Review of Three Identical Strangers (2018) by Marc B — 24 Jul 2018

A misleading documentary.

The film starts with a dramatic revelation of a secret adoption of triplets born in New York.

These three brave, tall, healthy, smiling, nice looking 19 year-old boys would make their families proud just by their poster child appearance; proud also would be the adoption agency that placed them at a few months age into three well-established families.

Still, the three boys share a tragedy of being abandoned by the biological mother at birth in 1961.

Before 1980s the practice of splitting twins was common in order to improve the chances of getting infants to families that may already have other kids.

The secret of adoption was common. Consequently, no one questioned the reasons for not informing adopted children of the existence of their possible siblings. Therefore, splitting twins did not go against the existing stereotypes. Not less natural was the idea to study the development of identical twins or triplets in adoptive families.

Now comes Tim Wardle and turns the whole thing upside down with his conspiracy theory.

His view is transparent in the side commentaries and several designed scenes, such as when the six parents visit an adoption agency in the middle of the night (!) to learn or suspect some unimaginable mystery. The movie suggests that the triplets were separated by the sinister will of researchers who wanted to conduct experiments on human beings without their knowledge.

The conspiracy bent of the film is consistent with both making no effort to interview experts on twin studies and making no reference that the practice of twin separation was common place at that time.

The audience shocked by the dark intrigue of evil researchers will evidence another type of bias as well. This time towards the ethnic group that frequently appears in conspiracy theories. The intensity of this bias makes the film fit the ideological arsenal of an infamous European party that raised to state power in 1930's, then vanished, though not without sympathizers to this day.

The film features weak logic and mediocre cinematography. Nonetheless, it disseminates its own brand of conspiracy theories and prejudice to science.