Recently, an online drama "Cloud Feather" starring Yu Shuxin and Zhang Linghe was launched, but it fell into a series of plagiarism storms, which caused widespread attention and discussion.
In this turmoil, the audience violently bombarded the play for plagiarism and pointed the finger at director Guo Jingming's past controversy. This incident involved multiple factors such as creativity, ethics and intellectual property, and profoundly triggered the thinking of society.
First, let's take a look at the audience's main accusations of plagiarism in "Cloud Feather". They point out that the characters and plot of the show are similar to those of the Japanese anime Inuyasha, and this similarity is not limited to appearance, but also includes the setting and plot development of the characters. The male protagonist Miyakoha is accused of resembling Inuyasha, while his older brother Miyakoku is believed to resemble Inuyasha's Sesshomaru. This similarity raises doubts among viewers, who see it not only as a lack of creativity, but also as a disrespect for the original.
Regarding these accusations, the crew and director Guo Jingming have not issued an official response so far, which further aroused the audience's dissatisfaction and doubts. The audience wanted to hear explanations from the parties involved in order to understand the truth of the incident.
In addition, netizens also pointed out that Guo Jingming has a black history of plagiarism many times in the past. His plagiarism is not only frequent, but always borrowed. In "Cloud Feather", although the audience feels that the male protagonist is like Inuyasha and the older brother is like Sesshomaru, the personalities of the two characters do not completely overlap. For example, in "Inuyasha", every full moon night will lose all internal strength, and this setting does not exist in the male protagonist of "Cloud Feather", but applies to the male protagonist's brother. This subtle modification may be on the one hand to avoid legal problems, and on the other hand it may also be to leave room for justification for some fans. This seems to be a habitual tactic of plagiarism, further raising concerns among viewers about creators' ethics and creative originality.
The audience's anger has also been affected by Guo Jingming's series of past controversies. He has been boycotted by a combination of writers, directors, producers and writers, which shows the entertainment industry's dissatisfaction with his controversial behavior. It also raises the broader question of whether the entertainment industry needs to be more innovative, refuse to follow the trend of writing, overcome the utilitarian mentality, and resist vulgar kitsch to drive the industry forward.
Finally, the audience called on the "Cloud Feather" crew and Guo Jingming to respond as soon as possible. If plagiarism is indeed committed, an honest apology is necessary, and the original creator should not be allowed to wait for years to obtain justice. If there is no plagiarism, then a reasonable explanation should be provided to clear up the audience's doubts and protect the reputation of the episode. The clash of ethics and creativity is reflected in this event, and the voice of the public will also shape the future direction of the entertainment industry.
It's not just a drama issue, it's about creativity, ethics, intellectual property and the direction of the entertainment industry. This event reminds us that creators need to cherish the opportunity to create and respect original works, while the entertainment industry also needs to strengthen self-discipline and encourage innovation to maintain the healthy development of the industry.
In the entertainment industry, the importance of original works cannot be overlooked. They represent the unique ideas and creativity of the creators, bringing a fresh entertainment experience to the audience. Plagiarism not only damages the rights and interests of the original creator, but also disappoints the audience and destroys the credibility of the entertainment industry. Therefore, protecting intellectual property rights and respecting originality is the only way forward for the entertainment industry.
The turmoil has also called for regulators to more closely monitor the entertainment industry to ensure the protection of ideas and the enforcement of intellectual property rights. Only with the joint efforts of creators, viewers and regulators can the entertainment industry achieve healthy and sustainable development.
Ultimately, we hope that this plagiarism scandal will serve as a warning to all entertainment practitioners that innovation and originality are indispensable elements of the entertainment industry. Only then will we see more original productions emerge, provide audiences with diverse and high-quality entertainment content, and propel the industry in a more dynamic and creative direction.