When Anora, a film about a young American woman’s violent yet comical interactions with Russians, was released in 2024, it placed Russian state propaganda in an uncomfortable position. For years, Russian media had claimed that the West was engulfed in cancel culture, banning Russian cultural works, including Tchaikovsky’s music and Chekhov’s plays. However, Anora defied this narrative. It featured Russian actors, with half of its dialogue in Russian, showcasing that Western media was not as dismissive of Russian culture as the state had led the public to believe.
Anora’s Oscar Success Symbolizes Russian Cultural Resilience Amid Trump-Putin Tensions
The film’s success at the Oscars was especially notable, coming at a time when U.S.-Russia relations were influenced by the Trump-Putin era. While some saw the film as a propaganda tool, Anora’s victory refuted this claim. Screenwriter and director Michael Idov even penned a New York Times column criticizing the film’s success, but the broader industry largely celebrated its triumph. The film’s journey was symbolically significant, highlighting the resilience of Russian culture in the face of political tension.
Initially, Russian state media avoided engaging with Anora, but Ukrainian media soon criticized actor Yura Borisov for allegedly promoting propaganda. This was based on one questionable role he had in a biopic about Mikhail Kalashnikov, the inventor of the AK-47. However, Borisov’s involvement in Anora seemed to undermine the criticism.
Anora’s Oscar Triumph Exposes Divisions in Russian Propaganda Amid Shifting U.S.-Russia RelationsHe had also starred in anti-totalitarian films like Captain Volkonogov Escaped, which highlighted his range as an actor and painted him in a far different light. His Oscar nomination marked a historic moment for Russian actors, as he was one of the few to receive such recognition in recent decades.
Russian Propagandists Clash Over Anora’s Oscar Victory Amid Shifting Political Narratives
Following Anora’s Oscar success, some Russian propagandists seized the opportunity to champion it as evidence that Russian culture was not being canceled. Tina Kandelaki, a producer linked to Gazprom, praised the film’s victory, likening it to the achievements of Sergei Diaghilev’s Russian ballet.
However, this was a controversial comparison, as Diaghilev had fled Russia to escape persecution. Meanwhile, others like Nikita Mikhalkov, a director known for his pro-war stance, derided the film, calling it anti-Russian and offensive. These divergent reactions revealed the fractured nature of Russian propaganda’s engagement with the film.
As the Kremlin shifted its diplomatic stance, particularly in negotiations with the U.S. in Saudi Arabia, Russian state media suddenly aligned with more favorable views of America, coinciding with Anora’s success. Pro-Kremlin bloggers celebrated the film for its supposed traditional values, critiquing Hollywood’s progressive trends in favor of what they perceived as more “normal” content. This shift in narrative demonstrated the fluidity of Russian propaganda in response to changing political dynamics.
The debate over Anora reached new heights when a scandal broke at a Moscow film college. Director Sarik Andreasyan, known for his commercial comedies, criticized the film as “fringe and garbage,” stating his dislike for auteur cinema. His comments were met with mockery and dissent from students, who expressed strong support for Anora and independent cinema over mainstream, state-approved blockbusters. This incident marked a significant public moment where young Russian creatives distanced themselves from the official narratives pushed by the state.
