This director is vindictive.

Chapter 500 So, is this an elementary school student's composition?
On its second day of release, "The Great Tang Dynasty in the Northern Desert" continued to perform steadily at the box office as word-of-mouth spread.

However, "Sunflower" suffered some misfortune.

It might not be overwhelmingly negative, but it's close enough.

The key issue is that the occupancy rate simply doesn't match the number of screenings.

After all, comparisons are the only way to feel hurt.

So when the third day arrived, the theaters decisively adjusted the screening schedule.

The number of performances of "Sunflower" has been significantly adjusted.

On that day, several movie review platforms suddenly saw a surge of enthusiastic posts from enthusiastic fans.

The popular post titled "A film of conscience silenced by capital" deliberately included a screenshot of Gao Yuexiang's trembling shoulders during a body search on screen, with the caption: "Not even the freedom to show one's wounds, this is the real 'secondary injury'."

"If all movies become celebrations, then that is the tragedy of cinema!"

"Yes! The group that 'Sunflower' focuses on is a neglected group. The film simply shows their suffering so that everyone can see it and hopefully society will pay more attention to these people. But instead, it has been criticized in various ways, which is too unfair!"

"After watching the movie, I think the biggest advantage of this movie is that it does not fall into any clichés. Every character is a living person. Their choices, their thoughts, and their cognition are all based on their own cognition as individuals."

There was no profound awakening, no grand family reunion with dumplings.

They made mistakes time and time again, but they also possessed the most basic kindness and longed for a simple and beautiful life. Perhaps this is the true meaning of the sunflower.

"After reading what the experts on 'China Film Report' said, there's actually no problem, but the film definitely suffers from survivor bias!"

Just because many people don't experience this doesn't mean the movie is unrealistic!

It has to be said that this public relations effort did have some effect.

Sure enough, on the same day, hashtags such as #Sunflower was maliciously downgraded#, #Arthouse film was suppressed by capital#, and #Sunflower never exploited suffering# trended on social media.

On the other side, Chen Mo naturally saw these things as well.

But he didn't care at all.

“Now many people believe it, saying that ‘Sunflower’ was suppressed by capital. Capital, I’m talking about you.” Zhao Liying said while looking at her tablet.

Chen Mo, however, said dismissively, "Old tricks. Me? Capital suppression? Heh, don't worry, I don't need to do anything. Someone will prove me wrong with the data!"

Sure enough, as it turned out that "Sunflower" wasn't as bad as it seemed, topics like the suppression of "Sunflower" by capital and the reduction of its screenings were stirred up.

This wave of emotional marketing did have some effect.

It's impossible for "The Great Tang Dynasty in the Northern Desert" to truly satisfy everyone.

Moreover, some people dislike these kinds of "nostalgia" movies the most.

Therefore, online, "Sunflower" is actually showing a slight rebound trend, while "Great Tang Desert" has started to receive a lot of negative reviews.

"I feel that 'The Last Transfer in the Northern Desert of the Tang Dynasty' is not as good as the short film 'The Last Transfer in the Northern Desert of the Tang Dynasty.' Apart from the final battle, I feel that the whole movie has no innovation at all!"

"I hate this kind of marketing that uses nostalgia as bait! It's like saying something bad about this movie is disrespectful to veterans!"

"The white-haired soldiers of the Tang Dynasty's Anxi Army are indeed amazing and admirable, but the final battle in the movie is clearly not historically accurate, right? Historically, they did not launch an attack at all, but were defending the city!"

Chen Mo did not react to this at all.

Because it's really not necessary.

Just as he said, the theater chain responded quickly without him having to do anything.

A cinema manager told reporters, "Based on the data from the first day, the occupancy rate of 'The Great Tang Desert' during prime time was as high as 82%, and some cinemas even had extra screenings that were still sold out; while the average occupancy rate of 'Sunflower' was only 35%, and the vacancy rate of evening screenings exceeded 60%."

In terms of promotional effect, the two films were initially promoted together, and the effects were evenly matched.

Our initial screening schedule was quite similar, but the difference is just too obvious.

We only look at the data. After all, we can't just not give screenings to movies with a lot of viewers, but increase screenings for movies with fewer viewers, right?

Our film scheduling is always based on real-time attendance and audience willingness to buy tickets, and has nothing to do with "capital suppression."

"In fact, at first, we tried to screen the two films next to each other, but the surveillance showed that when the audience left the theater for 'The Great Tang Dynasty,' they discussed historical details in the corridor, while most of the audience for 'Towards the Sun' left in silence and quickly. Some people even went directly to the service desk to complain about the value orientation issue."

Especially those who brought their children to see the film had strong opinions about "Sunflower," believing it was completely unsuitable for children due to its excessive use of profanity and plot points deemed inappropriate for kids. The Chinese-language film market is now quite mature.

In the early stages, marketing and hype might be able to influence viewers' choices, but as the film's runtime lengthens...

Once the number of moviegoers increases, word-of-mouth becomes something that cannot be controlled by simply manipulating comments.

The audience will make their own choice.

Sure enough, many viewers and film critics quickly began to speak out.

"I actually believed before that it was because of suppression by capital, after all, 'The Great Tang Desert' is Chen Mo's movie."

"Sunflower" is just an art film.

But after watching it, I felt like I had really made a fool of myself, actually believing in the so-called suppression by capital!

As expected, blaming capital for suppression is a panacea!
Let me share my thoughts after watching the movie. First, here's a picture of my movie ticket: "Sunflower" movie ticket.JPG!

To be honest, I thought this time, with such a big director involved, it would definitely be a masterpiece.

And the subject matter is very unique. However, after reading the sparse synopsis, I had some concerns. But after watching the movie, my concerns turned into sadness!
Choosing this subject matter was, undeniably, a good option. It just goes to show that the director had big ambitions, both exposing social wounds and shining the light of humanity, but unfortunately, the film was poorly made.

After watching "China Film Report," I initially thought the associate professor's evaluation was somewhat biased, but after watching the film, I truly believe it was very objective!
Why do I say that? Let's start with tags!

The other party said that a very bad thing about "Sunflower" is that it easily gives people the feeling that it is labeling female prisoners!
And it's a very bad label!

What's the truth? After watching the movie, I found that when the female lead and the second female lead were hurling insults at each other, they used a lot of profanities like "bitch" and "fuck," which was very uncomfortable!
This film, however, is marketed as a realist movie. So the question is, what will the audience think after watching it? Are all the female prisoners really like that?
This label is really disgusting, as if the screenwriter's understanding of them is limited to "shrewish women cursing in the street"!
This deliberately created "roughness" not only fails to reflect reality but also exposes the creators' stereotypical prejudices against female characters—does impoverished women necessarily have to use foul language? True realism is about showing the complexity of characters, not labeling them with profanity.

The female lead was imprisoned for distributing obscene materials, and there are occasional scenes of her exposing herself. I don't know how to describe it, but are these scenes really necessary?
Would the absence of these scenes affect the plot?

So does this mean that art films must have these kinds of shots to highlight "art"?
My least favorite scene: The female lead is working, and the boss wants her. The dialogue there is very contrived, like "You want to have a deep conversation with me," which is overly sentimental!
Suddenly I understand what that associate professor meant!

The movie claims to be about "female mutual support," but it's actually a gender-swapped version of "Young and Dangerous."
Violence solves everything: The female lead and the second female lead get into a fight by pulling each other's hair as soon as they meet, then immediately become sworn brothers with Guan Yu, only to slap each other again due to a misunderstanding. Female friendship is reduced to the cliché of "no friendship without fighting," completely ignoring the delicate emotional connections between women.

At first glance, it appears to be a narrative about the lower classes, but what is it actually like?
Many things in the movie were incredibly frustrating and repulsive.

The prison has become a happy home for them. The female protagonist casually says, "It's better to be homeless than to have food and lodging provided." The prison guards are all brainless villains, completely obliterating the progress of the judicial system.

What's most frustrating is that their values ​​are seriously flawed.

The female protagonist swindles money, sells counterfeit alcohol, and nearly kills someone, yet she ultimately achieves a "happy reunion," as if to say, "As long as you're miserable, your crimes can be forgiven." This distorted value system is an insult to the truly struggling people at the bottom of society.

So, let's not talk about capital suppression this time. If it really is, I hope the suppression is quite severe!

Neutral film critics also started speaking out at this point.

"The film 'Sunflower' claims to showcase the struggles of women from the lower classes, but what it actually produces is all old-fashioned, stereotypical content."

The director repeatedly uses the clichéd plot of boss X harassment, but fails to analyze the real reasons for workplace discrimination.

The movie is called "Born to Be Sunny," but the entire film doesn't show how they started their lives anew.

However, after watching the entire movie, I felt that not a single point matched the title.

The only thing that fits the title is that everything has to be associated with sunflowers.

For example, the Sunflower Choir at the beginning of the film, the Sunflower group name in the middle of the film, and the Sunflower Car Wash Team at the end of the film.

This kind of forced naming method is like a primary school student writing an essay and rushing to cram a few keywords from the title into the paragraphs to make up the number of lines.

Furthermore, the plot is severely disjointed:

They said they would reform them after their release from prison, but in the end they still let them go back to their illegal activities.

The director even insisted on adding scenes of women being assaulted—what's the point of such plots other than grabbing attention?

The most outrageous thing is the collapse of the main storyline:

The trailer focuses on Gao Yuexiang's love for her daughter, but in the actual film, it becomes an excuse for her to turn to the dark side.

She cried for two minutes when her daughter was given up for adoption, then turned around and started fighting with her sworn sisters—where was the maternal love she was promised?
What's even more ridiculous is the ending: the daughter inexplicably returned without any explanation.

Audiences pay to watch a story, only to have to fill in the key plot points themselves?
Please, this is the main plot! They talk about how much Gao Yuexiang loves her daughter, then gloss over it and move on to other things, as if her daughter isn't important anymore?

(End of this chapter)