An image obtained from social media on April 5 appears to show wreckage of an American aircraft and a helicopter rotor in Isfahan, Iran. Reuters-Yonhap

The U.S. military’s rescue operation of a downed airman in Iran’s rugged terrain was nothing short of dramatic, akin to something from a spy-action thriller.

U.S. President Donald Trump called the successful mission an “Easter Miracle,” as it coincided with Easter Sunday. Hundreds of U.S. special forces personnel, including Navy SEAL Team 6, who carried out this death-defying operation, participated in the operation. The CIA also played a crucial role in locating the airman, and its contribution cannot be overstated.

I was utterly astonished while reading news articles about the rescue, and I could vividly imagine the life-threatening mission. Is it possible for a true story to be more dramatic than an action movie? The “Easter Miracle” provides a clear answer: Yes, sometimes reality can be more thrilling than fiction.

The rescue operation made headlines just a day after I watched the 2026 Korean film “Humint” on Netflix. “Humint,” short for “human intelligence,” refers to information gathered through human sources and direct contact. The film follows a South Korean spy operating in the Russian Far East as he tracks North Korean drug trafficking. Along the way, he works with a North Korean agent to rescue a girl kidnapped by a Russian trafficking ring.

Given the timing, I naturally found myself comparing the real-life rescue mission in Iran with the fictional spy film. I concluded that the real rescue operation was far more dramatic. The way the two stories are conveyed is fundamentally different: One was an event unfolding in a war zone, while the other is a product of cinematic imagination. The rescue mission was something I read about and the film was something I watched.

Information obtained through newspapers is generally harder to emotionally engage with than stories told through audiovisual media like film. Furthermore, reality and fiction are not directly comparable — except in this case, where their timing invited comparison.

Despite these limitations, I found myself more emotionally invested in the rescue operation than in the film. Why was that? Was it simply due to my imagination? Probably not. The real reason lies in the stakes: One mission was about life and death. A stranded U.S. airman in hostile territory, with both U.S. and Iranian forces racing to reach him for opposing purposes, created genuine suspense. This real-life peril struck a deep emotional chord.

In contrast, I felt “Humint” was lackluster. The plot was predictable from the outset, leaving little room for suspense or curiosity about what might happen next. As a result, the film struggled to maintain engagement and often felt repetitive, echoing familiar tropes from earlier genre works.

The rescue operation, on the other hand, contained all the elements that spark active imagination. A well-crafted spy thriller should keep audiences absorbed, even losing track of time as they watch. It should deliver surprises, twists and moments of awe. Unfortunately, “Humint” lacked these qualities, which ultimately made it underwhelming.

It is therefore no surprise that “Humint” failed to receive critical acclaim from either critics or audiences. Released during the Lunar New Year holiday in February, it attracted fewer than 2 million viewers to theaters — far below its break-even point of 4 million, marking it as a commercial failure as well.

In today’s digital age, viewers are exposed to an overwhelming array of content, both old and new. Streaming platforms like Netflix and Disney+ continuously release original series and films, offering endless choices. Modern audiences, accustomed to watching content anytime and anywhere, have become increasingly discerning. “Humint” likely failed to captivate because its creators did not fully understand these digital-era evolving expectations.

© The Korea Times