Apple Shares 2026 Chinese New Year Short Film Shot on iPhone 17 Pro

[MacRumors]

Apple today shared a short film to usher in the Chinese New Year, aka Lunar New Year, which begins February 17 and will be celebrated through March 3.

"A girl, a talking dog, and a meticulously thought out scheme make up this heartwarming tale about finding family," says Apple. "Apple joins forces with director Bai Xue for an imaginative blend of cinematography and stop-motion to usher in Chinese New Year."

The video was shot on the iPhone 17 Pro, and there is also behind-the-scenes footage.

Article Link: Apple Shares 2026 Chinese New Year Short Film Shot on iPhone 17 Pro

 

[justanotherdave]

Waiting for all the comments about how much extra equipment they used, as if they don’t use the same equipment if they were shooting with a RED or ARRI camera. 🙄

 

[neilw]

That was delightful.

 

[BeerDrinkerDan]

Waiting for all the comments about how much extra equipment they used, as if they don’t use the same equipment if they were shooting with a RED or ARRI camera. 🙄

I saw one comment on this and thought "it's def someone saying 'it's not just an iphone!'" before clicking in.

-bdd

 

[filmantopia]

It looks incredible. It’s insane that the iPhone is such a capable cinema camera body. If I wasn’t told it was iPhone it wouldn’t even register that it looks any different from high end equipment, and my career is video/film.

 

[Allyance]

Touching and well done, anyone with a pet will love it. For once can you just enjoy something without dumping on Apple?

 

[lazyrighteye]

The quality looks amazing (and yeah, yeah - well aware of what goes into a production like this - it's how I pay my mortgage). Teh framing is really nice. LOVE the stop-motion scenes. Overall, well done. I'm certain this will be well-received here. This community really shines with discussions centered on the subjectivity that is art/creativity/etc.

 

[Allyance]

Waiting for all the comments about how much extra equipment they used, as if they don’t use the same equipment if they were shooting with a RED or ARRI camera. 🙄

Watch this and you can see all the extra equipment, none! Except for a few accessories for the iPhone. Impressive to see all the behind the scenes work and crew.

 

[diego.caraballo]

The extra equipment used pales in comparison to post-processing costs to remove all the lens flares. 😅

 

[ErneX]

Touching and well done, anyone with a pet will love it. For once can you just enjoy something without dumping on Apple?

Agree, I liked it.

 

[cnnyy20p]

Good film! Reminds me of isle of dogs. But the pacing is too fast. I feel like I can’t catch a break.

 

[Madonepro]

Agree, I liked it.

Me too. Can’t speak a word of Chinese, but living next door to a beautiful old Chinese lady, when the New Year comes around, it’s hard not to be sprinkled with ‘joy’.

 

[wikiverse]

Waiting for all the comments about how much extra equipment they used, as if they don’t use the same equipment if they were shooting with a RED or ARRI camera. 🙄

'Shot on iPhone17'... You too can shoot a film just like this with just an iPhone and a million dollars.

 

[Pierre535]

Wonder where they got the dogs that bark. Almost all Chinese owned dogs have their vocal cords cut so they cannot bark, avoiding the pet tax.

 

[emrick]

Almost all Chinese owned dogs have their vocal cords cut so they cannot bark

because this is simply not true. and there is no pet tax in China

 

[svish]

Good to see these videos that show off the impressive features of the camera system of iPhone.

 

[Johnny907]

Huh. Yeah I made it about two minutes before shutting it off.
Subtitle font way too small and I’m far too sober for the stop motion stuff.

 

[ThomasJL]

The very first line in that video is, "Do you ever feel like you're just an NPC?" Tim Cook is an NPC. That is the biggest difference between him and Steve Jobs and Scott Forstall. Jobs and Forstall were out-of-the-box thinkers, whereas Cook is an inside-the-box thinker, which is extremely typical of people like him who have an MBA degree.

MBAs are NPCs. That's why so many of them are automatons who worked in management consulting or investment banking. So many MBAs' dream job is to work at McKinsey or Goldman Sachs.

Jobs and Forstall had unconventional thoughts. Cook only has conventional thoughts. He's probably never had an original thought in his entire life. This has nothing to do with intelligence. Cook has a lot of intelligence in certain areas like supply chain management in the past, and maximizing profits in the present, but is clueless and mediocre when it comes to innovation. NPCs by definiton are not innovators.

Tim Cook is the embodiment of an NPC. He has no originality. That's why there hasn't been a single revoltionary product (like the Apple I, the Apple II, the Lisa, the Macintosh, the LaserWriter, and the iPhone) released under Cook's tenure as CEO. Cook supporters will tout the Apple Watch and Apple Silicon as revolutionary, but they are not. The Apple watch was a significant improvement compared to other smart watches by other companies, and Apple Silicon was based on the A-series SoCs that were released in iPhones while Jobs was CEO. So under Cook's tenure as CEO, we have only seen evolutionary products, not revolutionary products.

 

[Johnny907]

The very first line in that video is, "Do you ever feel like you're just an NPC?" Tim Cook is an NPC. That is the biggest difference between him and Steve Jobs and Scott Forstall. Jobs and Forstall were out-of-the-box thinkers, whereas Cook is an inside-the-box thinker, which is extremely typical of people like him who have an MBA degree.

MBAs are NPCs. That's why so many of them are automatons who worked in management consulting or investment banking. So many MBAs' dream job is to work at McKinsey or Goldman Sachs.

Jobs and Forstall had unconventional thoughts. Cook only has conventional thoughts. He's probably never had an original thought in his entire life. This has nothing to do with intelligence. Cook has a lot of intelligence in certain areas like supply chain management in the past, and maximizing profits in the present, but is clueless and mediocre when it comes to innovation. NPCs by definiton are not innovators.

Tim Cook is the embodiment of an NPC. He has no originality. That's why there hasn't been a single revoltionary product (like the Apple I, the Apple II, the Lisa, the Macintosh, the LaserWriter, and the iPhone) released under Cook's tenure as CEO. Cook supporters will tout the Apple Watch and Apple Silicon as revolutionary, but they are not. The Apple watch was a significant improvement compared to other smart watches by other companies, and Apple Silicon was based on the A-series SoCs that were released in iPhones while Jobs was CEO. So under Cook's tenure as CEO, we have only seen evolutionary products, not revolutionary products.

I mean, his nickname is Human Dial Tone for a reason.

 

[threesixty360]

The very first line in that video is, "Do you ever feel like you're just an NPC?" Tim Cook is an NPC. That is the biggest difference between him and Steve Jobs and Scott Forstall. Jobs and Forstall were out-of-the-box thinkers, whereas Cook is an inside-the-box thinker, which is extremely typical of people like him who have an MBA degree.

MBAs are NPCs. That's why so many of them are automatons who worked in management consulting or investment banking. So many MBAs' dream job is to work at McKinsey or Goldman Sachs.

Jobs and Forstall had unconventional thoughts. Cook only has conventional thoughts. He's probably never had an original thought in his entire life. This has nothing to do with intelligence. Cook has a lot of intelligence in certain areas like supply chain management in the past, and maximizing profits in the present, but is clueless and mediocre when it comes to innovation. NPCs by definiton are not innovators.

Tim Cook is the embodiment of an NPC. He has no originality. That's why there hasn't been a single revoltionary product (like the Apple I, the Apple II, the Lisa, the Macintosh, the LaserWriter, and the iPhone) released under Cook's tenure as CEO. Cook supporters will tout the Apple Watch and Apple Silicon as revolutionary, but they are not. The Apple watch was a significant improvement compared to other smart watches by other companies, and Apple Silicon was based on the A-series SoCs that were released in iPhones while Jobs was CEO. So under Cook's tenure as CEO, we have only seen evolutionary products, not revolutionary products.

How are successive PC’s (Apple 1,11 etc) and a different type of printer “revolutionary” rather than evolutionary?

Also, is the goal of the company to invent never seen before products or to make products people like and find useful?

In a way Tim has made life easier and more enjoyable for far more people than Jobs ever did.

 

[ThomasJL]

How are successive PC’s (Apple 1,11 etc) and a different type of printer “revolutionary” rather than evolutionary?

The Apple I (1976) was revolutionary because it was the world's personal computer as we know it. The Apple II (1977) was revolutionary because it is widely credited with kickstarting the personal computer revolution. The LaserWriter (1985) was revolutionary because it was the world's first desktop laser printer, and is widely credited with kickstarting the desktop publishing (DTP) revolution.

 

[Abazigal]

So under Cook's tenure as CEO, we have only seen evolutionary products, not revolutionary products.

And so...? What's your point again?

My Apple products are working great for me, I have probably purchased more of them under Tim Cook's tenure than I ever did back when Steve Jobs was still alive, and if you are trying to imply that Apple is any less because of it, I guess I am not feeling it.

Is my M4 iPad Pro evolutionary? Who cares? I continue to use my iPad to teach in the classroom, I have done so since 2012, and I expect to continue doing so for the near foreseeable future.

I am still using my 13 pro max, running fine 4 years later. The iPhone 4 would have struggled to remain functional after 2 software updates.

M1 MBA. Still going strong after 5 years.

By themselves, they are already great products. And Tim made the right decision to double down on the apple ecosystem right from the start. He also knew that product upgrade cycles would eventually lengthen, and managed to pivot from selling iPhones, to selling to people with iPhones (eg: more accessories, more services).

I guess my point is that while yes, there is no doubt Steve Jobs was unconventional, but he didn't make the iPhone happen by himself. He had a team, and admin and logistics admittedly ain't sexy, but they are not less crucial in keeping a company afloat. Why are we crediting only Steve Jobs and Scott Forstall while ignoring every other employee who slogged to make products like the iPhone possible? Don't forget that amongst everyone else, Tim Cook was on that team as well, and the best-designed product in the world is useless if you can't make enough of them to sell.

Yes, you need a good product to run a successful business, and you also need business acumen, you need to have the supply chain necessary to manufacture and ship the hundreds of millions of units that Apple sells every year, and I suppose that as I grow older and am holding a middle management position in my organisation, I have also come to appreciate the work that goes on behind the scenes to make this all possible.

 

[threesixty360]

The Apple I (1976) was revolutionary because it was the world's personal computer as we know it. The Apple II (1977) was revolutionary because it is widely credited with kickstarting the personal computer revolution. The LaserWriter (1985) was revolutionary because it was the world's first desktop laser printer, and is widely credited with kickstarting the desktop publishing (DTP) revolution.

I think it’s unfair to compare leadership into two totally different era’s.

There were many things to pioneer in the computing space from the mid 70s through the 80s. In fact many of the things Jobs brought to Apple were things that already existed at Xerox years earlier.

If Apple were to be the company it was in the 70s and 80s it wouldn’t even be making computers and phones. Pioneering technologies in the last decade or so have been on Ai, drone tech etc etc. what has been revolutionary in the personal computing space in the last 20yrs? I can’t think of anything really.

So I think you’re asking for something that can’t and perhaps shouldn’t happen. Tech in terms of personal computing products is very mature. Tim has done things that Steve couldn’t do because Steve didn’t have the temperament to compromise (2 button mouse?). So I think Tim has without doubt proven to be the right person to run the company in this era. No one comes close as a CEO in terms of genuinely keeping a company successful.

The Apple you wish for will never exist again. It simply cannot.

 

[Reason077]

Wow! Did they used trained animal actors for this or are they AI generated? Either way, it's very impressive.