🔗 Share this article

Last year, star Jude Law stated he had no concerns about backlash for playing the Russian leader in a new film. The movie, though, may align too neatly with the mythologized version promoted by Russian state media that, within Russia, it reads as a endorsement instead of a critique.

The Manufactured Superhero

For years, the Kremlin and the country's entertainment industry have worked together to forge a tailor-made persona of the president. This character is an infallible strategist devoid of flaws, an ex-intelligence officer reimagined as a local 007 who consistently understands more than he reveals.

“In Russia, the constructed Putin has long overshadowed the real one.”

Cinematic Reinforcement

One recent example is a television show released last October, helmed by a pro-government filmmaker. Its main character is a invented blue-eyed lieutenant colonel selected by fate to “rescue” Russia from disorder. While the character's name a different name, the implication is clear: the savior must be a known figure from the secret services.

Western portrayals frequently result in reinforcing this same narrative instead of debunking it. An adaptation based on a bestselling satirical novel sets out to subvert the leader's mythology by presenting him not as a cause but as a consequence, moving the narrative weight to the political machinery around him.

The Myth of the Reluctant Leader

In the film, Putin is shown as having been picked by powerful oligarchs to steady the nation because he is “a fit former intelligence agent”. They visit him and all but beg him to take the top job. He replies is that he would prefer to rule from the shadows, seeking enduring influence.

This tale is a key piece of state propaganda: the detached, unwilling mastermind shaped by destiny. In reality, none of this took place.

The Truth Behind the Selection

No one ever begged Putin to take the job. The presidency was effectively a casting call with no shortage of contenders. Central to this process stood a powerful businessman from the previous administration who planned to control the country in practice.

• His list included various figures, among them a reformer subsequently assassinated and a security service director.
• Per a journalist who studied Putin’s biography, the chosen candidate merely met the required parameters: obedient, from the intelligence world, and not a communist or a liberal.
• A businessman close to the events said the key criterion was controllability and faithfulness, not leadership.

“The goal wasn't a strong candidate, they needed someone controllable, someone who would follow instructions.”

Constructing the Spy Legend

Experts agree that the notion of Putin as a powerful KGB spy was built after the fact. Stories about his clandestine activities in East Germany do not stand up to scrutiny. Fundamentally, he handled paperwork and technical tasks, a low-level clerk not engaged in field operations.

Curiously, the move to framing him as a “007” could partly have been inspired by Daniel Craig’s arrival as James Bond. His harder interpretation led local outlets and online audiences to make comparisons with Putin. Edited images replacing the actor's likeness with Putin’s surfaced on city centers, fueling the increasing trend to see him as a local secret agent.

A Diplomatic Opportunity?

Given the casting, an star well-liked by Russian audiences, the Kremlin are likely to seize the chance to portray this choice as a minor diplomatic triumph. The film's exclusion of public dissent, the opposition, or key figures from its narrative, even though it includes the past decade, is a pleasant bonus for state propaganda.

In Russian cinema, the president is often an all-powerful presence who never appears on screen. His influence is signaled through photographs or calls “from above”. Now, he finally acquires a famous actor's visage—one that may inadvertently echo the exact legends it might seek to examine.