🔗 Share this article

In a recent appearance, star Jude Law remarked he had no concerns about backlash for portraying Vladimir Putin in a new film. This production, however, could coincide too neatly with the carefully constructed image circulated by Russian state media that, domestically, it functions as a compliment instead of a challenge.

The Manufactured Superhero

For years, the Kremlin and its pop-culture machine have collaborated to forge a tailor-made version of the president. This character is an infallible strategist without age or mistakes, a former spy reimagined as a Russian James Bond who always knows more than he reveals.

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

Cinematic Reinforcement

A notable instance is a TV series released last fall, helmed by a pro-government filmmaker. The protagonist is a invented blue-eyed lieutenant colonel selected by fate to “save” Russia from disorder. Although he is called Mikhail, the message is clear: the hero must be a familiar security officer.

International depictions often end up reinforcing this identical story rather than debunking it. An adaptation based on 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 spin doctors around him.

The Myth of the Reluctant Leader

In the film, the president is presented as having been picked by powerful oligarchs to steady the nation because he is “young, athletic and a spy”. The oligarchs approach him and all but beg him to take the top job. His response is that he would prefer to rule from the shadows, desiring permanent power.

This tale is the Kremlin’s export myth: the detached, unwilling mastermind guided by fate. Historically, none of this ever happened.

The Truth Behind the Selection

No one ever begged him to accept the role. The presidency was in essence a selection process with no shortage of contenders. Central to this process stood an influential oligarch from the previous administration who planned to control the state de facto.

• The shortlist featured various figures, among them a reformer subsequently assassinated and a former spy chief.
• Per an expert who researched Putin’s biography, the chosen candidate merely met the necessary criteria: loyal, from the security services, and not a communist or a liberal.
• A property developer close to the events said the key criterion was controllability and loyalty, not strength.

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

Building the 007 Persona

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

Interestingly, the shift to framing him as a “spy” could partly have been inspired by Daniel Craig’s arrival as 007. His harder version led local outlets and online audiences to make comparisons with Putin. Edited images replacing the actor's likeness with Putin’s appeared on Moscow streets, fueling the growing tendency to see him as a Russian 007.

A Diplomatic Opportunity?

With Jude Law, an star well-liked by viewers there, the authorities are likely to seize the opportunity to frame his casting as a small victory. Its exclusion of public dissent, the opposition, or prominent activists in the story, even though it includes the past decade, is a pleasant bonus for official messaging.

Domestically, the president is often an omnipotent figure who never appears directly. His influence is hinted at through portraits or orders from on high. In this new film, he at last gets a recognizable face—one that could unintentionally validate the very myths it might seek to examine.