Ryu Seung-wan's new film "HUMINT" opened on February 11, 2026.
The movie centers on the espionage concept of HUMINT (Human Intelligence) and digs into the density of human relationships.
It rebuilds the purpose of action around feeling and responsibility.
Meanwhile, the film extends the world of "The Berlin File" while placing more weight on individual stories.
HUMINT: An intelligence war aimed at people?
Overview
The film premiered in February 2026.
Ryu Seung-wan carries his earlier world forward and uses the HUMINT idea to foreground choice and responsibility in a spy action story.
The story begins when Captain Jo (Jo In-sung), a covert agent from South Korea, approaches Cha Sun-hwa (Park Jung-min) in Vladivostok.
It blends a realistic subject—human trafficking—with elements of romance and action to leave a solemn aftertaste.
Definition
The focus is people.
HUMINT means information gathered through people rather than equipment. The film expands that idea into questions about ethics and trust in human relationships.
In the movie, HUMINT becomes more than a collection method; it becomes a force that can change lives and choices.
Information acts as both a tool and a mirror that tests people.
Historical context
This is an extension of "The Berlin File."
Sharing a world with the 2012 film, the new movie feels like a sequel or spin-off released thirteen years later.
Although it inherits settings linked to characters from earlier films, this piece focuses more on inner life than on institutions or organizations.
Ryu redirects familiar elements to shift audience expectations toward a different emotional axis.
Plot essentials
Captain Jo's pursuit begins.
Jo (Jo In-sung) follows clues left by a fallen informant to Vladivostok, where he becomes entangled with Cha Sun-hwa (Park Jung-min).
From the midpoint, a romance between Park Geon and Cha Sun-hwa rises to the surface and the plot adopts a heavier tone.
State and organizational logic recede into the background while personal choice takes center stage.
Action and direction
The action feels grounded.
The choreography pays attention to gun stance, recoil, and the physical toll on bodies. The snowfield sequence aims for visual, auditory, and tactile catharsis.
Ryu mixes classic action homages with modern editing to keep tension taut.
However, the addition of romantic beats raises the emotional density.
Distinct device
Memory becomes a document.
The film uses a torture-like method—forcing repeated written memory entries—to expose how fragile human memory is and to blur the line between information and personhood.
This device offsets the brutality of action and exposes characters' inner lives.
Emotion and physical conflict connect organically.
Arguments in favor
The direction is precise.
Ryu pulls strong performances from his cast and keeps the narrative lean. The action has evolved to reflect feeling and circumstance, which enhances realism.
The snowfield climax is a success in balancing visual spectacle with emotional pacing.
Meanwhile, the individual-focused story prompts thought about the Korean Peninsula and elicits human sympathy.
Arguments against
Genre expectations are shifted.
After the midpoint, stronger romantic elements reduce the straightforward entertainment that traditional spy-action audiences expect.
Some critics and viewers feel the extended action and heavy mood break the film's tempo.
On the other hand, the sensitive subject of trafficking calls for careful handling, and some worry the film does not always navigate that line delicately.
Pro side — detailed
It connects through feeling.
Supporters argue Ryu's direction magnifies both the actors' strengths and the genre's virtues. Realistic action, emotional density, and a people-centered narrative expand what a spy film can be.
From this angle, information is not just a tool for objectives; it becomes a force that upends relationships.
Consequently, the film gives audiences an experience that lasts through emotion and responsibility.
Con side — detailed
They point to lost entertainment value.
Opponents raise a question of identity: by leaning into melodrama and a weighty tone, the film sacrifices the pure thrill that spy action normally delivers.
They also note that the handling of trafficking requires ethical care.
Therefore, some criticisms have merit when seen through the lens of genre balance and representational ethics.
Intent and causes
Ryu chose variation.
Ryu shifts the focus from organizational clash to personal depletion. This choice reads as both a stylistic variation and an attempt to broaden the director's range.
By betting on emotion rather than pure catharsis, he aims to reorganize audience expectation.
The result is an attempt to retrain how viewers weigh feeling against spectacle.
Social implications
The film asks who we trust.
HUMINT reveals ethical limits in information gathering and highlights institutional shortfalls, raising questions about the effects on families and individuals caught between state power and organized crime.
The movie invites viewers to reconsider the meaning of trust and safety.
Moreover, it has the potential to push debate beyond entertainment into public conversation.
Comparisons and cases
Differences from earlier work become clear.
Compared with "The Berlin File," this film moves its weight from institutional clashes to personal choice and responsibility. That shift explains much of the split in audience reactions.
It also sits alongside international spy films that have added human drama to the genre.
However, the real-world weight of trafficking is more contentious in its home context and provokes stronger debate there.
Overall analysis
It chooses feeling and responsibility.
The film expands the technical idea of HUMINT into a human thesis, showing how information can invade a person's life.
The debate around the film raises fundamental questions about genre definition and ethical representation.
Depending on what viewers value, the movie will either resonate deeply or leave them wanting.
Conclusion
The core is people.
"HUMINT" keeps the trappings of a spy picture but explores collapse of trust, personal choice, and responsibility from the inside out.
Ryu's directorial experiment is clear: he prefers emotional echo over pure genre thrill.
Ultimately, the film asks viewers to look past information and see the human being.
To summarize: the mix of direction, performances, and action makes a strong experience, but it also sparks debate over genre expectations and ethical representation.
What matters most to you in this film?
