Summary of the Core Content
The film "Niulai," which was initially ignored by everyone, became an internet sensation thanks to its use of social verification codes. Audiences bought tickets not to watch a movie, but to prove they were there—participating in a collective event of watching, criticizing, and checking in online. It doesn't even qualify as a "bad film" (since it fails to meet the basic standards of a completed work), yet theaters sold it as a regular movie, exposing the industry's lack of clear criteria for finished products and the responsibility of theaters themselves. Its sudden popularity was unexpected and should not serve as a template for success in Chinese cinema. Instead, it serves as a reminder that theaters should not rely on providing opportunities for audience engagement at the expense of proper film selection; audiences need works that are taken seriously.
Analysis 1: Isn't "Niulai" Even Worth Being Called a Bad Film?
Many people consider "Niulai" a bad film, but it doesn't even meet the basic criteria for one. A bad film is still a completed work—it has a story to tell (even if poorly told), characters (even if poorly performed), and a structure that follows a logical sequence (even if confusing). In contrast, "Niulai" lacks a coherent storyline, memorable characters, and even a clear reason for the audience to spend 90 minutes watching it. It uses abstraction as an excuse, skipping the most challenging parts of the creative process (writing the script, editing the footage, developing the characters), leaving behind a mess. Low cost or independent production are not excuses; many low-budget films are made with care. However, failing to complete the basic requirements cannot be disguised as "originality"—it's simply a disrespect for the audience's time.
Analysis 2: Audiences Buy Social Tickets, Not Movies
Most people who watch "Niulai" aren't interested in the film itself; they're looking for a sense of participation. They want to see how ridiculous it is and to join online discussions, using their ticket as proof that they were part of the excitement. This is similar to offline trends on social media—if you miss today's buzz, you'll fall behind when discussing "Niulai" tomorrow. Internet trends have a short lifespan, and people fear being excluded, so they attend even if they know it's a disappointment. This consumption behavior is familiar: it's like watching live streams go wrong or learning new memes, all for the sake of feeling included. Theaters are meant to be places where you put down your phone and focus on the experience, but now they've become mere check-in points for online trends, with the film itself becoming a secondary element.
Analysis 3: The Role of Theaters
Some argue that the release of "Niulai" is due to censorship issues, but the film's license (the "long mark") only ensures compliance with technical standards and content regulations, not the quality of the film. The real responsibility lies with theaters, which must screen whether a film is worthy of being shown. Theaters are not platforms for short videos or failed attempts; they sell the audience's entire attention, so they should ensure that the works are completed products. Selling "Niulai" as a regular movie is like a supermarket selling unfinished goods—it deceives audiences and discourages those who put years into creating quality films. If theaters think that engaging the audience through noise is more profitable than producing good content, it sends the wrong message to the industry.
Analysis 4: Don't Copy "Niulai's" Success
The sudden popularity of "Niulai" might lead some to believe that creating bad films, generating memes, or exploiting trends will be profitable. However, this strategy won't work. Its success was accidental, driven by something unique and unexpected. Audiences were attracted by something completely new. If theaters deliberately try to replicate this approach, audiences will see through it as manipulation and may feel annoyed. Moreover, people don't really enjoy abstract or gimmicky films; they're tired of the exaggerated marketing of so-called "blockbuster" or "emotional masterpieces." What Chinese cinema needs is for audiences to believe again that going to the theater is worth it—whether it's a commercial or independent film. The lesson from "Niulai" is that when movie tickets only prove attendance, theaters are moving further away from producing quality works.
In Conclusion
The hype around "Niulai" will pass, but the issues it raises deserve serious consideration. Theaters must uphold the standard that films should be completed products; audiences should refuse to pay for mere entertainment; and the industry must return to making films with care. The value of theaters lies in providing an experience that encourages viewers to put down their phones and engage for 90 minutes.