Cinema as a Weapon: Propaganda Across 20th Century Democracies and Authoritarian Regimes
Adolf Hitler and Joseph Goebbels recognized cinema as a potent instrument. In the early days of the Third Reich, they crafted a calculated plan to harness film as propaganda. They celebrated Aryan virtues while casting rival nations, notably England, in a negative light. They even released a controversial 1943 retelling of a famous maritime disaster and, in 1940, repurposed a defaced narrative rooted in bigotry into a film that stands as one of the era’s most infamous antisemitic works.
Benito Mussolini also steered cinema toward political ends, using film to glorify fascism and validate the regime. The industry popularized a style known as the white telephone cinema, featuring escapist comedies and dramas that reinforced ideological conformity. Francisco Franco, through the Spanish studio CIFESA, embraced a patriotic cinematic model and produced titles like Raza, underscoring his nationalist agenda. Across Europe, these movements linked film to state ideology, while in the United States Hollywood produced a different wave of wartime cinema that aimed to counter Nazi narratives and to promote capitalist ideals during the first half of the 1940s.
Cinema as misdirection
Among the most controversial figures is Yevgeny Prigozhin, the head of the Wagner Group. He became known for both military operations and his involvement in film projects that carried pro-Russian narratives and appeals to nationalist sentiment. Recent developments surrounding Prigozhin intersect with critiques of military leadership, including public debates about the effectiveness of wartime strategies. Cinema has repeatedly proven to be a powerful vehicle for shaping public perception, elevating certain values, and sometimes distorting events.
New Russian cinema has leaned into streaming platforms to reach audiences. A film titled The Best in Hell, released last October and produced by Aurum, centers on a brutal battle to seize a contested European city. Though fictional, some analysts note echoes of the broader realities facing Ukraine and other conflict zones. The movie’s realism in depicting combat has drawn attention to the ways contemporary war stories mirror ongoing geopolitical tensions.
The screenplay features a writer named Alexey Nagin, a former soldier who joined the Wagner Group and participated in early Ukrainian conflicts. With Prigozhin’s backing, Nagin shifted from traditional combat roles to writing, drawing on firsthand experience to craft scenes that resonate with current audiences.
Shortly before the film’s release, Nagin was killed in combat near Bakhmut. The Russian state subsequently honored him as a Hero of the Russian Federation, an award that aligns with a broader tradition of recognizing wartime sacrifice. Prigozhin received similar posthumous recognition in the wake of these events, reinforcing the cultural resonance of such figures in contemporary war narratives.
Film as a Global Lens
Even before the Ukraine crisis intensified, Putin aligned film work with the Wagner Group’s influence. A 2021 project called Tourist, directed by the same filmmaker behind The Best in Hell, showcased themes favorable to mercenary groups and their role in foreign adventures. Set partly in Central Africa, the film was distributed in Russia and carried messaging that reflected broader geopolitical aims. The surrounding context includes mining wealth and other resources tied to various state-linked ventures, illustrating how cinema can intersect with economic interests abroad.
Prigozhin’s production slate expanded to feature action-oriented narratives inspired by classic boeviki cinema from the 1980s and 1990s. These low-budget epics often center on rugged soldiers navigating conflicted environments, drawing inspiration from Hollywood’s familiar action epic archetypes, including works associated with big-name stars. The result is a blend of martial bravado and political symbolism that can influence audience perceptions of power and loyalty.
One notable project linked to Prigozhin is Shugaley, a film whose focus lies on a close ally identified as Maxim Shugaley, a controversial figure connected with online information campaigns. The production ties to the broader network of influence operations and public messaging strategies that have shaped political discourse in recent years.
Shugaley is often described as a figure who reveals the darker side of the current Russian information apparatus. Media outlets have referenced him in discussions about influence operations and the overlap between cinema and intelligence activities. In the United States, Prigozhin has pursued biographical storytelling that intersected with cultural subjects, while in Russia cinema has sometimes served to cast power in a sensational light.
Contemporary topics also touch on global security concerns, including conflicts in North Africa. Within a filmography that also features projects tied to the Kremlin’s broader interests, the issue of how film can support anti-radical efforts and military campaigns remains central. The broader narrative emphasizes how cinema can reflect, reinforce, or challenge official policy during times of geopolitical strain.
In recent years another film, Granite, released in 2021, drew attention for portraying counterterrorism efforts in a way that aligned with certain governmental narratives. The film highlighted cooperation with local partners and the perceived effectiveness of military actions against extremist threats. Likewise, another production called Burning Sun offered a stark depiction of occupation dynamics in a war-torn region, weaving personal struggles with larger strategic decisions and the ethical lines crossed in conflict reporting.
Across these examples, American cinema has long produced a wide array of narratives about power, conflict, and resilience. When viewed through the lens of global collaboration and competition, contemporary Russian storytelling stands as a counterpoint—often tethered to the interests of a state-driven network rather than purely commercial aims. The result is a set of cinematic works that illuminate how governments, factions, and media entities shape public perception in times of upheaval and uncertainty.