Why is "A Hundred Birds in the Phoenix" not popular?

I think first of all, the audience base is difficult to establish and the market mechanism basically does not exist. Unlike European and American countries, which have independent cinemas, a fixed audience and a perfect film market mechanism. Secondly, it is the fate of literary films to applaud and not be a blockbuster. No matter how good the word of mouth is, it is still impossible to form a phenomenal blockbuster. Finally, only when you are full and warm can you make a movie. Even if the director of a literary film whose box office is bleak does not compromise, he can't come up with the capital to stick to it.

"A Hundred Birds in the Phoenix" depicts people with suona, society with people, organically integrates the fate of suona, people and society, and shows the conflict between social development and people's fate and suona culture with a small perspective. Therefore, the film constructs several wonderful groups of contradictions and conflicts, and it is through the three-dimensional presentation of these groups of contradictions and conflicts that the audience can truly realize the urgency and reality of the inheritance and promotion of suona culture.

What's important is that "A Hundred Birds in the Phoenix" is still there, and the movies grown from the depths of national culture are still there. Authentic China art films, as long as they can persist in speaking out in the confrontation, even if they are so delicate, show that there is still hope. This may be the mission of "A Hundred Birds at the Phoenix". Looking back at the past literary films, there are many examples of applauding and not being a hit, but all the traditional literary films with some achievements are also: they are stained with the light of big directors and big stars; Dramatic films of literary nature, such as Dear and Return; Adapting well-known IP. But these are very small, and most literary films are still limited in market economy. Birds of the Phoenix is far from reaching the level of a masterpiece, and even objectively speaking, I think the score of 8.3 in Douban film is too high.

A feature film shot by the Comparative Academy tells the personal confusion and choice under the collision of the times. How can it be artistic? The shooting technique is not avant-garde and the emotional expression is not personal. This is a story we have seen since childhood, and it tells a good story with great human feelings. At that time, no one said it was an art film. "Birds flock to the phoenix" does not follow the trend, does not cater to the mainstream audience, and the box office is bleak. These are the appearances of art films, but how can we just assume that it is an art film for only a small number of people?