<![CDATA[My review.]]>Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Young Einstein

JohnnyBoy — 11 months ago(April 22, 2025 10:42 PM)

https://thecineviewer.com/youngeinstein.html
For tons of movie reviews, 60+ genre lists, best of the year lists, and other content, check out:
www.thecineviewer.com

]]>https://filmglance.com/discuss/topic/206755/my-reviewRSS for NodeWed, 13 May 2026 12:35:19 GMTFri, 01 May 2026 00:24:24 GMT60<![CDATA[Reply to My review. on Fri, 01 May 2026 00:24:31 GMT]]>mrmathexpert — 9 years ago(January 03, 2017 10:12 PM)

I just made a review of the movie after I saw it. So, if you are interested in what I thought about it, here is the link:
My playlist of movie reviews:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUQgeyDgxNo&list=PL0hIrBSf6_4kixzY9tLQCiXaT28Ffz3dz

]]>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1740782https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1740782Fri, 01 May 2026 00:24:31 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to My review. on Fri, 01 May 2026 00:24:30 GMT]]>IMDb User

This message has been deleted.

]]>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1740781https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1740781Fri, 01 May 2026 00:24:30 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to My review. on Fri, 01 May 2026 00:24:29 GMT]]>JohnnyBoy — 11 months ago(April 23, 2025 12:53 AM)

Yeah, true. The 80's was the most creative decade by going bonkers, and I didn't mind. That's what most viewers don't get.
For tons of movie reviews, 60+ genre lists, best of the year lists, and other content, check out:
www.thecineviewer.com

]]>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1740780https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1740780Fri, 01 May 2026 00:24:29 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to My review. on Fri, 01 May 2026 00:24:28 GMT]]>∂³∑x² — 11 months ago(April 23, 2025 12:19 AM)

Try
Real Genius (1985)
or
Hiding Out (1987)
to get a flavour of what movies were doing then
Mix it in with
Amadeus (1984)
and
Weird Science (1985)
and you've got what the guys from Down Under were trying to glance upon.
Don't forget we had Mad Max just before all of this and Peter Jackson comes out of this in the 90's having being influenced by the lot!
Sam Raimi has similar beginnings
Call me ∑

]]>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1740779https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1740779Fri, 01 May 2026 00:24:28 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to My review. on Fri, 01 May 2026 00:24:26 GMT]]>JohnnyBoy — 11 months ago(April 23, 2025 12:52 AM)

Yeah, true. Should've been more outrageous.
For tons of movie reviews, 60+ genre lists, best of the year lists, and other content, check out:
www.thecineviewer.com

]]>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1740778https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1740778Fri, 01 May 2026 00:24:26 GMT<![CDATA[Reply to My review. on Fri, 01 May 2026 00:24:25 GMT]]>WarrenPeace — 11 months ago(April 23, 2025 12:08 AM)

I think it had potential to be way more goofy, silly and outrageous than it was.
Or like they could have been way more creative with him being a genius inventing crazy stuff but they didn’t and it just fell flat.
The movie does not do the poster justice.
Seems like they were just banking on the crazy name of Yahoo Serious for appeal and that was not enough.
"Please vote to preserve the unique character of Warren…" - Robert Duvall

]]>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1740777https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1740777Fri, 01 May 2026 00:24:25 GMT