Alexander Samoilenko, known to audiences for his role as dentist Andrey Antonov in the beloved TV series Daddy’s Daughters, recently spoke with kp.ru about his decision not to join the show’s sequel. The actor recalled how the invitation arrived and what happened next. At the outset, the producers reached out to him with a proposal, asking whether he would be interested in revisiting the character on screen. Samoilenko made it clear that his answer would come only after he had read the new script and considered the project from multiple angles. He emphasized that he requested the complete screenplay so he could assess the direction, the material, and the potential chemistry with the cast, before anyone made a definite statement. This careful approach reflects his professional habit of evaluating every opportunity against a personal baseline of artistic standards and career goals. After that initial exchange, which could have simply concluded with a yes or no, the conversation paused for a while. No further negotiations or offers followed, and the door to further dialogue did not reopen. Yet the actor does not view this pause as a moment of regret, explaining that the project did not align with his preferences or long-term artistic aims at the time. He reiterates that the decision was ultimately about fit rather than passion or respect for the team involved in the original work. He holds no bitterness toward the project and acknowledges its place in the wider tapestry of his career, even if it did not become a recurring chapter. In reflecting on the experience, Samoilenko notes that the feel of the project lingers as something of a mixed memory, a sense that the show might have faced challenges in its evolution rather than a straightforward continuation of the original success. He adds that this sense does not erase the professional value of the early work or the lessons learned from collaborating with a talented ensemble. He highlights that, among the actors from the original cast, his strongest connections endure with Nonna Grishaeva and Tatyana Orlova, pointing to ongoing respectful relationships and friendly familiarity that persisted beyond the cameras and rehearsals. The conversation reveals a practical mindset: while some audiences might wish for a full return, the realities of television production, scheduling, and creative direction ultimately shape each performer’s choices. Samoilenko stresses that he has a clear sense of what types of projects suit him and what kinds of roles offer creative vitality and personal growth, even as he respects the fans who still cherish the character and the series.
In a broader reflection on his career, the actor names two productions as personal benchmarks that he would consider standouts for their creative excellence and impact. The first is Klim Shipenko’s film Salyut 7, a project that showcased his ability to contribute to a tense, historically grounded adventure while engaging in the collaborative dynamics of a tightly wound ensemble. The second is David Tkebuchava’s Soul Killer, a series centered on a complex figure from a city with a distinctive cultural backdrop. He describes both works as authentic examples of his acting philosophy: projects that challenged him, allowed him to grow, and resonated with audiences through memorable storytelling and credible character work. These roles, he asserts, represent the best of his professional choices, not merely as a tally of appearances but as meaningful artistic statements that align with his values as an actor. The sentiment underscores a broader principle: a fulfilling career in acting is built not just on visibility or fame but on opportunities that offer real craft, responsible storytelling, and the chance to explore nuanced emotions on screen. While the sequel to Daddy’s Daughters did not become a part of his filmography, the door remains open to future, carefully chosen collaborations that speak to his artistic identity and his audience’s expectations. The actor closes with appreciation for the work that did unfold and a measured optimism about projects that align with his evolving creative path, maintaining a steady focus on quality, integrity, and lasting professional relationships.
The recent public discussion also touched on the public and fan response to the absence of key figures from the new production. In particular, his former colleague Nonna Grishaeva, who was a staple of the original series, received attention for her presence and absence during the newer episodes. The commentary suggests a broader conversation about how long-running shows evolve, how returning casts are managed, and how fans interpret the shifts in cast dynamics. The exchange underscores the reality that even popular franchises face periodic revolutions in cast and storytelling, which can be a source of both excitement and disappointment for viewers who develop strong attachments to specific characters and actors. In this context, Samoilenko’s candid retelling of his experience contributes to a richer public understanding of the decision-making processes behind television continuations, reminding audiences that every casting choice reflects a calculated balance of artistic vision, scheduling, and the practicalities of production. The discussion ultimately highlights the respect and affection that exist between the actors who started the show and the broader community that continues to celebrate its legacy, even as new chapters unfold with different creative teams and narratives.