bkoganbing Even without a nuclear holocaust which annihilates most of the world's population from what little we see of the valley estate that Neil Fletcher has built nothing seems to have changed for 800+ plus year in 2889. Why the title? This could have been 1972 for all we see.Fletcher is the ultimate survivalist and he's got a compound for himself and daughter Charla Doherty and her fiancé who never shows up. But some others do and no one would pick this bunch to reboot the human race.With the possible exception of Paul Petersen who was now out of work after leaving the Donna Reed Show where he was king of teen idols in the early to middle 60s on television. Like so many other careers Petersen's tanked after his television show ended its run. I well remember him from my youth he was a lot like Tom Cruise. And maybe had he come along a generation later he might have had the career Cruise has had. Petersen is the hero here and is the best hope for survival with this crew.In The Year 2889 doesn't even bother to pretend it wasn't totally ripped off from Roger Corman's The Day The World Ended. If you're familiar with that you know what happens here.Terrible acting, completely plagiarized and production values that are better in a Film 101 class, what's to like here besides Paul Petersen's hunkiness.

Michael DeZubiria The story of In the Year 2889 is your standard bad b-movie plot about the end of the world, except there is not a single thing done to make the world look futuristic. I would grant that they managed to pull off a thick, muggy version of the early 70s, so I guess they achieved a few years of a futuristic look, but it's more likely that I just can't tell the difference between 1967 and, say, 1972 or so.The movie is an exercise in ham-handed and clunky story-telling. The sound dubbing is amazingly bad and doesn't even begin to match the action on screen, but no matter. Clearly this is a no-budget production so things like this must be forgiven. Or at least excused. The characters are in a fallout shelter, and wouldn't you just know it, it comes complete with a detailed miniature model of the house and surrounding area so that the inhabitants, mostly people who live in the area, can be informed about how the surrounding mountains will protect them from the radioactive fallout.You see, the mountains are filled with lead, so any radioactivity will pass harmlessly over their heads like radio waves. Pretty convenient, although there is some concern because rain would swiftly deliver nuclear death. There is meant to be some tension about the rising radioactivity in the air, except that any exterior scenes never look like anything other than a beautiful sunny day. So there is this thing about the radioactivity passing overhead and totally changing the world around them, but soon enough they are just fraternizing and grab-assing in the bomb shelter, and before you know it, the old man is instructing all the women, including his own daughter, that they must all bear children ASAP! What a guy!Overall this is basically zero-budget nonsense. There is a title that says "The Beginning" when the movie ends, and this might be the most clever thing in the movie, so I'll let you do the math. It might have been fun had it been made as a student film or something, but the amazingly bad costumes and performances just don't belong in a commercial film meant for public viewing.

julian kennedy In the Year 2889: 2 out of 10: Great now I can't get that damn song out of my head. (No it doesn't appear on the soundtrack. Cope to think of it I'm not sure if this film even has a soundtrack.) First of all the characters all dress and look like extras in the Zapruder film so I'm not sure where this whole year 2889 comes from.Oh yeah The earth was destroyed by nuclear radiation except this one house with three months worth of food for three people but then an extra guy shows up with an alcoholic stripper.Personally if the earth is destroyed by nuclear bombs I'm rooting for the alcoholic stripper to show up. (Heck who am I kidding I'm always rooting for the alcoholic stripper nuclear radioactive fallout or not).Very talky with some okay performances and silly monsters it is another Buchanan TV remake but better than his usual fair. More time wasting curiosity than anything mistaken for entertainment.

MovieWiz66 I gave it a 7 just based on the fact that I get a kick out of watching these old cheesy sci-fi flicks with Stick acting. The movie starts out with an elderly gent and his daughter apparently the only ones alive after a nuclear war. One by one other survivors make it to the house that was built in a valley behind a mountain to protect it from radiation fallout. The father had seen all of this coming and planned ahead for him and his daughter and her fiancé to be able to survive here. He really doesn't like all the people showing up and digging in to his rations..lol. The survivors who were exposed to radiation are turned into mutant cannibals that roam the hills looking for prey. They crave meat but are afraid of water. I wont spoil the rest. If you like watching these movies for the cheese factor..this is a classic. However,if you are looking for a real good movie with great effects,great acting and great plot..pass this one by..lol. I do love the old mans voice. He has the voice that sounds like it was the one used in all 60's and 70's documentaries. Great voice.