The Man from Earth: Holocene

2017
1h 38m

IMDb RATING

5.2/10

11K

YOUR RATING

Play trailer1:31

2 Videos

42 Photos

Time Travel Drama Fantasy Sci-Fi

A 14,000-year-old college professor notices that he has finally started showing signs of aging. Meanwhile, four of his students get suspicious of him and start investigating his past.A 14,000-year-old college professor notices that he has finally started showing signs of aging. Meanwhile, four of his students get suspicious of him and start investigating his past.A 14,000-year-old college professor notices that he has finally started showing signs of aging. Meanwhile, four of his students get suspicious of him and start investigating his past.

See production info at IMDbPro

IMDb RATING

5.2/10

11K

YOUR RATING

See production info at IMDbPro

Awards
- 3 nominations total

Videos2

Trailer 1:31

The Man From Earth: Holocene

Video 1:25

Teaser Trailer: The Man from Earth: Holocene

Video 1:25

Teaser Trailer: The Man from Earth: Holocene

Photos42

+ 38

User reviews237

5.211.1K

Featured reviews

5sunrise30

Could have been much better

Movie is watchable, and thats all. No compelling story, no atmopshere, music didnt fit. Students acting was hard to watch, and the ending ruined it all for me. First one wich i consider one of the best movies ever made i could watch all day and night but this one i will erase from my memory. 5 is generous

MovieIQTest

A lousy sequel.

What a disappointment. I was lured by the title "The Man from Earth" but didn't pay too much to the appendix word "Holocene" behind it. When I peaked my interest to watch it, then the "Holo..." of that word suddenly became "HollowScene". What a lousy sequel, man. It totally ruined my good memory of the original one. With some very annoying and unlikable college students, especially that pretentious and disgusting white girl's performance, this film has simply turned into a disastrous, shallow, predictable, torturous, absolutely unwatchable B movie. This film does not deserve a long review, so I rest my case.

6list307

Does not live up to the 2007 movie

It was a clear disappointment. The 2007 movie is definitely worth watching over and over, this one not so much.

3KrxOn

I've shouldn't have watched it

IMHO first movie was everything: Interesting, clever, intriguing, intelligent, captivating, just continue with superlatives... Heck, I registered here just to be able to rate it, and I've praised it to my friends. Most of them liked it as well. I was thrilled when I've heard about this sequel and I was eager to watch it. Now I would like to un-watch it, because it was completely unnecessary, it actually destroyed mystique of first movie.

5jack_o_hasanov_imdb

There was no need for a sequel to this movie

There was no need for a sequel to this movie.

Too bad. My goodness, they screwed up by making the sequel of the movie.

Storyline

Edit

Did you know

Edit

Trivia
The film was released on file sharing sites by the director Richard Schenkman, who stated, "In order to make sure that every single person in the world who wants to see the movie has access to stream or download it, we are uploading it ourselves to the filesharing community."

Goofs
While there can be "75-year-old Scotch", whiskey including Scotch varieties only age in the barrel and once bottled that age is set. So, if you have a 12-year-old malt it will always be 12 years old, even if you keep it for 75, 750 or 7500 years. A 75-year-old Scotch would be an extremely rare and exotic find, not something you would be likely to find at a garage sale.