🔗 Share this article

Last year, actor Jude Law remarked he “didn’t fear any repercussions” for playing Vladimir Putin in a new film. This production, though, could coincide too neatly with the carefully constructed version circulated by official channels that, domestically, it reads as a compliment rather than a critique.

The Crafted Superhero

Over a long period, the Russian political apparatus and the country's entertainment industry have worked together to forge a tailor-made persona of Putin. This character is a political superhero devoid of flaws, a former spy reimagined as a local 007 who consistently understands more than he reveals.

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

Cinematic Reinforcement

One recent example is a television show released last fall, helmed by a pro-government filmmaker. Its main character is a fictional security officer selected by fate to “rescue” Russia from chaos. While he is called a different name, the implication is clear: the hero must be a familiar security officer.

Western portrayals often end up buttressing this identical story rather than undercutting it. An adaptation inspired by a bestselling satirical novel aims to undermine the Putin cult by framing him not as a cause but as a symptom, moving the focus to the spin doctors around him.

The Myth of the Reluctant Leader

In the film, the president is shown as having been picked by powerful oligarchs to stabilise the country because he is “a fit former intelligence agent”. They visit him and all but beg him to become president. He replies is that he would prefer to rule from the shadows, seeking permanent power.

This tale is the Kremlin’s export myth: the detached, unwilling mastermind shaped by destiny. Historically, these events ever happened.

The Reality of the Casting Call

Nobody ever begged Putin to accept the role. The presidency was in essence a casting call with many candidates. At the centre to the selection stood an influential oligarch from the previous administration who expected to run the country in practice.

• His list included various figures, including an opposition leader subsequently assassinated and a former spy chief.
• According to a journalist who studied Putin’s biography, the future president simply fitted the necessary criteria: obedient, from the security services, and not a communist or a liberal.
• A property developer close to the events stated the key criterion was controllability and loyalty, not leadership.

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

Constructing the Spy Legend

Analysts concur that the notion of him as a powerful KGB spy was built after the fact. Stories about his clandestine activities in East Germany fall apart under examination. In essence, he was an administrator and technical tasks, a low-level clerk not engaged in field operations.

Interestingly, the shift to depicting him as a “spy” could partly have been triggered by the actor's debut as 007. The grittier interpretation led local outlets and online audiences to draw visual parallels with Putin. Edited images swapping the actor's likeness with Putin’s appeared on city centers, fueling the growing tendency to frame him as a local secret agent.

A Diplomatic Opportunity?

Given the casting, an actor well-liked by viewers there, the authorities are likely to seize the opportunity to portray this choice as a minor diplomatic triumph. The film's exclusion of public dissent, the opposition, or prominent activists from its narrative, even though it includes recent years, is a welcome aspect for state propaganda.

In Russian cinema, the president is frequently an omnipotent figure who remains unseen directly. He is signaled through portraits or calls “from above”. In this new film, he finally acquires a recognizable face—one that could unintentionally validate the very myths it might seek to question.