🔗 Share this article

In a recent appearance, actor Jude Law remarked he had no concerns about backlash for portraying Vladimir Putin in a new film. This production, however, could coincide too neatly with the mythologized image promoted by official channels that, domestically, it reads as a endorsement instead of a critique.

The Manufactured Strongman

Over a long period, the Kremlin and the country's entertainment industry have worked together to craft a tailor-made persona of Putin. This figure is a political superhero devoid of flaws, an ex-intelligence officer reimagined as a Russian James Bond who consistently understands more than he reveals.

“Domestically, the manufactured Putin has long overshadowed the real one.”

Screen-Based Support

A notable instance is a television show released last fall, helmed by a Kremlin supporter. Its main character is a invented blue-eyed lieutenant colonel selected by fate to “rescue” the nation from disorder. While the character's name a different name, the implication is unmistakable: the savior must be a known figure from the secret services.

Western portrayals often end up buttressing this same narrative rather than undercutting it. A new film based on a bestselling satirical novel sets out to undermine the leader's mythology by framing him not as a cause but as a symptom, shifting the narrative weight to the political machinery around him.

The Fable of the Hesitant President

In the film, Putin is presented as having been chosen by powerful oligarchs to steady the nation because he is “young, athletic and a spy”. They visit him and practically plead him to become president. He replies is that he would prefer to rule from the background, seeking permanent power.

This narrative is the Kremlin’s export myth: the cool, reluctant strategist shaped by destiny. In reality, none of this ever happened.

The Reality of the Casting Call

No one actually pleaded with him to accept the role. The position was effectively a selection process with many contenders. At the centre to the selection stood an influential oligarch from the previous administration who planned to control the state in practice.

• The shortlist featured various figures, including a reformer later murdered and a security service director.
• Per an expert who studied his rise, the chosen candidate merely met the necessary criteria: obedient, from the intelligence world, and politically neutral.
• A property developer familiar with the process said the key criterion was manageability and faithfulness, not strength.

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

Building the 007 Persona

Experts agree that the notion of him as a master operative was built after the fact. Claims about his clandestine activities in Dresden do not stand up to scrutiny. Fundamentally, he handled paperwork and routine duties, a low-level clerk not involved with actual agent work.

Interestingly, the move to framing him as a “spy” could partly have been inspired by Daniel Craig’s arrival as 007. The grittier interpretation prompted Russian media and online audiences to make comparisons with Putin. Edited images swapping the actor's likeness with Putin’s appeared on Moscow streets, feeding the increasing trend to see him as a local secret agent.

A Propaganda Win?

Given the casting, an star popular with viewers there, the Kremlin are likely to seize the chance to portray this choice as a small victory. The film's exclusion of public dissent, the opposition, or prominent activists from its narrative, despite covering recent years, is a welcome aspect for official messaging.

Domestically, the president is often an all-powerful presence who never appears on screen. He is signaled through portraits or calls “from above”. In this new film, he at last gets a recognizable face—one that may inadvertently echo the very myths it might seek to question.