🔗 Share this article

In a recent appearance, actor Jude Law remarked he “didn’t fear any repercussions” for portraying Vladimir Putin in a cinematic adaptation. This production, however, may align too neatly with the mythologized version promoted by official channels that, within Russia, it reads as a compliment rather than a critique.

The Crafted Superhero

Over a long period, the Kremlin and the country's pop-culture machine have collaborated to craft a made-to-measure version of Putin. This character is a political superhero devoid of flaws, a former spy reframed as a local 007 who consistently understands more than he reveals.

“Domestically, the constructed Putin has long eclipsed the actual person.”

Cinematic Reinforcement

One recent example is a television show released last October, helmed by a Kremlin supporter. The protagonist is a fictional security officer inexplicably chosen to “save” Russia from chaos. Although he is called Mikhail, the implication is clear: the savior must be a known figure from the secret services.

International depictions often end up reinforcing this same narrative instead of undercutting it. A new film based on a bestselling satirical novel sets out to undermine the leader's mythology by presenting him not as a cause but as a symptom, shifting the narrative weight to the political machinery around him.

The Myth of the Reluctant Leader

In the film, the president is shown as having been chosen by influential figures to stabilise the nation because he is “a fit former intelligence agent”. They visit him and practically plead him to become president. He replies is that he would rather govern from the background, desiring enduring influence.

This narrative is a key piece of state propaganda: the cool, reluctant strategist guided by fate. Historically, none of this ever happened.

The Reality of the Casting Call

No one actually pleaded with Putin to accept the role. The presidency was in essence a selection process with no shortage of contenders. At the centre to this process stood a powerful businessman from the previous administration who planned to control the state in practice.

• His list included several politicians, among them a reformer subsequently assassinated and a security service director.
• According to a journalist who studied his rise, the chosen candidate simply fitted the necessary criteria: obedient, from the security services, and not a communist or a liberal.
• A property developer familiar with the process stated the key criterion was controllability and loyalty, not strength.

“They didn’t need a powerful leader, they needed someone controllable, someone who would follow instructions.”

Constructing the Spy Legend

Experts agree that the notion of Putin as a master operative was constructed retrospectively. Stories about his clandestine activities in East Germany do not stand up to scrutiny. In essence, he handled paperwork and routine duties, a low-level clerk not involved with actual agent work.

Curiously, the shift to framing him as a “007” may in part have been inspired by Daniel Craig’s arrival as 007. The grittier interpretation led Russian media and social media to make comparisons with Putin. Edited images swapping Craig’s face with his surfaced on Moscow streets, fueling the increasing trend to see him as a local secret agent.

A Diplomatic Opportunity?

Given the casting, an actor well-liked by viewers there, the authorities will not miss the chance to portray this choice as a small victory. The film's exclusion of public dissent, the opposition, or key figures from its narrative, even though it includes the past decade, is a welcome aspect for state propaganda.

In Russian cinema, the president is frequently an all-powerful presence who remains unseen directly. He is hinted at through photographs or calls “from above”. Now, he at last gets a recognizable face—one that may inadvertently validate the exact legends it might seek to examine.