On April 10, 2025, Russian pop singer Filipp Kirkorov sparked controversy after showcasing his newly acquired Rolex watch, which features the image of the legendary Rodina-Mat, or Motherland. The watch was part of a limited collection released in collaboration with the London watch atelier XLAB-Watches, designed to commemorate the 80th anniversary of Victory Day, a significant event in Russia that honors the defeat of Nazi Germany in World War II.
Kirkorov revealed the expensive accessory during a visit to his friend Viktoria Shelyagova, boasting about the lengths he went to in order to acquire the timepiece. "I drove everyone crazy to get them! Now these are my favorite watches," he said, displaying the luxurious item in a video shared on social media. The limited edition consists of only 80 watches, making it a rare find. However, while Rolex's official site does not list the watch, one Moscow pawnshop has reportedly priced it at over 2 million rubles.
The singer's ostentatious display did not go unnoticed, attracting criticism from various quarters, including military blogger Yuri Podolyaka and former head of Roscosmos, Senator Dmitry Rogozin. Podolyaka, in a scathing comment on his Telegram channel, expressed skepticism about Kirkorov's motives, questioning the appropriateness of spending such a significant amount on a luxury item when the funds could have been directed towards more altruistic causes.
"I don't know how much such a watch costs, but I think it's a lot. And Filipp didn’t think of anything better than to flaunt his patriotism by showing off this watch. Better would have been to spend that money on something truly useful, rather than on ostentation. What else does he know how to do besides posing? Nothing," Podolyaka remarked. His comments highlight a growing sentiment among some Russians who view Kirkorov's actions as emblematic of a superficial brand of patriotism.
Rogozin echoed Podolyaka's sentiments, suggesting that Kirkorov's video was a calculated move designed to provoke public reaction. He stated, "He deliberately hurts people with his actions. I believe the video was staged, and Kirkorov knew exactly what kind of response it would elicit from ordinary Russians. He probably just laughed off the public outrage, using the scandal as another way to draw attention to himself." This perspective reflects a broader concern among critics who see celebrity culture as increasingly detached from the realities faced by everyday citizens.
The backlash against Kirkorov's display of wealth is compounded by the timing of his purchase, coinciding with a national holiday that carries deep historical significance. Victory Day is not just a celebration; it is a solemn remembrance of the sacrifices made during the war. As such, many feel that Kirkorov's extravagant purchase trivializes the meaning of the day.
Despite the criticism, Kirkorov's actions have also sparked a range of reactions on social media, with some supporters defending his right to celebrate his patriotism in his own way. The debate surrounding his purchase highlights a larger conversation about the intersection of celebrity, wealth, and national identity in contemporary Russia.
In recent years, Kirkorov has made headlines for various controversial actions, including a previous incident where he demanded an apology from social media influencer Nastasya Ivleeva regarding a 'naked' party he hosted. This incident further emphasizes the singer's penchant for attracting attention, whether through his music or personal life.
As the discourse surrounding Kirkorov's Rolex continues, it raises important questions about the role of public figures in shaping national values and how their actions resonate with the broader populace. In a country grappling with economic challenges and social issues, the juxtaposition of wealth and patriotism in the actions of a celebrity can be particularly jarring.
Ultimately, Kirkorov's purchase and the ensuing scandal serve as a microcosm of the complexities surrounding fame, wealth, and national pride in modern Russia. Whether viewed as a harmless display of personal expression or a troubling sign of disconnect from societal realities, the conversation is likely to evolve as more voices weigh in on the matter.
