The film “Sunshine Women’s Choir,” which became a huge box office success among Taiwanese domestic films, is set to enter the mainland Chinese market. However, promotional materials for the mainland release have labeled it as “a Chinese-language box office champion film in the history of film from the China’s Taiwan region.”
This has sparked criticism from Taiwanese fans and legislators, according to TVBS News.
Taiwan’s Minister of Culture Li Yuan, who himself is a noted screenwriter, said that although China’s market is large, the tactics of its United Front Department often provoke internal divisions within Taiwanese society. He believes that expanding into diverse markets is the way to avoid being manipulated by China.
Financial influencer Hu Caiping, on the other hand, suggested that the government could revise “a certain regulation” without making a major issue out of it.
The film “Sunshine Women’s Choir” previously received over NT$18 million in subsidies from the Taiwanese Ministry of Culture and Taipei City, and Taoyuan City, funded by Taiwanese taxpayers. It has performed exceptionally well at the box office in Taiwan and other regions, including the United States, Canada, Hong Kong, Australia, New Zealand, and Malaysia. In Taiwan alone, it achieved an impressive NT$750 million in box office revenue.
Success
You are now signed up for our newsletter
Success
Check your email to complete sign up
The film is scheduled to be released in China on April 4. However, promotional posts by the distributor on social media labeled it as originating from the “Taiwan region of China,” triggering strong dissatisfaction among Taiwanese fans and Taiwanese legislators. Many flooded the social media posts of director Lin Hsiao-chien, demanding an explanation.
United front tactics stir internal division
In response, Premier Cho Jung-tai led cabinet officials to the Legislative Yuan on the morning of March 31 to deliver a policy report and respond to questions. Minister of Culture Li Yuan proactively addressed the controversy surrounding the film.
According to a report by the Central News Agency (CNA), Li Yuan stated that the film’s producer had approached him, and has been actively inquiring about the film’s release situation in China.
Li pointed out that Taiwanese films sold to China must go through two state-run companies under the Chinese Communist Party: China Film Group Corporation and Huaxia Film Distribution Co., Ltd. As a result, all promotional materials are controlled by the other side. He said he would convene industry professionals who have experience dealing with the Chinese market to discuss how to respond in the future.
Li Yuan put forward three key appeals. First, he reminded that although the Chinese film market is large, the CCP’s United Front tactics may exploit this by arbitrarily modifying or manipulating Taiwanese films in an attempt to foster influence and incite internal division and hostility within Taiwan. Therefore, he urged caution and unity.
Second, Li stated that the Ministry of Culture has begun pursuing international cooperation and co-productions, and has launched a “Grand Voyage Plan” to increase subsidies and attract international funding in order to expand the market for Taiwanese films. He noted that many Taiwanese productions are already abandoning the Chinese market early in the production stage and instead targeting other countries.
Expanding markets to avoid manipulation
Li Yuan also pointed out that the domestic film market has been particularly vibrant this year and called on the public to support local films. He noted that box office revenue from January to March this year has already exceeded that of the entire previous year.
Several films currently in theaters are performing strongly—for example, “Da Meng” has earned NT$110 million, “Road to the Championship” has reached NT$95 million, and “Double Happiness” has brought in NT$80 million—an unprecedented situation in past years.
He stated that the government will support domestic films through various policies, enabling them to recoup costs within their own market while also expanding into other markets—only in this way can they avoid being manipulated by China.
He further pointed out that this principle applies to all cultural industries: “Only by strengthening ourselves and thriving in our own free environment can we avoid being controlled—and in turn become even more free.”
He concluded by calling on the public to give greater support to domestic films.
In response to the incident, many netizens commented: “Isn’t being suppressed the norm? It ultimately depends on what the production team decides.”
“This is the usual tactic—China likes to take advantage of Taiwan. The key point is that this film is a product of Taiwanese talent, made by Taiwanese people, not by Chinese filmmakers—that’s different.”
“At this point it’s basically ‘two countries, two narratives’—they say theirs, we say ours, that’s it.”
“The real reason people are angered is the wording used in promotions in China, such as ‘box office champion in the Taiwan region of China.’ So when domestic films are released overseas, there should be clauses preventing the downgrading of national status.”
Liu Weiran, the producer of “Sunshine Women’s Choir,” responded to online criticism on social media, stating that Taiwanese films released in China have historically been labeled as “Taiwan, China,” but no Taiwanese film would voluntarily adopt such labeling. Regarding government subsidies, she emphasized that according to regulations, if a film makes a profit, the subsidies must be fully repaid. However, she later deleted her account and posts.
Influencer suggests revising a regulation
Financial influencer Hu Caiping said in a message on Facebook on March 31 that criticizing situations like that of “Sunshine Women’s Choir” is not helpful.
“In this case, it would be better for the current Minister of Culture to revise future subsidy contracts. For domestically funded films that are released overseas, the Ministry of Culture should receive at least 30 percent to 50 percent of overseas profits. For example, a 30 percent share for box office revenues above NT$50 million, 40 percent above NT$100 million, and 50 percent above NT$150 million. A recovery mechanism and accounting system can simply be built into the contract—there’s no need to make a big fuss.”
Hu further pointed out that government subsidies for domestic films are meant to support Taiwanese creators, foster a local viewing environment, and benefit the public. However, if a film performs well enough to attract foreign distributors, a return mechanism should be established. After deducting costs and shares for theaters and streaming platforms, the national film fund should act like a shareholder and receive a portion of the profits, channeling them back into the subsidy pool so that more films can receive funding in the future—thus creating a positive and sustainable commercial cycle.
Hu Caiping stated that no matter where the film is released, if creators receive government subsidies, it is perfectly reasonable for profits to be returned to support new emerging filmmakers. There is no need to feel uneasy just because the film is shown in China. After all, earning revenue in RMB makes everyone happy.
Chinese audiences engaging with Taiwanese content may feel more empathy for Taiwan and be less receptive to rhetoric advocating forced unification. Meanwhile, the profits can fund more new-generation creators and improve the overall domestic film environment.
She added, “The current situation is because you nurtured them but have no control over them. But if money comes back, everyone will feel much more satisfied. Money can solve many problems—once the money is received, all grievances are gone.”
After her post was made public, netizens responded enthusiastically:
One said, “This approach is great! Earn money, allocate a return fund, and use it to support other domestic films. The Ministry of Culture should revise the rules quickly!”
Another said, “Collect box office revenue from China and give it back to the Ministry of Culture.”
Further someone else stated, “Makes sense—if you’re going to profit, at least give back to Taiwan.”
And another said, “From a human perspective, I totally agree. While it may not be a perfect solution, if the film goes to China, the profit-sharing should be increased.”
“Sometimes capitalism is the best solution,” said another netizen.
By Li Jingyao Vision Times
