In this blog post, we explore the profound question of why external changes cannot shake a person’s essence, and what constitutes identity, through the lens of the film La piel que habito.
Various criteria define a person. Appearance, as the most influential factor in intuitively recognizing someone, can certainly be one of those criteria. But it isn’t everything. What I realized through La piel que habito is this: even if you change everything about a person—their looks, voice, gender—there is one thing that remains unchanged: their identity. I believe this film carries a message about modern society, which is often consumed by grooming and external preferences.
A key theme explored in the film is how external changes affect human essence. As the protagonist’s face and gender transform, we are made to consider the limitations of superficial elements in completely altering a person’s identity. This can be read as a warning against the modern tendency to place excessive reliance on appearance. In a society that prioritizes appearance, outward looks inevitably take precedence over inner qualities, leading to the gradual marginalization of one’s intrinsic inner value. So where should we seek our true selves? The film offers various insights into this question.
The predominant emotion I felt while watching the film was discomfort. Or perhaps it was a film that was nothing but discomfort. The mysterious atmosphere created by the unfriendly exposition early on, the accompanying visual effects, the inhumanity of kidnapping people to change their gender, the grotesqueness stemming from elements like burns and skin grafts—I can’t say which had the greatest impact, but whatever the reason, I believe the director wanted the audience to fully feel the discomfort these elements evoked. Films intentionally provoke discomfort in audiences for two primary reasons. One is to emphasize the gravity of the questions they pose; the other is purely genre-driven, catering to those who relish the grotesque. Examples of the latter include films like the ‘Centipede Man’ series or ‘Tusk’. ‘La piel que habito’ falls squarely into the former category.
The technique of deliberately inducing fear or revulsion in audiences is quite common in many films. For instance, in the film ‘The Farm’, scenes depicting creatures wearing animal masks raising humans are portrayed in an excessively grotesque manner to convey a social critique message related to animal abuse. While the intent was to highlight human violence to emphasize the core message of animal protection, the film received overwhelmingly negative reviews for being unpleasant. I believe ‘La piel que habito’ is no different. Compared to the previously mentioned ‘Human Centipede’ or ‘Tusk’, this film feels less grotesque. Therefore, I didn’t perceive it as a film aimed solely at a niche audience. I felt it had a clear message, much like ‘The Farm’.
People today invest heavily in cultivating their outward appearance. And among the various criteria for evaluating people, the importance placed on looks is growing ever greater. In modern society, external beauty is considered a personal capability, and this is not unique to our time. Throughout human history, those with more superior looks have held the advantageous position of gaining more. So why is this emphasis on appearance only now being discussed as a social problem? I feel it stems from cultural shifts driven by media development. As media advanced, the world grew smaller, and people gained access to more diverse appearances and information. They easily encountered the beautiful images of celebrities consumed through media, idolizing them while simultaneously feeling deprived. Advertising for products targeting this psychology then spread again through media, altering the standards for consumption driven by people’s perceptions of beauty. Could it be that the simultaneous spread of two things through media—images of those with superior looks and products to enhance appearance—has altered people’s psychology regarding beauty? Cultivating one’s appearance is certainly not solely negative, as it is an act of enhancing one’s competitiveness in modern society. However, this social atmosphere should not become the cause of misplaced priorities. The psychology of people striving to make their outward appearance as close as possible to their idol, rather than cultivating their inner self; the unconscious delusion that becoming physically similar will make them similar people. Wasn’t this what the film sought to critique?
What makes this film particularly intriguing is how it presents a complex perspective on human adaptability and agency during the protagonist’s transformation. Vicente, having undergone facial and gender alterations and enduring prolonged confinement, gradually seemed to accept his new form and resign himself to his imprisonment. Yet, in the film’s latter half, upon seeing his former self, he reclaims his sense of self. This demonstrates that what truly matters is not merely conforming to a changed appearance, but remembering one’s original self amidst that change and ultimately reclaiming that essence. The film concludes with Vicente killing his captor, escaping the space, returning to where he originally belonged, and declaring his true name, ‘Vicente’. This scene clearly presents how we should approach appearance and identity: breaking free from societal frameworks that define identity through appearance, finding one’s own essence, and protecting it. This, perhaps, is the core message the film seeks to convey.
Through this message, the film prompts us to reconsider our society’s obsession with appearance. Merely altering one’s physical form cannot fundamentally change a person’s essence; identity exists beyond external appearance. Breaking free from the compulsion over looks and seeking inner value is the true beginning of self-discovery.
