Writer Yu Fei complained that "star-centered system" craftsmen do not have to listen to the voice of capital

In recent years, financial capital and Internet forces have intervened on a large scale in the film and television industry. With money, online novel copyrights, and big data marketing, film and television products can be accurately produced. Professional screenwriters who regard themselves as "craftsmen" have encountered unprecedented challenges and even fallen into collective anxiety. Where to go? Yu Fei is also exploring the love and killing with capital.

Original title Yu Fei: We are craftsmen, but what experience is it to be a professional screenwriter without listening to the voice of capital

? A British screenwriter has a famous saying: "Writing is sitting at a table with your eyes staring at the blank manuscript paper until your forehead bleeds." Draw on white paper and create a world. Colorful movies and television dramas are staged every day, and the screenwriters are the story creators of all the images. A high-quality story is the foundation for the success of a film and television work, and its birth is as difficult and difficult as "bleeding from the forehead".

However, this group of practitioners in the story industry has always been in a weak position in the domestic film and television ecological chain. What are the reasons?

After being a professional screenwriter for more than 20 years, Yu Feihui, the screenwriter of the TV series "Serious Crimes Group Six" and "The Eternal Wave", replied: "Just like there would be no food without farmers, there would be no script or story without screenwriters, and the entire film and television industry will be finished." But he changed the topic and asked the reporter: "Although farmers are indispensable, do you think farmers have a high social status? That's the truth."

The problem is that the four great classics are IP, so you are IP? A child in a small ravine wrote something fanciful and compared himself with the four great classics. In fact, there shouldn't be the word IP at all. Isn't it okay to call it creativity or material?

Be wary of IP capital requires a concept to act.

Reporter: Throughout 2015, the film and television industry seemed to have been contracted by a hot word called IP. This year, the IP craze continues. What do you think of this phenomenon?

Yu Fei: In my opinion, the birth of the concept of IP originated from the large-scale intervention of capital. A large number of non-professional screenwriters produce online novels, which are labeled with the concept of IP by capital, saying that these online novels have the value of adapting them into film and television dramas. Then these online articles and stories became very expensive after being hyped up by capital.

I certainly admit that good IP is very valuable. People often say that the four great classics are also IP, which is very good. But the problem is that the four great classics are IP, so you are IP? Many people are confused. A child in a small ravine wrote something fanciful and compared himself with the four great classics. It is because of the word IP that they are confused. In fact, there shouldn't be the word IP at all. Isn't it okay to call it creativity or material? Once you say one word, it becomes something that can go hand in hand with others and have premium capabilities.

Why does it become an actionable story after naming it to a strange name like a network address? The fundamental reason is that capital needs a concept to act. The purpose of acting is not for the good of the industry, but to move back and forth. Beat the drum and spread the flowers. Everyone said it was great. Buy it and buy it, hype an online article to a sky-high price, and after selling it, he wouldn't care.

Reporter: In this way, capital hype over IP is like a game of beating the drum and spreading the flowers, and there are many bubbles in it.

Yu Fei: That's right. Once the cultural market is bad, the capital is immediately transferred to other places. At that time, you bought 10,000 IPs, and all the capital used to speculate on IP left the market. Who do you go to? Who wants these things from you? If these IPs were valuable, someone would have taken it out long ago.

And I can say with certainty that there are no 10,000 IPs worth adapting into film and television dramas in online novels around the world. Nowadays, companies often come forward and say that they have hoarded 10 million IPs as a gimmick for self-hype, but there are only 5 or 10 IPs that are really valuable for development. For those who claim that they have 10 million IPs, I will ask you if you really want to develop them. If you are, then I will convince you; if not, then why are you shouting about it.

Reporter: In fact, the development criterion for IP dramas ultimately depends on how many clicks there are behind them, right? This looks funny.

Yu Fei: There are also good IP dramas. What we oppose is junk IP. Some are particularly bad, but the reason why they were filmed is because the original online article has so-called clicks. First of all, is the number of clicks true? I doubt it. Second, even if the data were true, would it be used as a baton?

Like big data telling you that many people like to eat stewed fire, does that mean that all chefs in the country are going to cook stewed fire? Why can't we hold a Manchu and Han banquet to put everyone in suspense? Why must we blindly cater to the tastes derived from big data? Therefore, even if the data is true, it does not necessarily mean that it should be done according to the data, let alone it may be fake, so it is absurd to create in this way.

We are craftsmen, but that doesn't mean that we can't keep up with the pace of the times. We are all stuck in the ravine foolishly without knowing that we have been deceived. Writers are one of the smartest people. Why should these people write the best stories, get the least money, and be grateful for being cheated? Why?

Craftsmen don't have to listen to the voice of capital.

Reporter: Your attitude towards capital is very interesting. On the one hand, you are wary of the harm caused by the influx of a large amount of financial capital to the film and television creation industry. On the other hand, you do not exclude capital yourself. You established a company and not long ago sold half of the company's equity to the A-share listed company Tangde Film and Television. Why is there such a seemingly contradictory approach?

Yu Fei: In fact, the core issue specific to the screenwriting industry is the relationship between craftsmen and capital. The relationship between craftsmen and capital is actually already in front of us and cannot be avoided. There are many such companies in the capital market that have grown through creativity or craftsmanship, and there are very huge economic benefits behind them. This is a norm. Financial capital and Internet power cannot exist. We scold what we should, say what we should, evaluate what we should, and discuss what we should. But cooperation must also be cooperation.

Reporter: So what experiences have you learned from your cooperation with capital?

Yu Fei: First of all, we have to get out of a misunderstanding. The craftsmanship of our screenwriter cannot be reproduced industrially, but we should not rule out team creation and industrial production. Craftsmen can also cooperate with each other. Secondly, we cannot compromise on quality and standards, but we will not give up on the market. I set up my own company, negotiated with my partners, and even brought a lawyer to negotiate and sign the contract. If we can secure considerable economic protection and allow us to create in our own way with peace of mind, I think we can accept it.

In addition, we must take the initiative, have long-term strategies, guide the direction, and change the atmosphere. The voice of our profession must be heard when there is any major change in ideological trends. Instead of listening to the voice of capital, the voice of Internet celebrities, the voice of powerful people, and the voice of big data.

Nowadays, many stars bring their own writers to the scene, which is the most foolish thing. For a script that has been written, when it starts, the actors will lead a screenwriter and I will lead a screenwriter, and everyone will change their own. I think this is a complete crime and it is directly stealing people's money.

Screenwriters are at a disadvantage in the ecological chain. It is silly to ask foreigners to write stories about China.

Reporter: Not long ago, we heard a lot of dissatisfaction from everyone on the screenwriter forum. The screenwriter Song Fangjin said that the final result and his own text cannot be unified because "people are constantly jumping out to grab the steering wheel." Is that so?

Yu Fei: The screenwriter is really in a weak position in the film and television ecological chain. What you write is likely to end up in a mess and turn out to be a bad show. Of course, there has been a lot of change now, the price of writers has gone up, copyright protection is better. In fact, there are also some excellent screenwriters. Their scripts are not allowed to be changed by others, and there are commissions. But there are still no fundamental changes, and the screenwriter still cannot control the direction of the show.

Nowadays, it is actually a "star-centered system". Whoever is a star is powerful. If it is a screenwriter star, no one will dare to change your things; if it is a producer star, no one will dare to make your ideas; if it is a particularly famous director, there may be dozens of screenwriters around you to help you change it.

But the most are actors and stars, and many stars even bring their own writers to the scene, which is the most nonsense. For a script that has been written, when it starts, the actors will lead a screenwriter and I will lead a screenwriter, and everyone will change their own. I think this is a complete crime. It is directly robbing people's money. This thing of mine is originally good, but if you bring a group of people here and destroy the original good thing, that is robbing me of money. If you want to get involved in depth, get involved in advance, get involved during the script creation stage, and talk with the screenwriter. This is something I very much agree with. But don't take someone to correct it after the writer writes it and starts the machine.

Reporter: Is this kind of situation in which stars change scripts unique to China?

Yu Fei: At least in Hollywood, the production level is very industrial. Many directors in Hollywood don't have editing rights. If you leave after filming, it has nothing to do with you. Under normal circumstances, this should be the case. So making this thing is not that mysterious, it is a standardized thing that can be manipulated, and only the script is completely unpredictable. Who knows what to write and how to write? No one knows. Even if there are some rules, they may be broken at any time.

Ang Lee, the Coen brothers, these films that completely broke the Hollywood model and produced, how innovative do you think can there be at the production level? But from the script level, it is completely subversive. The production should be done according to the industrial process, but how can the script be done according to the industrial process? Do you say we should make another "The Godfather" and "The Past in America" according to industrialization?

Reporter: But we have seen that many screenwriters of American TV dramas are composed of multiple people.

Yu Fei: But there is a controller in a screenwriter team. This person had an idea. If he wanted to make a drama, he would find a group of people to do it. The ideas are mine, I find the people, and I structure the shooting team. The screenwriters of many American TV series play this role. The soul of the work is him, the beginning is him, and the operator is him. He may write two or three episodes himself, or he may not write at all, but he knows who to go to and finally follow his thoughts. To put it bluntly, this is a scriptwriter-centered system.

Reporter: How do you view the current surging wave of Chinese and foreign co-productions?

Yu Fei: That depends on what level of co-operation is. If it is only cooperation at the capital level, such as China capital investing in South Korean TV series, it doesn't matter. But if China capital invited a South Korean screenwriter to write a China series for China audiences, it would be a particularly stupid thing.

I knew this was happening. A China film company asked a foreigner to write about our local life, and then asked our local screenwriter to revise it. For example, a pig's script is written to people on the planet of pigs, and a sheep is written to people on the planet of sheep. Pigs write well, sheep write poorly. But if a sheep can't write, you can only change it to another sheep and find another sheep to write. You can't ask a pig to write for the sheep. These are completely two different creatures. The pig simply cannot empathize with what the living state of the sheep is and how he writes the life story of the sheep. So this is completely unworkable.

Editor: yvette