Russian President Vladimir Putin has long been shrouded in myth, with his image carefully crafted by the Kremlin to portray him as an all-powerful leader. The latest film to explore this phenomenon is Jude Law's "The Wizard of the Kremlin," which premiered at the Venice Film Festival last year.
Law's portrayal of Putin was a calculated risk, with the actor himself stating that he "didn't fear any repercussions" over his performance. However, it seems that the film's depiction of the Russian president may have been more effective in reinforcing the existing myth than challenging it.
One notable example of how this myth has been perpetuated is in the latest TV series, "Chronicles of the Russian Revolution." The show's main character, a fictional lieutenant colonel with ties to the security services, bears striking similarities to Putin. The implication is clear: the man who saves Russia from chaos must be the familiar figure at the center of power.
In contrast, the French director Olivier Assayas's "The Wizard of the Kremlin" takes a more nuanced approach. The film frames Putin as a symptom rather than a cause, shifting its focus towards spindoctor Vadim Baranov and the machinery around him. This is a significant departure from the typical portrayal of Putin as an all-powerful leader.
However, even Assayas's attempt to subvert this narrative may have been co-opted by the Kremlin. The film does not present itself as a documentary or biopic, but rather as a cautionary tale about the consequences of "political evil." This framing has allowed the Kremlin to spin the film as a minor diplomatic triumph, much like they did with Putin's invitation to meet Donald Trump in Alaska.
The image of Putin as a powerful KGB spy was also constructed retrospectively, and it is unlikely that this aspect of his persona will be widely recognized by the Russian public. The claims about his "recruitment work" during his time in Dresden do not hold up to scrutiny, and most of these stories were added later as part of the wider mythology surrounding him.
In conclusion, "The Wizard of the Kremlin" is a complex film that attempts to challenge the existing narrative around Putin. However, its effectiveness may have been limited by the way it was received within the Russian context. The film's framing as a cautionary tale about the consequences of "political evil" has allowed the Kremlin to spin it as a minor diplomatic triumph, reinforcing the very myth that the film sought to challenge.
Ultimately, the persistence of this mythology is a testament to the power of propaganda in shaping public perception. As long as the Russian media continues to perpetuate this narrative, it will be difficult to imagine an alternative image of Putin in the minds of his citizens.
Law's portrayal of Putin was a calculated risk, with the actor himself stating that he "didn't fear any repercussions" over his performance. However, it seems that the film's depiction of the Russian president may have been more effective in reinforcing the existing myth than challenging it.
One notable example of how this myth has been perpetuated is in the latest TV series, "Chronicles of the Russian Revolution." The show's main character, a fictional lieutenant colonel with ties to the security services, bears striking similarities to Putin. The implication is clear: the man who saves Russia from chaos must be the familiar figure at the center of power.
In contrast, the French director Olivier Assayas's "The Wizard of the Kremlin" takes a more nuanced approach. The film frames Putin as a symptom rather than a cause, shifting its focus towards spindoctor Vadim Baranov and the machinery around him. This is a significant departure from the typical portrayal of Putin as an all-powerful leader.
However, even Assayas's attempt to subvert this narrative may have been co-opted by the Kremlin. The film does not present itself as a documentary or biopic, but rather as a cautionary tale about the consequences of "political evil." This framing has allowed the Kremlin to spin the film as a minor diplomatic triumph, much like they did with Putin's invitation to meet Donald Trump in Alaska.
The image of Putin as a powerful KGB spy was also constructed retrospectively, and it is unlikely that this aspect of his persona will be widely recognized by the Russian public. The claims about his "recruitment work" during his time in Dresden do not hold up to scrutiny, and most of these stories were added later as part of the wider mythology surrounding him.
In conclusion, "The Wizard of the Kremlin" is a complex film that attempts to challenge the existing narrative around Putin. However, its effectiveness may have been limited by the way it was received within the Russian context. The film's framing as a cautionary tale about the consequences of "political evil" has allowed the Kremlin to spin it as a minor diplomatic triumph, reinforcing the very myth that the film sought to challenge.
Ultimately, the persistence of this mythology is a testament to the power of propaganda in shaping public perception. As long as the Russian media continues to perpetuate this narrative, it will be difficult to imagine an alternative image of Putin in the minds of his citizens.
. by framing him as just a symptom of the machinery around him, assayas takes away the hero complex and forces us to see putin for what he truly is: a product of his environment. but at the same time, we can't help but feel that he's still in control, pulling the strings from behind the scenes 
. it's like, how much of our perception of reality are we influenced by the people around us? is it possible to see through the myth and find the truth?
... like, they're just reinforcing the myth that putin is some kinda super powerful leader and not actually challenging it at all 
. the fact that it's framed as a cautionary tale about "political evil" just shows how deeply entrenched their propaganda machine is 
. it's also wild to think that claims about putin's recruitment work are basically made-up and added later... the russian public deserves better than this level of misinformation 
. It's crazy to think that a film can actually reinforce these myths rather than challenge them. The French director's attempt to frame Putin as a symptom rather than a cause is really interesting, but it seems like the Kremlin found ways to spin it anyway 
. I'm not sure if we'll ever get a genuine look at who Putin really is behind closed doors... probably just more propaganda 
.
the media's all about spinnin this mythology around him 2 make ppl believe he's some kinda superhero 
but it's all just propaganda 4 me 
but at the end of the day its hard to imagine putin being anything other than a powerful dude when its all he's ever been presented as 
.
.
.
that film "The Wizard of the Kremlin" seems kinda interesting but also a bit weird how it got framed as a cautionary tale about "political evil". doesn't that just sound like more propaganda to me? 
"Those who would give up essential liberty to acquire more are not worthy to be free" - Thomas Jefferson 
. I mean, how many times can you spin a cautionary tale about "political evil" before it just becomes a repeat of the same old propaganda 
? Putin's image is like a Marvel movie character - he's always gonna be a complex and powerful figure, no matter what's said about him 
. And honestly, I think we're all just watching a bunch of clever spin doctors at work, trying to keep the myth alive 
.
...like, I remember watchin' these documentaries back in the day and thinkin', "Dude, that's just a myth, right?" But now they're makin' movies about it like it's real life! And it's all because of propaganda, man...the Kremlin's got 'em wrapped around their finger 
. I mean, even Assayas tried to make this film that was like, "Hey, Putin's not the hero we think he is," but nope, they just spin it as a cautionary tale and everyone buys it 
It's like, we need to have more nuanced discussions about propaganda and how it affects us, you know? 
. It's crazy that this film tried to show him as a symptom of a bigger problem rather than the cause, but in the end, it seems like the Russians are just eating up whatever narrative they're fed 
. I mean, who needs actual facts when you can have a good story? It's wild how propaganda can shape public opinion so much that even we outsiders can see it happening 
) who can spin it just right, people will swallow it whole.
. And honestly, it makes me wonder if there's even any room for nuance or criticism in Russia right now? I mean, you try to subvert this myth and it gets co-opted 
. It's like they're playing this game of propaganda chess where one wrong move and the whole board is reset 
. I'm curious to see how this plays out in the future, but for now, it just feels like more of the same 
, where every move he makes gets analyzed and framed to fit into this existing narrative. But what if we were to challenge that narrative? Would we find out more about the real guy behind the myth? 