Three Identical Strangers

Three Identical Strangers is stranger than fiction.  That’s because it’s the truth.  Bobby Shafran, Eddy Galland, and David Kellman were identical brothers that were separated at birth and adopted by three different families.  Each one didn’t know about the other.  That’s the premise.  The story begins when 19-year-old Bobby attends Sullivan County Community College for the first time.  All of a sudden people are slapping him on the back and acknowledging him with an intimate familiarity.  It turns out the students mistook him for Eddy, a very popular student who had dropped out the previous semester. A fellow classmate makes the connection that Bobby was a twin. To hear Bobby tell this anecdote is one of the many pleasures of this feature.  There’s a shared sense of elation with his palpable excitement in coming to terms with the revelation that he had a twin brother. Then after their picture appeared in the newspaper, David saw the photo of his doubles and realized they were a set of triplets.

What happened next was a whirlwind of activity.   Back in the early 1980s, the media had a field day with the news of long lost triplets.  They were living the high life.  They appeared on talk shows,  frequented nightclubs, had a cameo opposite Madonna in Desperately Seeking Susan.  The three young men became the toast of New York society. Everything seemed wonderful.  During this segment, the soundtrack blasts the song “Walking on Sunshine” and I had to chuckle a little.  Director Tim Wardle was obviously setting the stage.  I sensed a precipitous fall, as is usually the expectation when things seem a little too perfect.  Sure enough. A bombshell is dropped. There are a few more twists as the tale develops and slowly the details of their separation become clearer.

Talking about this movie is tricky. I contend that it’s the joy of discovery that holds the entertainment value in this saga. I went in completely cold and I believe this real-life drama is best experienced this way.  Knowing more than what I’ve revealed here can severely lessen the emotional impact.  Why these brothers were separated at birth is something you will learn.  The chronicle gives us quite a few details into that decision and the subsequent aftermath.  Furthermore, a lot of attention is focused on how similar these men were.  Despite their time apart, they had many similar tastes. They smoked the same brand of cigarettes, they all had been wrestlers, they were attracted to the same type of woman. The media exaggerated these superficial facts at the time and so does the documentary for the majority of its runtime.  What the picture doesn’t do is spend enough time emphasizing how they were different.  It rarely makes them seem like three separate people, often blurring the distinction between each individual man.  Moreover, it doesn’t hold a lot of resolutions.  As such, there is no finality to this story.

Three Identical Strangers is fascinating, but I still had many questions. The way the boys embraced their newfound fame is highlighted.  This even led to a joint business—they opened a restaurant on New York’s Lower East Side called Triplets. Collectively they were living the dream.  So it makes how each man’s life changes a bit of a head-scratcher.  Current interviews with the subjects somewhat help distinguish their individuality.  To its credit, this documentary was captivating enough to inspire me to do some investigative journalism of my own after I watched the film.  I wanted more clarification. It’s marginally brought up, but apparently, a lot more demons plagued these brothers than this account reveals.  Why is the burning question, but the feature doesn’t leave us with many answers.  The respective background lives of each man should have been given a more detailed consideration.  Near the end, the movie does manage to offer a “hot take” on the parenting styles of each mom and dad.  The blaming of one parent, in particular, is not only glib but irresponsible.  This condemnation is one of the last things we are left with as an audience.  The facile explanation left a bad taste as I left the theater.  Yet I will avow, that for most of the tale, this is a compelling story.

9-20-18