Summary of the Core Content
"Niulai" is a 3D animated film created by a home renovation company that ventured into the film industry. The mother-son team behind the project (the son, who has a background in architectural design, served as the supervisor, and the mother, in her 60s) spent five years and only around 100,000 yuan to produce the film using a home computer. With just 7,711 yuan in box office sales in the nine days before its release, the film's popularity soared to 2.2 million yuan within two days due to widespread online criticism. The number of screenings increased from a few to 1,500, and the total box office is predicted to reach 18.37 million yuan. This article analyzes the "unconventional" aspects of this film to reveal several key points: passing censorship does not guarantee quality; audiences have the freedom to choose "bad movies," which is a sign of market vitality; the presence of many bad films often indicates a thriving industry; and the barriers to grassroots creativity are gradually decreasing.
Detailed Interpretation
1. The "Secret to Success" of the Amateur Team: Cross-industry Collaboration + Low Cost + Five Years of Persistence
The creative team behind "Niulai" broke all the traditional rules of the film industry:
- Cross-industry Approach: The production company was originally a home renovation firm that started in the film business in 2021. The director, with a degree in architectural design, handled all core tasks such as modeling, animation, editing, and voiceover. The mother, in her 60s, wrote the script, provided the voiceover, and composed the soundtrack.
- Extreme Low Cost: Initial estimates suggested the cost was only a few thousand yuan, but it eventually amounted to around 100,000 yuan. The film was made using a home computer over five years, resulting in rough visuals (low-quality modeling, lagging animations, and mismatched scenes). Netizens joked that the "most polished part of the film was probably the poster."
- Word-of-Mouth Success: Initially, no one wanted to watch it, but the widespread criticism only piqued people's curiosity—"Just how bad can it be?" The name "Niulai" (which sounds like "bull market is coming") also attracted investors. In short, this amateur team used unconventional methods and unexpected factors to gain popularity on social media.
2. The Dragon Label Is Not a Quality Guarantee! Censorship Checks Only Compliance
Many wonder how "Niulai," with its poor quality, could get the official approval. Here's the clarification:
- Censorship Focuses on Compliance: Reviews mainly check for political, sexual, or violent content, as well as technical issues like broken frames and audio-visual discrepancies. As long as these criteria are met, the film gets the approval, regardless of its artistic quality.
- Don't Confuse Censorship with Artistic Judgment: If censorship were responsible for judging quality, who would set the standards? What might be considered a bad movie today could become a classic in ten years (like some of Stephen Chow's early works). Audience tastes vary greatly, and censorship agencies cannot make decisions on behalf of millions of people.
Therefore, "Niulai's" release simply indicates that it met legal requirements; it's not a case of inferior content displacing better ones but a normal outcome within the system.
3. Audiences Have the Right to Choose Bad Movies: A Mechanism for Market Self-Regulation
Why allow audiences to watch bad movies? The market mechanism is crucial:
- Voting with Money: The initial low box office (7,000 yuan) showed that no one was interested in the film, so theaters didn't schedule it. When curiosity led to increased ticket sales, theaters added more screenings—this spontaneous allocation of resources is more effective than any administrative intervention.
- Administrative Interference Can Harm the Market: If bad movies were banned, it would create a situation where only certain films could be released, discouraging creators from experimenting and hindering market self-purification (bad movies would disappear, and good ones would emerge).
In other words, audiences have the freedom to spend their money on whatever they want, as long as it's legal.
4. Many Bad Movies Do Not Mean a Dying Industry: They Are a Sign of Prosperity
The article provides two examples:
- Hong Kong's Film Golden Age: In the 1980s and 1990s, hundreds of movies were produced annually, many of which were poorly made. Yet these films fueled the industry, supporting companies like Shaw Brothers and嘉禾, allowing creators like Stephen Chow and Wong Kar-wai to develop their skills.
- Hollywood B-Movies: Low-budget, crudely made B-movies accounted for a large portion of Hollywood's output, and many directors (like Quentin Tarantino) started their careers with such films. Bad movies are essential for a diverse industry ecosystem; without them, there would be fewer high-quality works.
5. "Niulai" as a Lesson for All: The Barriers to Creativity Are Falling
The most significant aspect of "Niulai" is that it shows ordinary people that making films is no longer out of reach:
- Lowering Technical Barriers: A computer, some learning software, and five years of effort are enough to produce a film for theaters. While artistic and narrative skills still matter, technical barriers have diminished significantly.
- Shift in Market Power: In the past, capital and critics determined what we saw; now, social trends can make small films popular. Creators don't need to spend money on screenings—if their work generates interest, the market will find them.
- Implications for the Industry: Theaters should not focus solely on big-budget hits; low-cost projects can also be successful. Regulators should ensure compliance without interfering with artistic judgment, and creators should dare to experiment, even if they don't succeed.
In Conclusion
The real threat is not bad movies being released but a market with no variety—only one type of "good film" being available. The success of "Niulai" reflects market vitality: allowing diverse works ensures a thriving industry.