Rapimento alieno a Manhattan

A fraudster claims to be abducted by aliens and a brave woman then tries to show it was all a scam but is threatened by the criminal who made it all up.

Bring in some hypnotism and other junk science and we have a series that could have been shortened by a couple of hours.

Nevertheless, the show as a whole is watchable and compelling.

Who on earth in their right mind can come to the conclusion this was anything other than a fraud and the that one claiming to be abducted is delusional, intentionally or not.

And the use of a child to propagate the scam is unforgivable.

There is simply no scientific or other evidence at all for aliens or alien abduction and saying that people experienced such a thing or witnessed it has for years been discredited.

I just wish the production had done more to uncover the falsity of the claims:

7/10.

This is not an investigative piece of documentary filmmaking. At most, there are presented 2 sides of a story that was thin on details even when new 25 years ago. Unfortunately, the only sane voice in the series - that of Carol Rainey - cannot be encouraged to speak more on the matter because she has died. The only voices left to speak to this are those of the alleged abductee and her son, whose face never appears on camera. There is no evidence provided by the filmmakers to support the assertion that the "Johnathon" that appears on camera is even the son of Linda, who is the main subject of the story.

The filmmakers missed every opportunity to support or refute the claims made by the participants in the series. Was there a city wide blackout in 1989 on the alleged date of the abduction? Are any of the alleged witnesses still alive? What are the opinions of Javier Pérez de Cuéllar (the former UN Sec-Gen who is named-checked throughout the series)? What happened to the alleged implant in Linda's nose? What are the well-known issues with hypnotic regression therapy? I don't know, because the filmmakers don't provide the simplest form of fact checking.

If you watch this, understand that the series is not an attempt at journalism. At least I hope that wasn't the intent of the filmmakers. What is presented is exactly what the title of this review states: an interesting subject with no legs on which to stand.

A lot more intelligently done than it has any right to be, given the subject matter.

I'm a skeptic in every possible sense of the word, to the extent that it's arguably been a detriment to my life in some ways - and I absolutely wouldn't say I've been convinced of the existence of aliens after watching this series. If anything - it indicates to me at least that even your average person is, in theory, capable of convincing anyone of anything.

And yet - it's so pragmatically well-made, so even-handed and balanced, I can't help but have questions. Yes, Linda strikes me and probably anyone with common sense as fame-hungry and maybe prone to deceit, but look at how she's living - this isn't the life of someone riding off the riches of a lifelong con, this is someone who sincerely believes this happened to her. And honestly - I'm open to it.

At first glance, this is a simple documentary that may or may have not been exaggerated and has a solid foundation due to over a dozen witnesses.

It all gets weird when Carol Rainey , wife of Budd Hopkins, the wife of the main filmmaker that was platforming the original story gets all in her feelings, clearly jealous and starts questioning any and everything that would come their way. It didn't take her any reason or even logical thinking to question any of the claims, witnesses or setups, it was baseless hatred and jealousy from top to bottom. I would have much preferred to have someone who was truly neutral that would question everything and look deeper into it.

A fun watch nonetheless.

I am still a UFO enthusiast, but after reading this story a long, long time ago, I think I was skeptical of it. The whole truth henges on the truth of the 23 witnesses, but not a thing was given about them (maybe one person who couldn't remember well). In the case of Communion with Whitley Strieber, he had an implant in his ear and had proof of that. In this case, we don't have the solid proof that Strieber provided the skeptics. I agree with Carol that Bud was probably overzealous in his protection of Linda, but I don't think he would have been deceptive. I think he had the wool pulled over his eyes. The ONLY way I would believe Linda is for the 23 witnesses to step forward. They would have had to be living totally separate lives at the time and had no relations with Linda at all.