🔗 Share this article

Last year, star Jude Law remarked he “didn’t fear any repercussions” for playing the Russian leader in a new film. The movie, though, could coincide too neatly with the carefully constructed version circulated by Russian state media that, domestically, it functions as a compliment rather than a challenge.

The Manufactured Strongman

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

“Domestically, the manufactured Putin has long eclipsed the real one.”

Cinematic Reinforcement

One recent example is a TV series launched last fall, helmed by a pro-government filmmaker. Its main character is a fictional blue-eyed lieutenant colonel selected by fate to “rescue” Russia from chaos. While he is called Mikhail, the message is unmistakable: the hero must be a familiar security officer.

Western portrayals often end up buttressing this identical story rather than debunking it. A new film based on a bestselling satirical novel sets out to undermine the leader's mythology by framing him not as a cause but as a consequence, shifting the narrative weight to the spin doctors surrounding him.

The Myth of the Reluctant Leader

On screen, Putin is shown as having been picked by influential figures to steady the country because he is “young, athletic and a spy”. The oligarchs approach him and practically plead him to take the top job. His response is that he would prefer to rule from the background, desiring permanent power.

This narrative is a key piece of state propaganda: the detached, unwilling mastermind shaped by destiny. In reality, none of this ever happened.

The Truth Behind the Selection

Nobody actually pleaded with Putin to take the job. The presidency was effectively a casting call with no shortage of candidates. At the centre to the selection stood a powerful businessman from the Yeltsin era who expected to run the country in practice.

• The shortlist featured several politicians, including a reformer subsequently assassinated and a former spy chief.
• According to an expert who studied his rise, the future president simply fitted the required parameters: loyal, from the intelligence world, and not a communist or a liberal.
• A property developer familiar with the process said the key criterion was manageability and loyalty, not leadership.

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

Constructing the Spy Legend

Experts agree that the image of Putin as a powerful KGB spy was constructed retrospectively. Claims about his “recruitment work” in Dresden do not stand up to scrutiny. In essence, he handled paperwork and technical tasks, a mid-level functionary not involved with actual agent work.

Interestingly, the move to framing him as a “007” could partly have been triggered by the actor's arrival as 007. His harder interpretation led local outlets and online audiences to draw visual parallels with Putin. Mashup posters swapping the actor's likeness with Putin’s surfaced on city centers, fueling the increasing trend to see him as a local secret agent.

A Diplomatic Opportunity?

Given the casting, an star popular with viewers there, the authorities will not miss the opportunity to portray this choice as a small victory. The film's exclusion of public dissent, the political rivals, or key figures in the story, despite covering recent years, is a welcome aspect for official messaging.

In Russian cinema, the president is frequently an omnipotent figure who never appears directly. His influence is signaled through photographs or orders from on high. In this new film, he finally acquires a recognizable face—one that could unintentionally echo the very myths it might seek to examine.