🔗 Share this article

Last year, star Jude Law remarked he “didn’t fear any repercussions” for portraying the Russian leader in a new film. This production, though, could coincide so closely with the mythologized version promoted by official channels that, within Russia, it reads as a endorsement instead of a critique.

The Manufactured Superhero

Over a long period, the Kremlin and its entertainment industry have worked together to craft a made-to-measure version of the president. This character is an infallible strategist without age or mistakes, an ex-intelligence officer reframed as a Russian James Bond who always knows more than he reveals.

“Domestically, the constructed Putin has long overshadowed the real one.”

Screen-Based Support

A notable instance is a television show launched last fall, directed by a pro-government filmmaker. The protagonist is a invented blue-eyed lieutenant colonel selected by fate to “rescue” the nation from chaos. Although the character's name Mikhail, the message is unmistakable: the hero must be a familiar security officer.

International depictions frequently result in reinforcing this same narrative rather than debunking it. A new film inspired by a popular book sets out to subvert the leader's mythology by presenting him not as a cause but as a consequence, shifting the focus to the political machinery surrounding him.

The Myth of the Reluctant Leader

On screen, the president is presented as having been picked by influential figures to stabilise the nation because he is “young, athletic and a spy”. The oligarchs approach him and practically plead him to become president. He replies is that he would prefer to rule from the shadows, desiring enduring influence.

This tale is the Kremlin’s export myth: the cool, reluctant strategist guided by fate. In reality, none of this took place.

The Truth Behind the Selection

No one actually pleaded with him to accept the role. The presidency was effectively a casting call with many contenders. Central to the selection stood an influential oligarch from the Yeltsin era who planned to control the state de facto.

• The shortlist included various figures, including a reformer later murdered and a former spy chief.
• Per an expert who studied Putin’s biography, the future president simply fitted the necessary criteria: loyal, from the intelligence world, and politically neutral.
• A businessman familiar with the process said the primary requirement was controllability and faithfulness, not leadership.

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

Constructing the Spy Legend

Analysts concur that the notion of him as a master operative was constructed retrospectively. Stories about his “recruitment work” in Dresden do not stand up to scrutiny. Fundamentally, he was an administrator and routine duties, a mid-level functionary not involved with field operations.

Interestingly, the move to framing him as a “007” may in part have been inspired by Daniel Craig’s debut as James Bond. The grittier interpretation led Russian media and online audiences to draw visual parallels with their leader. Edited images replacing Craig’s face with his surfaced on city centers, feeding the increasing trend to frame him as a local secret agent.

A Diplomatic Opportunity?

Given the casting, an actor popular with viewers there, the Kremlin are likely to seize the chance to portray this choice as a small victory. The film's exclusion of public dissent, the opposition, or prominent activists from its narrative, even though it includes the past decade, is a pleasant bonus for state propaganda.

Domestically, the president is often an all-powerful presence who remains unseen on screen. His influence is signaled through photographs or calls “from above”. In this new film, he at last gets a recognizable face—one that could unintentionally validate the very myths it perhaps aims to question.