In recent years, the competition in China's film market has become increasingly intense, and every summer season has become a fierce box office competition. However, the 2023 movie summer vacation has attracted widespread attention due to a series of high-profile events. In this dramatic battle, Yu Dong, a heavyweight in the industry, criticized the strategic strategy of the movie "In the Octagon Cage" by public name, and at the same time aimed his criticism directly at the well-known actor Wang Baoqiang. This incident not only revealed a corner of the open and dark struggle in the film industry, but also highlighted the deep concern of industry insiders and audiences about the rules and ticket price policies of the film market.
This article will dig into the details of this series of events, from which to show the real situation of power struggles and games in the film industry. The end of the 2023 movie summer season symbolizes the end of a three-month box office scramble, however, at this critical moment, Yu Dong, an important figure in the industry, mercilessly named Wang Baoqiang and the producer of the movie "In the Octagon Cage", which undoubtedly set off a new uproar. As the founder of Bona Film Group, Yu Dong's roll call not only questioned the film's publicity strategy, but also focused on the internal friction and struggle in the industry.
Yu Dong's move exposed many problems in the film industry. His criticism relates to the use of an ultra-long screening strategy in "In the Octagon", which is considered too extreme and may affect the audience's judgment of the quality of the film. The act of naming Wang Baoqiang as the starring actor of the film directly points to the complex interaction between stars and film production companies in the film industry. This also reflects the delicate balance between commercial interests and creative pursuits in the film industry.
However, this incident is not only a dispute between industry insiders, but also a general concern of audiences and the industry about the film market. Audiences' concerns about film quality, ticket prices, and publicity tactics have gradually evolved into concerns about the rules and commercialization of the film market. Film is no longer just entertainment, it also carries the interweaving of social and cultural values and commercial interests. Yu Dong's action may be just one of the long-standing calls in the hearts of many audiences.
However, the controversy caused is not only superficial, the problems behind it are more complex and profound. Through Yu Dong's words, we can sense his inner passion and steadfastness, however, this view does not exist in isolation. Behind this controversy, multiple voices emerged, forming a complete picture of a more intricate social phenomenon.
Some voices believe that the incident may involve an overt and covert struggle in the field of capital. They believe that there may be more complex conflicts of interest and power struggles behind them, and movies are just pawns in this larger game. Others have focused on the film industry as a manifestation of infighting. In this view, the incident may involve the entanglement of the relationship between the producer, the distributor and the theater, and may even involve a delicate balance between competition and cooperation.
However, no matter from any point of view, it is impossible to ignore the impact of this controversy on the film market. Yu Dong's attack, he specifically mentioned the ultra-long screening strategy adopted by the movie "In the Octagon Cage". This strategy has sparked intense discussion in the industry. Some people question whether this ultra-long screening strategy is fair and whether it will distort the rules of market competition, which in turn will affect the release of other films. This view reflects the industry's concern for market fairness and the desire to maintain a competitive environment.
However, the controversy did not stop there. The incident also triggered people's deep thinking about the relationship between film quality and box office. Some people believe that although the ultra-long screening strategy can trigger a short-term box office boom, it cannot cover up the quality of the film itself. Whether the audience is willing to pay to watch the movie is the key to determining whether the film can continue to become popular. This view highlights the market's demand for quality content and underscores the need for the film industry to be based on quality.
It is worth noting that the controversy covers much more than the above. It involves film promotion, marketing, audience psychology and other levels. For example, the problems caused by the ultra-long screening strategy about the publicity cycle, publicity costs, and audience expectations all affect the fate of the film to a certain extent. At the same time, this controversy also makes people think about whether the film market is oriented towards commercial interests, or whether it should pay more attention to the inheritance of cultural values.
To sum up, the issues and discussions raised by this controversy are far more complex and profound than we seem. It not only involves various entanglements within the film industry, but also touches on market rules, film quality, audience needs and other levels. This controversy will lead us to think deeply about the direction of the film industry and the balance between business and culture. However, the controversy and discussion triggered by this turmoil goes far beyond the surface, and involves more extensive and profound aspects. Through Yu Dong's phrasing, we can not only perceive his passion and firm position, but also describe more mixed voices. However, these voices do not exist in isolation, they collide and intertwine, sketching a complete picture of a more intricate social phenomenon.
In Yu Dong's words, he strongly condemned the ultra-long screening strategy of the movie "Octagonal Cage" and compared it with the practice of "calling it released after it reaches 10 million box office". This sparked a broad and profound discussion. Some people believe that this ultra-long screening strategy may lead to uncertainty about the release time, destroy the publicity law of the market, and affect the normal release of other films. They worry that this strategy will exacerbate market instability and harm the overall health of the film industry. This view reflects the industry's concern for market rules and desire for a level playing field.
However, the deeper issue of the controversy also involves the degree of commercialization of the film market and the balance of cultural value. Some people believe that although the ultra-long screening strategy may boost the box office in the short term, it cannot hide the problem of the quality of the film itself. Whether the audience is ultimately willing to pay for the movie determines whether the film can continue to be popular. This view highlights the market's need for high-quality content and conveys the audience's desire for well-made, in-depth films. Such thinking raises deeper questions, that is, whether the trend of commercialization has led to the vulgarization of film culture, and whether it should return to the essential value of film.
However, the essence of the controversy is not only about the film itself, but also about the comprehensive embodiment of power, competition and interests. Some voices believe that there may be an open and dark struggle between capital. This interpretation focuses on the struggle between different capitals, viewing the incident as a manifestation of jealousy of Wang Baoqiang's success in the film market, and the ultra-long screening strategy is just a symptom. This view reveals the intricate power structure within the film industry, reflecting the games and disputes in all links of the industry chain.
From any point of view, the controversy highlights the fierce competition in the film industry. In order to compete for market share, different film and television companies did not hesitate to do everything they could, resulting in intensified market competition. Against this background, industry insiders are increasingly concerned about industry rules and market order. Although the events covered in this article are only the tip of the iceberg of disputes in the film industry, the intricate contradictions and contests within the entire film industry are more complicated. This also reflects the dilemmas and challenges in the development of the film industry.
In addition to the internal battles in the industry, the audience's concerns about movie ticket prices are also clearly demonstrated in this article. As a mass cultural product, the ticket price of a movie directly affects the viewing experience of the general public. The appeal mentioned in the article expresses the audience's dissatisfaction with the rising ticket prices of movies. Audiences want to enjoy the pleasant experience brought by high-quality movies at a reasonable price. This call highlights the audience's expectations for the film industry, and also affects the supply and demand relationship of the market to some extent.
Based on the above, a series of events triggered by the 2023 film summer file, starting from the naming speech of industry insiders Yu Dong, reflect the power game in the film industry, the fierce competition in the market and the discussion of cultural values. This controversy is not limited to the film market itself, but also reflects the important interweaving of power, competition and interests in the social context. This turmoil is not only a discussion about the film market, but a microcosm of the broader challenges and dilemmas facing the film industry. In the context of the rapid development of the film industry, how to find a balance between commercial interests and cultural inheritance will be a topic that the film industry needs to ponder in the future.