Interview

For this documentary review, I decided to watch Three Identical Strangers. The story itself seems pretty straightforward: three adopted young men who grew up in separate families meet by chance and turn out to be identical triplets. The plot follows the young men through their journey after this event, garnering incredible media coverage and fame as a result. But their story isn’t quite so simple as questions about psychology, morals, and ethics are called into question.

​

As a general overview of the movie as a whole, I really enjoyed it and my interest was piqued throughout the entire plot arc. I don’t remember having any moments where I was zoning out — I was genuinely invested in the documentary and story. Cinematically, documentaries can tend to be rather monotone and borish. However, this one almost felt like a mini-series, stylistically speaking. They included reenactments of important and dynamic scenes, which definitely made it feel like more of a story than a typical documentary. It helped to create more interest than the slow-panning, Ken Burns’ed images that the majority of interview-based documentaries use almost exclusively. What I noticed about these acted scenes, in particular, was that the actors’ faces were not shown very often, and when they were, it was for a short period of time, or it wasn’t a direct shot. This was definitely so that differences between the actors and real people would be less noticeable and actors would be easier to cast, but I still think it was a unique way to shoot.

​

It was also definitely helpful that this documentary is based on a story which is still somewhat relevant — many of the people involved are still alive and able to comment, and it happened at a time when lots of video footage was taken, so that was easy to insert and include. The only problem I had with this was that there were a number of moments in which clips and pictures were repeated, sometimes three or four times through the movie. I know that the interviews and news pieces the triplets took part in were limited, but it kind of got on my nerves to see the same clip resurface again fifteen minutes after the first time I watched it. And then again twenty minutes after. A nit-picky observation, perhaps, but that always annoys me when I notice it.

​

Although I can say I did truly enjoy the movie, and my interest was kept through the entire thing, I must also say that I felt like the ending was a little less organized than the rest of the movie. There were a few ideas and concepts being played with and talked about by the interviewees, and so the last fifteen minutes seem a bit jumpy compared with the first 80%. But, at the same time, I can also say that I was impressed by the directors’/writers’/producers’ thorough preparation in delving into each avenue they had presented. They got interviews with obscure people who I never would have thought they could find, let alone get an interview with.

​

There were many things I enjoyed about this documentary, and some more things I could definitely pick apart if I were to watch it again. However, to make this short and sweet to save you (the reader) some time, I’ll end here. I’d rate this film an 8.9/10 because I am a snobby critic and refuse to give it a 9/10 since that seems too generous. In other words, yes, I would definitely recommend this to friends. It’s an intriguing story with well-executed storytelling techniques and good cinematography. Thanks for the read and tune in next time for Rochelle Film Reviews (RFR’s)!