Putin’s on-screen image is echoed in Jude Law’s Kremlin film

The article says Olivier Assayas’s The Wizard of the Kremlin, with Jude Law as Vladimir Putin, presents the president as a cool, reluctant former spy, and argues that this depiction aligns with Kremlin-promoted myths rather than the historical record.

Olivier Assayas’s The Wizard of the Kremlin stars Jude Law as a version of Vladimir Putin and frames him as a cool, reluctant leader and former spy. The article argues this portrait closely matches a mythologised image promoted by Russian media rather than the contested historical record. It notes the film shifts narrative weight toward a spin doctor character and the political machinery around him. The piece draws on journalists and witnesses who challenge the romanticised account of Putin’s rise. What the article reports: - The film is adapted from Giuliano da Empoli’s satirical novel, with some characters using real names and others clearly modelled on real figures such as Vladislav Surkov and Mikhail Khodorkovsky. - The cinematic Putin is presented as chosen for being “young, athletic and a spy,” a portrayal the article describes as resembling Kremlin-crafted mythmaking. - Journalists and witnesses cited in the article, including Roman Badanin and Shalva Chigirinsky, say Putin was selected as a manageable loyalist and that claims about active KGB agent work are overstated. - The article traces earlier media comparisons that likened Putin to James Bond and says Jude Law’s casting may be used domestically as a cultural win. - The film omits portrayals of mass protests and opposition figures such as Alexei Navalny, which the article notes aligns with propaganda-friendly storytelling. Summary: The article argues that the film’s depiction risks reinforcing a romanticised leader image cultivated in Russian media rather than undercutting it. The piece highlights discrepancies between the cinematic narrative and historians’ accounts of how Putin rose to power. How Russian audiences and officials will respond is not fully known, and the film’s wider cultural effects remain undetermined at this time.