Sputnik
ifcOn paper, Egor Abramenko's Sputnik might feel like yet another forgettable alien thriller focusing on a Soviet astronaut, who returns from a mission gone wrong during the Cold War, carrying something mysterious inside of him. However, the film quickly defies these expectations, drawing more from Denis Villeneuve's 2016 Arrival than most horror films in recent memory. The film is surprisingly quiet and tense in the exploration of more than the practical elements of its unexpected visitor, using it as a catalyst for multiple larger discussions, elevating the film far above the generic horror film level.
From the very start of the film, which opens with an attack on the Soviet spacecraft, it is clear that one of the film’s strongest elements will be the direction by Egor Abramenko. He is clearly at the top of his game and showcases that one of the most effective ways to craft true horror is to hold back. Instead of simply showing the audience the threat, Sputnik teases the audience with the horror just on the other side of a wall, allowing them to bring the monster and threat to life. This is infinitely more effective than relying on CGI and keeps the presence of the creature all the more mysterious and scary. This logic can be traced back to some of the most iconic horror films like Jaws and Jurassic Park, and where those films might have decided on this logic for practical reasons, the effectiveness of the choice stands true even today. When it comes time for the film to show the creature, the CGI is of incredibly high quality and the design itself is unique and fresh.
The same can be said about the setting. Instead of presenting modern times, the film is a period piece taking place in the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Not only does this feel fresh as this is far from a common setting, but it naturally fixes many of the plot details that simply wouldn't have made sense had the film took place in modern times: from a government desperate to seem strong – therefore hesitant to even acknowledge any issue – to an event like this being able to largely stay a secret. These details are key to the plot, and the setting naturally allows these details to be believable truths.
As mentioned, not only does Sputnik fly high as a thriller, but it is also a film with a clear voice, which has depth and thought behind it. While the film might not reach any truly shocking conclusions, the mixture of personal character drama and larger social commentary on science and authority gives the film a real voice. Sputnik has something to say, and with the craft from both the directing and screenplay, it says it in an engaging and powerful sense that elevates the film above a simply well-crafted thriller. Plenty of this emotion has to be accredited not just to the screenplay but also the acting within the film. Not only does the main character, played by Oksana Akinshina, achieve the perfect balance of innocent bystander and active participant – serving as the eyes for the viewer while also standing as an important figure in the plot, never falling victim to being pulled apart by the two sides of her character. In supporting roles, both Pyotr Fyodorov and Fedor Bondarchuk also stand out, with each character giving hauntingly tense performances in two drastically different ways.
Sputnik easily goes down as one of the most well-crafted and rewarding thrillers of the year. Whereas the film clearly is best viewed in a cinematic setting, is perfectly engaging and worth checking out from home as well. From a thoughtful screenplay to outstanding direction from Egor Abramenko, there is plenty to respect and love within the film – clearly an inspired outing by all parties involved.
