Actor Dmitry Ulyanov, well known for his portrayal opposite Maxim Averin in the television series Sklifosovsky, recently spoke with StarHit about the absence of direct clashes or heated feuds with a fellow cast member. The exchange highlighted the professional maturity shared by the actors and offered a glimpse into the working dynamics on set. Ulyanov emphasized that the set functions as a collaborative space where the goal is to bring a shared story to life rather than to settle personal scores or indulge in on-screen rivalries. His reflections paint a picture of a seasoned team that prioritizes craft over conflict, a crucial reminder for viewers who observe the on-screen tension and infer complicated relationships behind the camera.
According to Ulyanov, the cast members operate with a clear sense of respect for one another, which translates into a smooth, productive workflow. He underscored that Averin is central to the project, guiding the narrative with the responsibility of a lead actor while allowing room for ensemble contributions. The veteran performer noted that their enduring friendship, built over three decades, gives the collaboration a stability that benefits both the actors and the storytelling. Their shared history stretches back to their time at the same acting institute, followed by collaborations across various projects. This long-standing bond supports a professional camaraderie that makes the series feel cohesive and authentic to the audience, reinforcing the impression that genuine respect fosters better performances for the screen.
Ulyanov described his character, Dr. Voloshin, as a model of professional rigor. The character embodies precision, ethical dedication, and a deep commitment to patient care, traits that anchor many dramatic scenes and lend credibility to the medical world depicted in the series. By contrast, Averin’s Bragin is portrayed as an improvisational figure who often moves through situations with adaptability and a certain improvisational flair. This contrast between methodical expertise and adventurous spontaneity creates a dynamic on-screen tension that drives plot development while avoiding personal antagonism off the camera. The balance between these two forces—discipline and improvisation—serves as a storytelling fulcrum that keeps viewers engaged and underscores the talent each actor brings to their roles.
The conversation also touched on the broader environment of the television industry and what keeps such collaborations healthy over the long term. It was noted that success in a high-stakes project often hinges on shared professional values, mutual respect, and a willingness to prioritize the story over personal ego. In this case, the relationship between the two leads demonstrates how longtime familiarity can translate into a strong working chemistry that benefits the production as a whole. The sense of trust cultivated through years of working together likely contributes to a more seamless rehearsal process, fewer on-set misunderstandings, and a more natural on-screen rapport that viewers recognize and appreciate. The takeaway is that strong professional ties can coexist with intense character dynamics, enriching the audience experience without necessitating real-life conflict.