🔗 Share this article

In a recent appearance, star Jude Law remarked he had no concerns about backlash for playing the Russian leader in a cinematic adaptation. This production, though, could coincide so closely with the mythologized version promoted by Russian state media that, domestically, it reads as a endorsement rather than a challenge.

The Crafted Superhero

For years, the Kremlin and its entertainment industry have collaborated to forge a made-to-measure version of Putin. This character is a political superhero without age or mistakes, a former spy reimagined as a local 007 who always knows more than he reveals.

“Domestically, the manufactured Putin has long overshadowed the actual person.”

Screen-Based Support

One recent example is a TV series released last October, helmed by a Kremlin supporter. Its main character is a fictional security officer selected by fate to “save” the nation from chaos. While the character's name Mikhail, the message is clear: the hero must be a familiar security officer.

International depictions frequently result in reinforcing this identical story instead of debunking it. An adaptation inspired by a bestselling satirical novel sets out to subvert the leader's mythology by presenting him not as a cause but as a symptom, moving the focus to the political machinery around him.

The Myth of the Reluctant Leader

On screen, Putin is presented as having been chosen by powerful oligarchs to stabilise the nation because he is “a fit former intelligence agent”. They visit him and practically plead him to become president. His response is that he would rather govern from the background, 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 Reality of the Casting Call

Nobody actually pleaded with Putin to accept the role. The position was effectively a selection process with many candidates. At the centre to this process stood a powerful businessman from the Yeltsin era who planned to control the country de facto.

• The shortlist featured several politicians, among them a reformer subsequently assassinated and a security service director.
• According to an expert who researched his rise, the chosen candidate simply fitted the required parameters: loyal, from the security services, and not a communist or a liberal.
• A property developer familiar with the events stated the key criterion was controllability and loyalty, not leadership.

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

Building the 007 Persona

Experts agree that the notion of him as a powerful KGB spy was built after the fact. Claims about his “recruitment work” in Dresden fall apart under examination. In essence, he handled paperwork and routine duties, a mid-level functionary not involved with actual agent work.

Interestingly, the shift to depicting him as a “007” may in part have been triggered by Daniel Craig’s debut as 007. His harder version prompted local outlets and social media to make comparisons with Putin. Edited images replacing the actor's likeness with his appeared on city centers, feeding the increasing trend to see him as a Russian 007.

A Propaganda Win?

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 mass protests, the opposition, or prominent activists in the story, despite covering the past decade, is a welcome aspect for state propaganda.

In Russian cinema, Putin 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 exact legends it might seek to examine.