🔗 Share this article

Last year, actor Jude Law remarked he “didn’t fear any repercussions” for portraying Vladimir Putin in a cinematic adaptation. The movie, though, may align so closely with the mythologized image promoted by official channels that, domestically, it reads as a endorsement rather than a critique.

The Manufactured Superhero

For years, the Russian political apparatus and the country's entertainment industry have worked together to forge a made-to-measure persona of the president. This character is a political superhero without age or mistakes, an ex-intelligence officer reframed as a local 007 who consistently understands more than he reveals.

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

Screen-Based Support

One recent example is a television show launched last fall, helmed by a pro-government filmmaker. The protagonist is a invented blue-eyed lieutenant colonel inexplicably chosen to “save” Russia from chaos. Although he is called Mikhail, the implication is clear: the hero must be a familiar security officer.

International depictions frequently result in reinforcing this same narrative rather than undercutting it. An adaptation inspired by a bestselling satirical novel aims to subvert the Putin cult by presenting him as a symptom but as a symptom, moving the focus to the political machinery around him.

The Fable of the Hesitant President

In the film, Putin is shown as having been picked by influential figures to steady the country because he is “a fit former intelligence agent”. They visit him and all but beg him to take the top job. His response is that he would prefer to rule from the shadows, desiring enduring influence.

This narrative is a key piece of state propaganda: the detached, unwilling mastermind shaped by destiny. In reality, none of this ever happened.

The Truth Behind the Selection

Nobody ever begged Putin to take the job. The position was effectively a casting call with no shortage of candidates. At the centre to the selection stood a powerful businessman from the previous administration who planned to control the country de facto.

• His list included several politicians, including a reformer later murdered and a security service director.
• According to an expert who studied his rise, the chosen candidate merely met the necessary criteria: obedient, from the intelligence world, and not a communist or a liberal.
• A property developer close to the events stated the primary requirement was manageability and faithfulness, not leadership.

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

Building the 007 Persona

Experts agree that the notion of Putin as a powerful KGB spy was constructed retrospectively. Stories about his clandestine activities in East Germany fall apart under examination. Fundamentally, he was an administrator and technical tasks, a low-level clerk not engaged in actual agent work.

Curiously, the shift to depicting him as a “spy” could partly have been triggered by Daniel Craig’s arrival as James Bond. His harder interpretation prompted local outlets and social media to make comparisons with Putin. Edited images swapping the actor's likeness with his appeared on Moscow streets, fueling the increasing trend to see him as a local secret agent.

A Propaganda Win?

Given the casting, an actor popular with viewers there, the authorities are likely to seize the chance to frame his casting as a small victory. Its exclusion of mass protests, the opposition, or key figures in the story, despite covering recent years, is a pleasant bonus for state propaganda.

In Russian cinema, Putin is frequently an omnipotent figure who never appears on screen. His influence is hinted at through photographs or orders from on high. In this new film, he finally acquires a recognizable face—one that could unintentionally echo the very myths it perhaps aims to examine.