Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the evolving perception of international film festivals, highlighting the increasing skepticism towards the integrity of awards and the influence of politics, culture, and capital in the selection process [1][7][22]. Group 1: Award Controversies - The term "撕奖" (tearing awards) refers to the intense debates and disagreements among jurors during award deliberations, exemplified by Zhao Tao's strong advocacy for actress Xin Zhilei at the Venice Film Festival [2][3]. - The public's interest in the behind-the-scenes dynamics of award selection has grown, revealing the complexities and potential biases in the judging process [9][12]. Group 2: Influence of Politics and Culture - Film festivals are deeply influenced by specific political climates, cultural orientations, and capital forces, which often dictate the aesthetic preferences of the juries [7][9]. - The selection of films for awards is not solely based on artistic merit but often reflects the jurors' personal or cultural agendas [7][9]. Group 3: Public Perception and Trust - The trust in international film awards has diminished, with audiences increasingly prioritizing personal viewing experiences over accolades [22][23]. - The article notes a shift in audience expectations, where viewers are more critical of films and less swayed by the prestige of awards [22][23]. Group 4: The Role of Public Relations - The significance of public relations in the film festival circuit has been highlighted, with many production companies investing heavily in marketing strategies to influence award outcomes [16][17]. - The article suggests that the operations behind award nominations and wins have become more transparent, leading to a decline in the perceived value of these awards [16][17]. Group 5: The Demystification of Film Festivals - The article argues that the mystique surrounding film festivals has been shattered, as audiences now see the internal conflicts and manipulations that occur behind the scenes [9][17]. - This demystification is seen as a positive development, allowing for a more rational and honest evaluation of films based on their content rather than their awards [23][24].