This is a very well written film that is fascinating throughout, but I can't understand IMDb listing it as sci-fi--though there are very strong fantasy elements. What I liked best about the film is that it was made with an apparently minuscule budget and most of it took place in a single room (like TWELVE ANGRY MEN)--showing you don't need explosions, boobs or action to have an excellent film.

THE MAN FROM EARTH begins with a professor packing up to leave. With little notice, he's decided to drop everything and leave--and he's told no one where he's headed. His colleagues are baffled--he is a good friend and yet none of this makes sense. Not only is his exit a surprise, but he's leaving a good job and they see no reason for this. Then, on a lark, he tells them that he's actually a 15000 year-old immortal--that he ALWAYS disappears every 10 years--otherwise people would wonder why he never seems to age.

While this is an exciting premise, the film is highly philosophical in nature with very strong religious overtones. In fact, these religious elements are bound to offend many people. My advice is just to remember that it's all a story--it's not true and it's just a clever way to explain various religious dogmas. You can still be a good religious person and see this film! The film gets super-high marks for writing--with a story that grabs your attention and won't let go. It also gets very high marks as well for a great ensemble cast. While some of the character actors are quite familiar, it's likely you don't know any of their names. The film has no "big name" actors and actually benefited from this--heightening the sense of realism. Plus, the cast did such a great job, I can't imagine others doing better.

The only reservation I have is that I can't imagine super hyperactive or many teenagers enjoying this film--you really need to sit still and pay attention and be willing to accept a film that is very "talky" and subdued. For these folks, try looking elsewhere.

Professor John Oldman has invited several colleagues in varying disciplines. He's leaving and suggests that he's some 14,000 years old. He tells them that he picks up and leaves every ten years or so just as people get suspicious of him not aging. The colleagues argue from their differing expertise. They dismiss it. They interrogate John. They start to believe. It turns religious. Then he claims that it's all a hoax.

This feels like a sci-fi writing exercise all be it a very good assignment. I simply don't understand John's motivation in gathering this group. In fact, they ask him and he says he doesn't know. It seems like a cry for help which would only work if he commits suicide after telling them his whole story. As it stands, I rather have him do a My Dinner with Andre... My Dinner with Harry. I'm uncertain about the religious turn. It feels manufactured. The most intriguing route for the character is for him to be a nobody. He's a loner living a nomadic existence. Overall, I really appreciate the idea to dig into the long-lived man concept. I would just do it differently.

An impromptu goodbye party for Professor John Oldman (David Lee Smith) becomes a mysterious interrogation after the retiring scholar reveals to his colleagues he has a longer and stranger past than they can imagine.

First of all, thank you for casting Tony Todd. Allegedly he was the first person cast, and I am glad he was. While he may be best known for horror films and especially "Candyman", this is a man who is a trained actor and knows his craft -- let him do it. Here, he does it.

This is very much a film with two great strengths. We have a powerful set of actors, with Smith leading the way. Cult icons William Katt and Richard Riehle are here. "Star Trek: Enterprise" fans will surely recognize John Billingsley. And even more so, an incredible dialogue-rich script from Jerome Bixby that covers a range of history, science, geography, art and religion. The very concept is brilliant, and the execution is flawless. That Bixby is not better known, despite his massive influence on the genre, is a real shame.

This would make a great stage play (which is how it first appeared, I believe) or perhaps an even better radio drama -- it comes across as sort of pointless as a film. Not to say it is a bad film -- it is excellent -- but without there being any action or more than one setting, it seems almost silly to have a visual aspect at all.