It felt reminiscent of the first 'Captain America' movie because both are set against a Cold War backdrop. However, that historical setting seemed more like an excuse to launch into a familiar story: a secret experiment goes wrong, resulting in superheroes and villains. I can’t recall another Russian film on this scale; I resolved never to watch them again after 'The Inhabited Island.' While my familiarity with Russian cinema is limited, there might be many superior films I've missed. Despite very low ratings and negative online reviews, I decided to give it a try, and I have to say, it was an acceptable film—neither outstanding nor the worst of the year. There’s plenty of predictability, as you’d find in standard Hollywood superhero movies. Comparing it directly isn't entirely fair given its origin. Some credit is due for the effort involved, though borrowing the core concept raises questions about originality. The universality of scientific principles can be seen as a justification for this lack of innovation. The visual effects were nearly flawless. While the characters are distinctive, they follow the established formula common to superhero films. What ultimately held it back was the screenplay. Superhero movies thrive on well-designed action sequences and impressive stunt work that showcases superpowers—and those elements weren't maximized here. > ❝Death for us is not a problem, we've lived long enough.❞ I appreciated the costumes, finding them appropriately styled without being overly elaborate or simplistic, and I liked the powers themselves, even if they weren’t utilized to their full potential. It’s also unusual to see a superhero film clocking in at under 90 minutes; that’s another shortcoming. A shorter runtime doesn't necessarily mean faster pacing. The characters lacked development—there wasn’t room for them to have quiet moments, explore their thoughts, or reveal past events. They simply appeared, confronted the villain, and fought. The initial setback was necessary for the plot to progress; superheroes often rise after an early stumble. Only by acquiring modern weaponry and gadgets could they match the antagonist's power. This felt like a well-executed element, but it’s also a familiar trope—one you see in both Hollywood and European productions. What makes this film worthwhile is its production quality, which rivals that of big-budget movies worldwide. Those who criticized it for cheap CGI were mistaken; the visual effects are far from poor. If the visuals were truly bad, 'Bahubali,' a massive success in Indian cinema, would certainly be at the bottom of any list. Watching this film will either confirm or challenge your own opinions. However, there are definitely plot holes if you look for them closely enough. If you’re inclined to watch it, those flaws won't likely detract from your enjoyment—that’s what film critics tend to do. Some overly enthusiastic fans join in the criticism. So disregard the negative comments; I’m not trying to defend the movie. Just know that my rating is average. My intention isn't to portray it as a terrible film, nor am I suggesting it’s exceptional—it’s a fifty-fifty proposition with the potential for varied outcomes. Given all the conflicting ratings and reviews, deciding whether or not to watch it can be difficult. If you do choose to see it, keep your expectations modest. _6/10_

Source on TMDB