1991 / 109 Minutes / PG
Reviewed by Dale J. Nauertz

“You know what six movies average out to be really good? The first six ‘Star Trek’ movies!”- Fry, “Futurama”

Read the rest of this entry »

Share on Facebook

1989 / 107 Minutes / PG
Reviewed by Dale J. Nauertz

I wanted to like this movie. I really, really did. I popped it into my DVD Player and thought: it can’t possibly be as bad as everyone says. In fact, I bet it’s a diamond in the rough, a forgotten treasure, a film unfairly maligned because it follows on the coattails of a very successful, beloved and fun film.

Boy, was I wrong.

Read the rest of this entry »

Share on Facebook

1986 / 118 Minutes / PG
Reviewed by Dale J. Nauertz

Making feature films within the “Star Trek” universe has always, arguably, been about broadening the “Trek” fan base. That base began with a small, devoted cult that lamented the early demise of the original TV series. Others were indoctrinated through late night syndicated broadcasts and their ranks swelled enough that someone at Paramount smelled money and decided to take “Trek” out of mothballs and onto the big screen. Despite the relative financial disappointment of the first film, they still sensed the potential…and the success of “Khan” proved them right. Even if one hadn’t seen the original series and wasn’t familiar with the characters, “Khan” was an engrossing film and quite a profitable one (it cost $11 million to make and made $14 million in its opening weekend ALONE). Hence “The Search for Spock”, a film that disappointed nearly everyone and, while it made more than “ST: TMP”, failed to rival the stellar box office of “Khan”. Therefore, it was time to go back to the drawing board, so to speak. If Paramount wanted to make more money, they once again had to broaden Trek’s appeal.

Read the rest of this entry »

Share on Facebook

1984 / 105 Minutes / PG
Reviewed by Dale J. Nauertz

Poor Leonard (Lennie?) Nimoy. Where Shatner has a thriving career making cameos, doing Priceline ads, recording questionable albums (though, truth be told, his most recent album isn’t half bad), and starring in several television series (”Tonight on Rescue…Nine…One…One”) aside from his iconic role in “Star Trek”, what does Old Pointy Ears have to his credit? One questionable single (a song about Bilbo Baggins that can be seen below and a book consisting of nude photos of fat ladies. Ah, but there is one other achievement Spock has under his belt: a mediocre directorial career!

Read the rest of this entry »

Share on Facebook

1982 / 116 Minutes / PG
Reviewed by Dale J. Nauertz

It ranks right up there with the greatest images in motion picture history, I’m not even kidding. Right up there with Omar Sharif emerging from the endless desert in “Lawrence of Arabia”, with a giant pair of lips uttering the word “Rosebud” right before a snow globe shatters in “Citizen Kane”, with the whole damn ending of “Casablanca” and that huge ship passing over the camera at the beginning of “Star Wars: A New Hope”. Just below all those others is where you’ll find Shatner, his face filling the entire frame, his lips quivering with almost unimaginable rage and hate, his toupee floundering atop his skull like a dying fish, his entire face contorted with unspeakable rage as he bellows one single word at the top of his lungs. That word, of course, is “Khaaaaaaannn!” Before you dispute me, watch that scene again. There is a passion and a gloriously outsized intensity on display in this single scene that has perhaps never been matched in the history of cinema. I don’t think I’ve ever seen ANYONE in a movie this purely and righteously pissed off.

Read the rest of this entry »

Share on Facebook

1979 / 136 Minutes / PG
Reviewed by Dale J. Nauertz

For years my path to attaining true geekhood has been blocked by only one thing: I just can’t get into “Star Trek”. I’m not sure why it is, but I’ve watched several episodes of the show and while I find it captivating at times, I’m mostly just staring at the television in boredom, wondering how some people can find so much joy in something I find so hokey and lame. I mean, I like sci-fi. And I certainly admire the antics of William Shatner. But with a few exceptions (the half of the “Tribbles” episode I’ve seen, “Star Trek: First Contact”) I remain unimpressed. It is said that you are either a “Star Wars” person or a “Trek” person. Perhaps that explains it. I’ve always, ALWAYS loved “Star Wars”. My earliest pop culture memories involve begging my parents or grandparents for “Star Wars” action figures (according to my father, I once lost Chewbacca and was inconsolable until they stopped everything, made a trip to the store, and purchased a new one). If it’s an “either/or” thing, then I made my decision about seventeen years ago and “Star Trek” never stood a chance.

Read the rest of this entry »

Share on Facebook

2009 / 163 Minutes / R
Reviewed by Dale J. Nauertz

Every decade has its genre du jour. In the 30’s, it was the gangster picture. In the 50’s, it was the biblical epic. In the 80’s, it was “weird shit happening in suburbia” movies (which includes not only “E.T.”, “Back to the Future” and “Gremlins” but also David Lynch’s “Blue Velvet”). Our decade, of course, has the comic book adaptation. At its worst, this genre has given us every two-bit superhero imaginable in a pandering, kid-friendly PG-13 package (”Ghost Rider”, I suppose, is as good an example as any, though I thought it was a lot of fun). With such films as “Sin City”, “The Dark Knight” and now “Watchmen”, however, the genre has finally grown up.

Read the rest of this entry »

Share on Facebook

After an unsuccessful attempt to record a commentary for “Commando” (even though the program said it was recording it chose not to) we decided to crank out a podcast for all of our patient listeners out there. It was inspired by a lame article on MSN that classified “Dances With Wolves” as the worst Best Picture winner ever. Citing this as complete B.S., we start there and move on to the movies we liked best from 2008. Somewhere along the way we go through the Oscar winning pictures of the past 15 years and discuss the ones we agree with as well as the ones we would change (Does anyone seriously believe that “A Beautiful Mind” was Best Picture material? I didn’t think so.). Hope you enjoy the rambling. If you’ve listened to us before, then you know what you’re in for.

Also, I thought I’d share that we utilized the power of my new laptop to record this podcast. No editing required! What does this mean to you? Well it means that we should be able to crank these out much more frequently now, since the editing process was always an annoying hurdle to deal with in the past. The audio quality might not be as good (I wouldn’t know as I haven’t listened to it other than the first few minutes), but you’ll get more podcasts and commentaries from us this way. According to the poll that seems to be what people want and we aim to please.

[iTunes] Subscribe to the Podcast directly in iTunes (MP3).
[RSS] Add the A Fistful of Reviews Podcast feed to your RSS aggregator and have the show delivered automatically (MP3).
[MP3] Download the show in MP3 format.

Share on Facebook

by Dale J. Nauertz

Much as you might think the sequel was born in the 1980’s (it certainly seems that way) such was not the case. The sequel has actually been with us nearly as long as motion pictures have existed. The first sequel was released way back in 1916. It was “Fall of a Nation”, the followup to D.W. Griffith’s “Birth of a Nation”. So it seems that rampant racism was not that film’s only crime. Not all sequels suck, but enough of them do to give the word “sequel” negative connotations. There are plenty of lists floating around the internet of the greatest sequels of all time (I may even make such a list myself, should the mood strike) but what about those that give the word “sequel” its negative connotations in the first place. There must be some reason sequels allegedly suck, right? And some of them may even be films you look back on pleasantly. Some films that you consider examples of sequels done right, in fact, suck more than you may remember. Don’t believe me? Well, consider these prime examples:

Read the rest of this entry »

Share on Facebook

Thanks to an inquiry from forum member Ecksem Diem the forums are now back online.

Perhaps in an indication of how asleep at the wheel I’ve been lately, I didn’t even realize they were offline. Not even sure how it happened to be quite honest.

At any rate, they are alive again and have been upgraded to the latest version of phpBB 3, so let’s put them to use!

Thanks again to Ecksem for bringing the issue to my attention.

- Jones

Share on Facebook