Get ready to dive into a cinematic storm—because The Wizard of the Kremlin is here, and it’s already sparking debates. But here’s where it gets controversial: Jude Law steps into the shoes of Vladimir Putin in this political thriller, and the trailer just dropped exclusively on Deadline. The film follows a young Russian filmmaker who becomes an unlikely advisor to Putin as he climbs the ladder of power in post-Soviet Russia, navigating the chaos and complexities of a new era. And this is the part most people miss: it’s not just about politics—it’s about the human stories behind the headlines. Joining Law are heavyweights like Paul Dano, Alicia Vikander, Zach Galifianakis, and Tom Sturridge, with Olivier Assayas at the helm, co-writing the script alongside Emmanuel Carrère and Giuliano Da Empoli.
While Deadline holds the exclusive rights to the trailer for now, you can catch it HERE (https://deadline.com/2025/11/the-wizard-of-the-kremlin-trailer-paul-dano-jude-law-1236612426/) before it lands on other platforms. Our Editor-in-Chief, Chris Bumbray, got an early look at the Toronto International Film Festival and shared his unfiltered thoughts. He notes the film’s striking similarities to Assayas’s Carlos, a masterpiece about an international terrorist—but with a twist. Here’s the bold take: The Wizard of the Kremlin feels like the cinematic version of Carlos—episodic, rushed, and at times, confusing. Bumbray admits, ‘I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a longer, more cohesive version out there,’ as the film jumps from the mid-90s to 2019 in a way that leaves viewers scrambling to keep up.
Despite receiving a 12-minute standing ovation in Venice—a testament to its ambition—Bumbray isn’t sold. He calls it ‘cold and matter-of-fact,’ questioning whether it’s suited for theaters. ‘It feels made for streaming,’ he adds, suggesting a limited series might have done justice to pivotal moments like the Kursk submarine disaster, the Sochi Olympics, and the Orange Revolution. But here’s the question: Is this a case of style over substance, or does the film’s episodic nature reflect the fragmented reality of its subject? Law and Dano deliver stellar performances, but will audiences connect with a story that feels more like a history lesson than a gripping narrative?
The film clocks in at 157 minutes, and while it starts strong, Bumbray warns that the rushed pacing makes it feel tedious. Controversial thought: Could this be a missed opportunity to explore Putin’s rise in a way that’s both personal and political? Or is it a bold attempt to capture the chaos of an era? Let us know what you think in the comments—because this is one conversation that’s just getting started.
