🔗 Share this article

Last year, actor Jude Law stated he “didn’t fear any repercussions” for portraying the Russian leader in a cinematic adaptation. The movie, however, may align so closely with the carefully constructed image promoted by Russian state media that, domestically, it functions as a compliment rather than a challenge.

The Manufactured Superhero

For years, the Russian political apparatus and its entertainment industry have collaborated to craft a made-to-measure version of the president. This figure is a political superhero without age or mistakes, an ex-intelligence officer reimagined as a Russian James Bond who consistently understands beyond what he shows.

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

Screen-Based Support

A notable instance is a TV series launched last October, directed by a pro-government filmmaker. Its main character is a invented blue-eyed lieutenant colonel selected by fate to “save” the nation from chaos. Although he is called Mikhail, the message is clear: the hero must be a known figure from the secret services.

International depictions frequently result in buttressing this identical story rather than undercutting it. A new film inspired by a popular book sets out to subvert the leader's mythology by presenting him as a symptom but as a symptom, moving the focus to the political machinery around him.

The Myth of the Reluctant Leader

In the film, the president is presented as having been chosen by influential figures to stabilise the nation because he is “young, athletic and a spy”. The oligarchs approach him and practically plead him to take the top job. He replies is that he would rather govern from the background, seeking enduring influence.

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

The Truth Behind the Selection

Nobody actually pleaded with him to accept the role. The presidency was in essence a casting call with many candidates. At the centre to the selection stood a powerful businessman from the previous administration who planned to control the state de facto.

• The shortlist included various figures, among them an opposition leader subsequently assassinated and a security service director.
• According to an expert who researched Putin’s biography, the future president merely met the necessary criteria: loyal, from the intelligence world, and not a communist or a liberal.
• A businessman familiar with the events said the key criterion was manageability and faithfulness, not leadership.

“The goal wasn't a powerful leader, they needed someone malleable, someone who would obey orders.”

Building the 007 Persona

Analysts concur that the image of him as a powerful KGB spy was built after the fact. Claims about his “recruitment work” in East Germany fall apart under examination. In essence, he handled paperwork and routine duties, a low-level clerk not engaged in actual agent work.

Curiously, the shift to framing him as a “spy” may in part have been triggered by Daniel Craig’s arrival as 007. His harder version led local outlets and online audiences to make comparisons with Putin. Mashup posters swapping Craig’s face with Putin’s surfaced on city centers, fueling the increasing trend to frame him as a local secret agent.

A Diplomatic Opportunity?

Given the casting, an star popular with Russian audiences, the authorities are likely to seize the opportunity to frame his casting as a minor diplomatic triumph. Its omission of mass protests, the opposition, or key figures in the story, even though it includes recent years, is a pleasant bonus for official messaging.

Domestically, the president is frequently an all-powerful presence who remains unseen directly. His influence is hinted at 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 very myths it might seek to question.