It's damn good, but not to the level that merits "hyperrealistic," in my opinion. Unless you're using that term in some other way than a layman such as myself would interpret it. In my opinion, that term would more fairly apply to the Ellen Ripley sculpture by Steve Scotts that's been making the rounds on the Internet for a while now. This one lacks a lot of telltale human aspects to be convincing. It's more like a sculpture of a cartoon character, and I don't mean that to read as an insult.
Can anyone explain to me why hyper realistic 3D work is somehow "important" while the same subject rendered in 2D would be scorned as no different than a photograph?