Anhui mother and son occupy seats in cinema, causing over 300 people to be forced to get refunds.

On January 30th, a mother-son duo in Anhui province caused a stir by “forcibly occupying seats in a movie theater, leading to over 300 people being forced to refund their tickets.”

According to reports from China Blue News, on January 29th, a man in Bengbu, Anhui took his mother to watch the movie “Detective Tang 1900”. Dissatisfied with the front-row seats they had purchased due to poor visibility, the man forcibly took seats in the rear row that belonged to others, and even said, “I will sit here, what can you do about it?”

In the video footage, a man in the back row of the theater is seen standing on the seat, emotionally declaring, “I will sit here, what can you do about it?” It appears that an argument over the seats ensued with others. A woman beside him retorted, “Then you’re so filial, such a great son,” which was met with applause and cheers from the audience. Police later arrived at the scene and the audience shouted, “Get out! Get out!”

In the comments section of related videos, a post allegedly made by one of the parties involved stated that they were seated in row 13, while the man’s mother occupied a seat in row 2, leading to a dispute over seat occupation. Another witness also mentioned that the mother and son resorted to sitting in the back row due to poor visibility in the front row, and after unsuccessful negotiations, things escalated to a point of no return. They eventually called the police, stopped the movie screening, and all 300 attendees were forced to refund their tickets.

On January 30th, staff from the Global Laser IMAX Cinema stated that all ticket prices were refunded to customers. They mentioned that the mother-son duo refused to listen to advice, “They simply did not listen to us, and even hit our staff members a few times.” According to them, the pair’s original seats were on the side, but dissatisfied with the view, they insisted on sitting in the middle of someone else’s row, triggering a dispute. They also mentioned that their injured colleague was not seriously harmed despite wearing multiple layers of clothing.