believe in alien abduction theories and more importantly, those who believe that the footage they see in the movie is real. The second is making curious people go online and google the words “alien abductions in Nome, Alaska” and “Dr. Abigail Tyler,” only to come up short in information minus the viral marketing ploy of the movie company involving websites that support the story, but were not even created before 2009.

The actors did their job well despite the fact that the audience is constantly reminded that they are doing just that—acting. Due to the style the movie is played out, with the split-screen footage, it is hard to take the actors seriously, let alone pay attention to them at all.

So the most important question everyone is wondering: Is the footage in “The Fourth Kind” real? My guess is probably not. However, you have to admit that one of the best ways to reel in audiences is to create a story based on happenings that will never be answered and tell them that it’s true. Movies such as this one prey on the gullible. The supposed “real” footage did involve something I had never seen or heard of before when it comes to alien abduction stories—alien possession. Since when do aliens possess the bodies of humans and speak through them in…Sumerian? Although the images were a bit frightening, it pretty much lost all credibility when the footage included levitating humans supposedly being possessed by aliens. The movie might have been more believable if it had been about demonic possession instead of alien abductions. The footage was definitely useful in providing sufficient amount of horror, though. Without it, the movie would have been extremely dull. In my opinion, one of the scariest parts was looking at the bug-eyed face of the “real” Dr. Abigail Tyler. Throw in the image of her eyes popping out of her head and her jaw opening so wide that it appears broken while speaking Sumerian in an alien voice—that was a horror movie within itself.

Whether the movie is a hoax or not, it is definitely interesting and entertaining. You might actually have to humor the idea that it can be real to get the full effect, though. You may be walking out of the theatre thinking, “Wow, that was total bull,” or maybe even the opposite. Either way if you find yourself going home and googling information on the events then you know the movie has accomplished at least one thing for you—curiosity.

Trailer is below:

Review for Law Abiding Citizen

Law Abiding Citizen (R)

Release Date: October 16th
Director: F. Gary Gray
Starring: Jamie Foxx, Gerard Butler, Colm Meaney, Bruce McGill, Leslie Bibb, Viola Davis
Rating: 3 ½ out of 5 stars

Law Abiding Citizen is one of those thrillers where you will most likely find yourself rooting for the alleged “bad guy” all the way until the end. It’s hard not to enjoy sweet revenge when someone who has been wronged brings it upon those who deserve it.

Gerard Butler stars as Clyde Shelton, a loving family man whose wife and daughter are murdered by two thugs who break into his home one night. Jamie Foxx plays Nick Rice, the Philadelphia district attorney handling Clyde’s case. Nick arranges a plea-bargain with Darby--the man most responsible for the murders—in order to maintain his 96 percent conviction record. It entails a testimony against his accomplice, which will result in a short-term jail sentence for Darby while the other man receives the death sentence. Nick justifies the plea bargain by telling Clyde that both men could walk free without the testimony. However, this isn’t good enough for Clyde and he develops resentment towards Nick for making a deal with a murderer.

Ten years pass by for Clyde to develop his ingenious plan to bring justice upon the two guilty men as well as several people involved with the case and succeed where the judicial system has ultimately failed.
The murder of Darby—the scumbag that pretty much gets off scot-free--is like watching the movie “Hostel” all over again, except with a lot less gore. It’s violent and sadistic but you know you’ll be smiling because he deserves it. After being arrested, Clyde plays a sort of cat-and-mouse game with Nick, offering ridiculous deals he must come to terms with if he wants Clyde to reveal the locations of people whose lives are still in danger even though he is locked up. He asks for a therapeutic bed for his cell in turn for his confession, a steak dinner and his ipod in turn for the location of the killers’ criminal attorney who is not quite dead yet—propositions that make Clyde seem crazy but end up having an actual purpose to them. Even after being put in solitary confinement, judges and lawyers are still dropping dead and it makes you wonder how talented this guy has to be to still be able to kill people from behind solid bars.

The great thing about this movie is that Clyde’s way of vengeance isn’t cliché. Meaning he’s not walking around in a leather jacket with a big shotgun kicking in doors and putting bullets in the head of every person who has pissed him off. His tactics include obvious effort and intelligence. One could only hope so given he’s had ten full years to plan this whole thing out.

The worst part was the relationship between Clyde and Nick. It wasn’t as evolved as it should have been. I mean, they have a few short conversations when Nick questions him asking him for a confession, threatening him if he ever touches his family, etc. But there wasn’t any real emotion there, no torment between the two of them. The good guy-psycho relationship in movies likes this is what makes it strong. It seemed like any time things would get too intense Nick would just walk out of the room and the conversation would be over, not even giving enough of a chance for Clyde to get inside his head. In reality, of course, that would be the smart thing to do but in movies it is a factor that leads to boredom.

As far as the acting goes, Butler’s charisma made his role of a sadistic serial killer a likable one. The man can act, although he didn’t do too well of a job hiding his native Scottish accent in this one. This was not exactly an award-winning performance for Foxx. At times he just seemed bored, but his character wasn’t exactly a complex one to begin with.

The movie definitely brings suspense until it nears the end when you finally find out how Clyde has been managing to pull off his seemingly impossible murders from behind bars. Then you’ll probably just be asking yourself “Really? How did these dumb lawyers not think of that three murders ago?”

Law Abiding Citizen is definitely worth a watch. You might be battling with yourself as to whose side you should actually be on, but the murders, explosions, and suspense is enough to keep anyone entertained.

Check out the trailer below: