🔗 Share this article

In a recent appearance, star Jude Law stated he had no concerns about backlash for playing Vladimir Putin in a new film. The movie, though, may align so closely with the mythologized version promoted by Russian state media that, domestically, it reads as a endorsement instead of a critique.

The Manufactured Superhero

Over a long period, the Kremlin and its pop-culture machine have worked together to craft a made-to-measure version of Putin. This character is a political superhero without age or mistakes, an ex-intelligence officer reframed as a local 007 who always knows more than he reveals.

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

Cinematic Reinforcement

One recent example is a television show released last October, helmed by a Kremlin supporter. The protagonist is a invented security officer selected by fate to “rescue” the nation from disorder. Although he is called a different name, the implication is clear: the hero must be a known figure from the secret services.

International depictions frequently result in reinforcing this identical story instead of debunking it. A new film inspired by a popular book 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, Putin is presented as having been picked by influential figures to steady the country because he is “young, athletic and a spy”. They visit him and practically plead him to take the top job. He replies is that he would rather govern from the shadows, desiring enduring influence.

This narrative is the Kremlin’s export myth: the detached, unwilling mastermind shaped by destiny. In reality, none of this ever happened.

The Truth Behind the Selection

Nobody actually pleaded with him to accept the role. The position was effectively a selection process with no shortage of candidates. At the centre to the selection stood a powerful businessman from the Yeltsin era who expected to run the state in practice.

• The shortlist included various figures, including an opposition leader subsequently assassinated and a security service director.
• According to a journalist who researched his rise, the future president simply fitted the necessary criteria: loyal, from the security services, and not a communist or a liberal.
• A property developer close to the process said the key criterion was controllability and loyalty, not leadership.

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

Building the 007 Persona

Analysts concur 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 was an administrator and technical tasks, a low-level clerk not involved with field operations.

Curiously, the shift to depicting him as a “007” could partly have been triggered by Daniel Craig’s arrival as James Bond. His harder version led Russian media and social media to draw visual parallels with their leader. Mashup posters replacing Craig’s face with Putin’s appeared on Moscow streets, feeding the growing tendency to frame him as a Russian 007.

A Diplomatic Opportunity?

Given the casting, an star popular with viewers there, the Kremlin are likely to seize the opportunity to portray this choice as a minor diplomatic triumph. Its omission of public dissent, the opposition, or key figures in the story, even though it includes the past decade, is a pleasant bonus for official messaging.

Domestically, Putin is frequently an all-powerful presence who remains unseen directly. His influence is signaled through portraits or calls “from above”. In this new film, he at last gets a famous actor's visage—one that may inadvertently validate the exact legends it perhaps aims to examine.