I had no idea this was a sequel, so that little montage at the beginning of the movie was very confusing to me, I didn't know what was going on and when I figured it out I was kind of uninterested in seeing what would happen next, but I kept watching and was surprised by the action sequences and special effects in the final act of the movie.

I need to see the first movie to fully understand what was happening and to get the whole picture, but as a sci-fi, alien invasion movie, it was ok. Again, a bit confusing for me but I was invested in the story till the end.

The whole water dome sequence was amazing, the best part of the entire movie.

I did like the first one. Not a great film a but an enjoyable different kind of blockbuster. The follow up, Invasion is in the same vein. It doesn't make a lot of sense but it's really fun to watch. the main difference between your average run of the mill american blockbuster and this is mostly in the way the human antagonist are portrayed. There's no evil or villain and you understand why people act the way they are. Most people are not black and white, they're grey.

Don't let the negative reviews put you off. If you're running out of sci fi to watch like me you will be glad you found something

"Vtorzhenie" is an interesting film with a messy script, but not bad. The special effects and the cinematography are wonderful, an excellent sound design and a cool music score. The direction is fine and the acting is good. The opening credits are totally great. Back to the script is messy sometimes but with good points, there is some James Cameron's influences as some similar scenes to "The Terminator" and "The Abyss". "Vtorzhenie" could be better, but it's an interesting film.

134 minutes of dragged out plot and technical issue riddled writing that felt like 5 hours. You'd think they would've learned from the first films' mistakes. Nope. The first film was written by 5th graders. This one by 5 year olds. These writers need to go back to high school. Pretty sure the subbing was also done by 5 years olds. Acting was ok, and the score surprisingly good and fitting. The cinematography was excellent and the S/VFX were stellar - which is the main reason I'm giving this film my very generous 5/10

This movie joins a long and honorable list of sequels that should not have been made but were made anyway because of the success of the originals (think Pacific Rim Uprising or Independence Day 2 ). The sequel dropped the deeper philosophical elements of the original entirely and filled the remaining space with even more action scenes. And if you throw enough action scenes in a movie, some of them will end up being good. Unfortunately this yields a poorly paced, loud, and ultimately derivative movie, though Michael Bay would probably approve it.

1) Take some ideas from Independence Day, Minority Report, The Day After Tomorrow, Titanic and some Youtube videos about Japan's Tsunami. 2) Mix them thoroughly 3) Ignore all the rules for writing a screenplay that works

Enjoy the result.

I have watched it in Russian with English subtitles, and being a native Russian speaker I can say - whoever made the subtitles translation for this movie has no language proficiency whatsoever. Pathetic. However, this is not this movie's biggest problem - it is simply a dull, talentless (talking about the screenwriters and film directors) mediocre mess. Big names, some good actors, Columbia pictures and all, and I felt simply embarrassed about my birth country producing such a wretched parody of a movie. To be fare, using big names and indeed very talented actors, who have delivered some solid acting for the movie, helped to offset some of its miseries. But the plot, the ideas, the pompous drama of the plot has turned it into a pretentious farce, a circus. Russia certainly has talent and creative potential to make good movies, it's a shame this one has been such a waste of good capable actors and such a disappointment for the viewers. If you pass on this film, you won't miss much.

It seems most of the rewievers missed a certain point of both films. 2 Points to be exact. By the title "attraction", one would think they would understand that it is supposed to be a love story. And the second one, the more important one, is that both movies are supposed to say how easily are we humans convinced that something has happened when the media tell us, in other words, how completely and utterly are we dependant on digital technology, infomation technology and how easily can negative emotions and lack of information sway us to acts we otherwise would not commit.

The writers of this movie made a solid research into human psychology, and I like that. 9/10.

Fantasy/invasion movie. Surprisingly, Attraction 2: Invasion I liked and enjoyed much more than the first. The first film, although it had started promisingly, was then very mediocre, meaningless and the script was all over the place. The second film, however, implicates developed artificial intelligence that targets the protagonist girl as a potential danger in the future and tries to annihilate her. Besides, however, it clearly shows the power and influence that technology has on humans and from them wins a lot in the script from my point of view. Extraterrestrial artificial intelligence completely controls digital communications on earth, but also all audiovisual media, producing fake videos and speeches such as to incriminate the protagonist and execute it themselves. This alone could become a film in itself, a technological thriller about a not-so-distant future (AI made fake videos are already a reality). In addition, the extraordinary effects, the whole suspense of being chased by all the protagonists and the action, raise the level of the 2nd film by far compared to the meaningless first. In the negatives obviously the meaningless good alien who is essentially human and by coincidence speaks Russian, a necessary negative since it is a continuation of the first, but also the completely disliked and unnecessary rival who is also continuation from the first. Of the protagonists, only the young woman was good but also her father. Maybe in a 3rd movie things will improve even more and that film reaches the top. Remarkable effort to overturn the mediocrity of the first. It is recommended to all fans of the genre, but unfortunately you also have to watch the very mediocre first film to understand the protagonists and the case.

The first film, Prityazhenie, was clunky, but had some very captivating scenes and the story was original enough. I was noting then that Alexander Petrov made the movie happen, even as he had just a supporting role, with his emotional range and energetic acting. The ending, too, had a lot of emotional impact, with both Hakon and Artyom dying for the same human woman. The sequel pretty much erases everything: everybody is alive again, Artyom has a brain aneurysm that does nothing to the story - I even googled a bit to see if the actor didn't have this affliction that they inserted in the film, and the galactic water ecologists now attack Earth because (mathematically!) it's the best solution. Oleg Menshikov gets a deserved larger role, but all the others are reduced to cardboard props.

The production value is greater, the actors are doing a good job, the film is more solid, but the story and the way good actors were wasted makes it a poorer experience. It's a decent film, for a Russian sci-fi production, but they have a long way to go still.

4 that I gave is for CGI and some acting. But not all actors were good. Some characters were certifiably stupid and other things made no sense unless you just accept them as part of the story and don't attempt to question it... It felt as if the budget was too big for the studio and they rushed through the editing and filming process. Major, major fail because of it! I didn't know which characters to like or hate as almost all were dis-likeable, which should not happen!

Overall, I found the movie pretty boring. It took me 15 minutes of trying to remember what happened in the first one(shot a few years back) to even understand what was happening in the beginning. I heard other people asking each other what is going on. Basically, if you haven't watched the 1st one, you will have some trouble understanding the 2nd(this one) as the movie does not go about explaining everything, other than very light details. But even though I watched the 1st one, it was still a bit hard to follow not only because I couldn't remember some details, but also because of the very bad script/story which never helped. Some dialog was very "theatrical" and fake. Nobody likes that. Viewers connect better to real dialogs. 1st movie was much better imho. It was flawed,but it was better nevertheless.

SFX: 8/10 Acting: 6/10 ( some were good and some really bad) Script: 2/10 Story: 4/10 Directing: 0/10

Overall: 4/10

The plot contains a lot of holes and too little logic, the actors' motivations don't exist. So many moments that deserve a palm face. I don't know what's worse: this movie or the first part of this movie. Watch and laugh at how you can spend 6 million dollars to make the bad movie ever.

The saying that ''You can't polish a turd'' is fitting here. It's actually worse than the first one. This movie is a paradox. The visuals are simply incredible, yet the story is about the very worst. They must of had 1,000 computers working nonstop for a year to get all these stunning graphics, only to be destroyed by the most ridiculous plot ever. As the saying goes, ''They've lost the plot', can't even be applied here because the is not even a plot to begin with.

PLEASE DON'T MAKE THIS INTO A TRILOGY, so help me God, just make it stop!

Both parts of Attraction are fitting seamless into todays high tech popcorn cinema. They are not better or bader than ,say ,most of the marvel movies. The story is rather simple,the cgi is fantastic and the pace is right for a enjoyable watch.

No, it is not remix of prevous american movies. Yes, they used many things from other plots, excluding sci-fi novels for teens, hmm like a "Guest from the future" by Kir Bulichov. This is not serious sci-fi like "Salyut-7". Anyway, "Invasion" smells like a real war. Russians have a ability to made their action movies with feeling it is a real war, not just a movie war. "Invasion" is like a videogame.

It is unfortunate that the writing was not stronger, since the nonsensical dialog and story points take from the awesome visuals and action :-( The first one held up a bit better.

The main problem of this film is that there is no sane narration, sane plot. The complete lack of acting tries to be compensated for by the loudness of the sound and visual effects. But to no avail. The complete victory of form over content. I do not recommend to watch.

The film was released long after the first part of "Attraction". And if then I watched it with pleasure and waited for the second part, then the "Invasion" in the form of the second part did not impress me at all. The plot is not particularly linked to the last film, much seemed illogical and non-obvious. Perhaps the time factor played due to the fact that many small details were simply forgotten. But the fact remains.