There is a mirror in episode five. The subtitle reads, "From now on I will use this mirror to deal with the world," and the shot shows a woman with soft features holding up a bronze mirror against backlit reeds. Twenty-odd seconds earlier, the same face collapses — the whites of the eyes roll up, the mouth pulls to an unnatural angle, and the subtitle gives only half a sentence: "The moment I see him."

Made by the Jimeng AI short-drama studio, this fifth episode of *The Ugly Fox* (丑狐) has 345,000 likes on Douyin. The top comment, with 25,000 likes, reads: "Please give this kind ugly fox a perfect ending." The second, with 4,418: "This ugly fox is such a lovesick fool."

A character who is simultaneously begged for a happy ending, called a fool for love, and described by 2,061 people as "physically uncomfortable to watch" — those three reactions together suggest the adaptation got one hard thing right. It did not sell ugliness as a gimmick, and it did not treat ugliness as a crime.

Here, ugliness is a result, not a premise

In Pu Songling's original, the fox takes human form, is ugly, and is kind-hearted; the ugliness is inborn. This version reverses the order. It starts with a face you can look at, then lets the face be deformed by how she is treated.

A viewer named "Jie" lays out that logic and gets 1,397 likes: after the fox smashes the mirror, she becomes the mirror herself; faced with unkind people, her face reflects it and turns sour and sharp, until she meets the monk and recovers.

That is the audience's reading, not an official setting — but it explains why 25,000 people would ask for a happy ending for an "ugly" character. The drama has written ugliness as a reaction rather than a label. People judge labels; they inhabit reactions.

The sharper cut comes in another comment, 3,704 likes: "Everyone is the ugly fox. Without feelings you're radiant; once you fall in love or get married, one by one you turn hideous."

That line turns a supernatural tale into an observation about marriage. It isn't praising the effects or the acting. It is saying: this premise has something to do with me.

WATCH NOW

The discomfort wasn't scrubbed away, and that's good

Note that the "physically uncomfortable" comment has 2,061 likes. A substantial share of viewers were not persuaded by the word "kind." What they saw was a face that made them recoil.

Those two reactions coexisting is precisely the sign that the adaptation avoided the shortcut of redemption. If the team had wanted the fox to be likeable, the cheapest route would have been to make her pitiable: thin, weak, tearful, backlit. Instead we get fangs, bulging eyes, a twitching mouth, and a line — "the moment I see him" — that states desire very directly.

The discomfort comes from there: her ugliness is not evidence of having been hurt. It is what she looks like when she wants something.

So "giving ugliness a cause" is not the same as "excusing it." A cause explains why she became this; it does not rule on whether what she does is right. The first makes a character stand up; the second is left to the audience. Some viewers beg for a happy ending, some are repelled, some analyse the mirror — all three groups are working on the same text. That is what a successful adaptation looks like: it opens an argument instead of delivering a verdict.

And the monk? 637 likes ask why the monk looks so much like the fox; 424 likes observe that only one monk in the temple is a real monk; 487 likes defend his breaking of vows — "he saved a life." When a supporting character can trigger three rounds of discussion, the characters are not function cards.

Why classical IP suddenly got cheap to adapt

According to a China Merchants Securities research note dated November 2 (reprinted by Gansu Culture Industry Network on November 5), AI tools have pushed the overall cost of short-drama production to roughly one tenth of live-action, with animated drama falling from over 2,000 yuan per minute to a range of 150–800 yuan. The same note, citing DataEye, says domestic AI animated-drama users passed 600 million in the first half of 2026, about five times the same period in 2025.

That explains why adaptations of *Liaozhai*, zhiguai tales and courtroom cases have suddenly clustered this year: costume, fantasy and creature-heavy genres — formerly the most expensive — can now be made for a few thousand yuan per episode. Once supply opens up, competition moves immediately from "can it be shot" to "what did you make of it."

And the step most easily skipped in adapting a classical text is this one: translating the original's moral ledger into today's ledger. In *Liaozhai*, "ugly face, kind heart" is a protest against judging by appearance. The protest still holds, but its setting has changed — what makes people ugly today is often not birth but relationships.

「爱人如养花」, used in reverse

The saying 「爱人如养花」 (ài rén rú yǎng huā) — loving someone is like tending a flower — has circulated for years: people who are well treated bloom. It appears repeatedly in sentimental writing and is a well-worn classic rather than a new meme.

*The Ugly Fox* flips it: a flower tended badly withers; a person treated badly turns ugly. Same logic, opposite direction. Said forwards it consoles; said backwards it accuses. The show chooses backwards, which is why it isn't sweet — it shows how a face gets slowly rewritten by a relationship.

That is also what makes it more worth watching than most "ugly duckling" stories. The duckling promises you will become better. *The Ugly Fox* only promises you will become what you have been through. The first is a placebo. The second is a mirror.

The bar for adaptation is doing the arithmetic

I don't think *The Ugly Fox* is finely made. It reuses a handful of locations and its effects are not sophisticated. But it settles one account: where the ugliness comes from, who owes for it, and whether it gets repaid.

Viewers are willing to argue about that account for thousands of comments, which says what they have always wanted is not a beautiful face but a coherent person. Classical IP supplies the skeleton; adaptation has to supply the reason that skeleton still stands today. Without that reason, even the most expensive costumes are just the old story told once more.