Recensioni degli utenti

I'm going to start this review by saying that I do believe that we aren't alone in the universe. There being other civilizations in the universe is far more likely than that we're all alone. BUT... Just because other civilizations exists, doesn't mean that they have found their way to us, or even know about our existence.

I went into this documentary with an open mind. The real skepticism started already in part 1 of the documentary when Linda claimed to be scared, Budd told her to come to him, and she said she was going to do her makeup first.. like.. girl, what!? If you truly were scared you'd leave the apartment as soon as possible.

Part 3 of the documentary was a big clownfest that even ended with Linda openly threatening Carol.. Will Linda face any consequences for that?.. probably not. Linda also claimed that nobody believes Carol, but nah.. I, and probably many others, believe in Carol's theory. I'm not sure if Budd was in on it all, but he most certainly did cherry pick among the information that was given, because he wanted to believe Linda sooo bad.

I kind of feel like I've wasted my time watching this. Do I recommend it? Meh.. I feel like it's up to you if you want to waste time learning about this hoax or not.

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.

Thought I was about to experience an epic alien abduction story, right in the middle of NYC, with UFOs hovering over skyscrapers, mysterious lights flashing, and people disappearing into the sky. But nope, turns out it's just a long, drawn-out spat between two old ladies who can't stand each other. They bicker over the smallest things, throw insults like confetti, and somehow turn everything into a personal grudge match. If cranky seniors throwing shade and endless passive-aggressive banter are your thing, then dive in. But if you're here hoping for an encounter with extraterrestrial life, you're in the wrong place-no aliens here, just drama. Get outta here while you can.

Simply put, I don't really remember seeing a worse ufo or mystery documentary.

• The show is spread into 3 parts for no reason since what you see or hear is extremely repetitive. The whole first part feels just like a trailer, and the following parts don't get much better. The show doesn't respect your time and just wastes it with repetition
• Many very basic questions that pop into your mind get unanswered and the show does very little to pursue them. Something like involved characters at least trying to explain what exact effort was done to explain some of the phenomena.

I feel it just wasted my time.

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 production fails to clearly define its purpose. Stylistically, it seems a workmanlike homage to Welles's F is for Fake, while lacking all that tour de force's lyricism and poetry. Did the creators set out to unmask a fraud or show how a major UFO investigation was marred by internal rivalry and dissent? One could imagine a production that unifies these into one purpose, but in this case, that's impossible given how preoccupied the film is with conjuring up the look and feel of late-90s-New York, which does little more than distract creator and viewer alike with superficial dross. Also, bound to this concern with the superficial appears to be the film's obsession with the "gotcha!" moment of revealing how Budd Hopkins wasn't the saint that some people thought he was. Add to this the annoying circus-like music that plays throughout the show and you have a meandering production that is clearly unconcerned with offering any interesting revelations or insights. A serious effort would have done more than merely target certain people with innuendo. It would have done the required footwork for laying bare the supposed scam's internal workings, fulling exposing and dissecting the charade. Of course, doing so would have required real work.

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.

I have to start by saying if you actually endure real, traumatic events, you will not be able to reenact those events for any amount of money. Period. So, simply going off that, I cannot believe anything Linda is saying.

I am actually a believer that we cannot possibly be the only intelligent beings out there, but nothing in this documentary convinced me of anything except that these two ladies don't like each other.

Why was this three episodes? You're telling, and showing, us the same stuff over and over again. We get it. I usually really enjoy Netflix documentaries, but this one is just a let down for me. I say don't waste your time, but if you're still interested, you'll get all the info you need in episode one.

You can tell that some of these reviewers are young and don't even know who Budd Hopkins was. Also they don't realize that the woman doing the debunking was his other half. Budd Hopkins was a famous UFO Investigator of his time, talking this issue seriously and documenting cases because no one else was doing it back then. Problem is that most people in those times would think you are crazy if you even talked about it. The talk shows of that era (Oprah, Geraldo, Ricky, and many more) were all competing for ratings with the most controversial subjects they could find. When they started inviting Budd Hopkins on TV, it was more about ratings than a true concern for humanity in those days - and came across as mockery as the audience just laughed at his serious work. This Linda case got out of hand with Budd believing her every word and his objectivity was being over shadowed by basically getting hooked on her every call and whim. His other half who always filmed for him started to notice his bias and loss of objectivity in this particular case since it was so bizarre. She tried talking to him but by this time he would not entertain any discussion. So she started to piece together all the scientific evidence it was a hoax. The ending of this story is enlightening and I won't spoil it but some shocking evidence that wasn't brought out in the beginning shaped my own opinion whether this was a hoax or not.

How they can say this is the most convincing account? If it is the rest most be pretty awful.there are so many flaws.why did they not remove and check the so call alien device up her nose ? Also the aliens were supposed to have taken samples from her ovaries.why was she not checked out by a bona fide doctor.if the aliens could travel at the speed of light and come from another planet surely they would have a more convert way of removing her from her bedroom .also where was her husband ? Then she decided to drag her son into it.he gave his account and then for some reason wouldn't give anymore interviews perhaps he decided he couldnt remember the complicated story line etc etc totally unbelievable.

After two years of whining and begging by my children, I finally subscribed to Netflix. Of course, it's quite clear that dad watches a lot more than the kids. Also, now that I have a wide and versatile catalogue on the screen in front of me, it's perhaps the right time to step out of my comfort zone and watch something I normally never would. Like a true crime documentary about alien abduction, for instance!

Big mistake. I have never been so bored in my life. "The Manhattan Alien Abduction" revolves around story of New York housewife Linda Napolitano who, in 1989, got lifted out of her bed, and floated over nightly Manhattan for a while, before brought aboard an extraterrestrial spaceship. Believers claim Linda's ordeal is the ultimate proof that alien life exists, because allegedly 23 different people witnessed how she floated over Manhattan.

If you are open for the possibility that extraterrestrial life exists, and that the aliens desire to examine the earthlings via random abductions and probes, well then "The Manhattan Alien Abduction" will strengthen your beliefs. If you are a skeptical person and assume the only rational explanation for what happened is that Mrs. Napolitano suffered from psychosis, then "MAA" also does nothing to make you doubt. Worst of all, it's unimaginably boring. I fell asleep three times and wasn't even tired.

And owing to spoilers I can't say exactly why - I can say that I'm unbiased on which way I want for this to be proven true - although granted the romantic in me wants for the abduction to be proven sound and valid - but the scientist in me can't help but to applaud this women's doggedness and dedication to methodically and meticulous pursuit of the truth, however damaging to her relationships that may be - I can not express the admiration I have for someone to be this stalworth and true to one's ideals and principles ideals - what an absolute pleasure to have been able to see this thoughtful documentary take shape over three episodes into its inevitable conclusion

Brava.

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.

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.