Extremely absurd There is a unique phenomenon of transparent people in Japan. These are people whose thoughts are heard by others. But their uniqueness lies not only in this. They have outstanding intelligence and are therefore declared a national treasure of Japan. The difficulty in dealing with transparent people is that they don’t have to learn about their nature. Therefore, many special people are assigned to them, making sure that no one around them talks. Transparent by the name of Kenichi, the main character of the film, works as an oncologist in the clinic. The government wants to transfer him to a lab so that he can develop new drugs and be of great benefit. But Kenichi wants to stay a doctor. Especially when his patient is his own grandmother, who once raised him after the death of his parents in a plane crash.
What strikes me in the film is the wildest seriousness. Around the phenomenon of transparent built a whole state machine. Even a special committee has been set up to ensure that the transparent do not know anything. And cities that agree to adopt transparent ones get tax breaks. Every step of the transparent is monitored. Kenichi, who works in the clinic, is watched by a horde of specially trained policemen, and when he goes to the festival in a neighboring town, this horde moves there after him and even organizes a real headquarters for observation. If you calculate how much the state incurs for one transparent, you can simply be horrified. They are not likely to benefit from the benefits that are transparent. In general, without a sense of total perplexity to watch this film is impossible. It is unimaginably serious and full of completely unnecessary pathos.
The meaning of this pathos is simple and banal - transparent people also have rights, because they are also people. It was as if someone had taken away those rights. Where there is pathos, there is sentimentality. When Kenichi operated on his grandmother and realized that he could not save her, he poured his long tears into everything he could. The loss of a loved one is a tragedy. But it could be portrayed without the classic sugary tear scenes, which in general are not much to believe. The problem with “Transparent” is the same as the problem with “In His Map.” The doctor’s attachment to the patient in reality always has a clear limit and never turns into a tearful union of soulmates, as in these films.
Transparent carries a very primitive humanistic message, which is to tolerate those who are different from us. But the form in which this message is hidden seems extremely ridiculous. To invent a man with his thoughts heard by other people, and all in order to force the soulless state to recognize his desire to be a doctor and operate on his grandmother! It all looks very absurd and only aggravated by wild seriousness. Comedy elements would definitely benefit the film.
5 out of 10