3 Reasons the Manhattan Alien Abduction Is a Bad Docuseries

Technically, The Manhattan Alien Abduction is a good docuseries if you measure it by its binge-ability. It was on my Halloween must-binge list, and I gobbled up all three episodes of the Netflix documentary pretty much in one sitting. (Except for breaks to hand out candy to trick-or-treaters.)

But it’s not a good investigative docuseries. At all.

Nor was it satisfying in the way the trailer led me to believe it might be. Rather, I had a very different reaction to the Team Linda vs. Team Carol experience than I thought I would.

Because, at its core, that’s what The Manhattan Alien Abduction is all about—pitting believers against skeptics. In this case, they use the two women on both sides of one of the most sensational UFO abduction cases ever for that purpose.

Not that they’re strangers to controversy. Ever since Carol Rainey, who’s identified as “The Skeptic” in the series, stopped believing and started questioning Linda Napolitano’s alien abduction story, they’ve been at odds, which equates to a few decades.

The docuseries definitely exploited that. And that’s about all it did.

Sure, it claimed to tell the “true story” of what happened. To an extent, it did, but it’s misleading. That’s a good place to start with the reasons The Manhattan Alien Abduction is a bad docuseries.

“True Story” Is Arguable

Here’s the synopsis for the series:

This is the true story behind one of ufology’s greatest mysteries which is still a source of controversy on social media and online forums. But few know that a filmmaker was embedded at the heart of the Manhattan abduction and filmed it all. With access to hundreds of hours of never-before-seen footage, this is the real-life X Files, caught on camera.

Was I expecting a definitive “Yes, that really happened” or “No, it didn’t” answer from The Manhattan Alien Abduction? Yes. I always hope these kinds of documentaries will reveal something conclusive, even though they never do. 

But in addition to getting my hopes up that this one would be different, my reading comprehension (or lack thereof) may also be to blame. It does tell the story of what happened, both from Napolitano’s perspective and Rainey’s. It never says it solves the enduring “did it happen or didn’t it” mystery—even though I still attest it implies that. Or at least how Netflix categorizes it does, which is the next reason this doc isn’t good.

Intimate But Not Investigative

Netflix labeled The Manhattan Alien Abduction both “intimate” and “investigative.” It is intimate. Both Napolitano and Rainey are candid during their interviews with producers, and Rainey’s footage of that time definitely reveals an up close and personal look at what was happening back then.

But investigative? Um, not so much. It severely lacked fact-checking overall, but these four bits of “evidence” in particular bothered me:

1. Witnesses

Napolitano and Rainey comprised the main ones, but there are very few others included.

There was a lot of footage of Budd Hopkins, Rainey’s ex-husband and the ufologist who worked with Napolitano and wrote Witnessed: The True Story of the Brooklyn Bridge UFO Abductions, a book about Napolitano’s experience. But he died in 2011, so he obviously couldn’t participate. His assistant, Peter Robbins, is still alive, and he did. He defended both Linda’s claim and Robbins’s work.

There were also interviews with a couple of other alleged abductees, as well as Napolitano’s son, Johnny, who also might’ve been abducted around the same time as his mom. But that was pretty much it.

However, there were two crucial people who absolutely could verify Napolitano’s claim. And one of them should’ve been tracked down for this doc.

Napolitano claims that two law enforcement officers paid her a visit after her story came out. They identified themselves as Dan and Richard. In addition to coming to her house, they sent letters to Hopkins.

At some point, they revealed that they were the security detail for Javier Pérez de Cuéllar, the Secretary General of the U.N. at the time of her abduction. All three allegedly witnessed her abduction—or so their letters claimed. At one point, Napolitano even pointed out the man she claimed was Richard in footage of him escorting Cuéllar.

Did anyone ever try contacting Cuéllar to ask him? It’s impossible now. He’s dead. And it might take a little digging, but finding out who the man was that Napolitano identified as Richard should be verifiable. No one did it for this doc.

2. Handwriting Analysis

Suspicious of the letters to Hopkins from Richard and Dan, Rainey consulted a handwriting expert. And, like she did with all things back then, documented it on video. (She was a videographer.)

It doesn’t even matter that the handwriting expert determined Dan and Richard’s writing matched Napolitano’s. I mean, that didn’t look good for Napolitano’s case, but it looked worse for the producers of The Manhattan Alien Abduction. 

They didn’t consult anyone new. They just included Rainey’s work and ran with that, which was disappointing. Not to mention lazy and shoddy investigative work.

3. Nose Photos

Napolitano explained how she was looking at pictures of herself after the abduction and noticed a bump on the side of her nose, one that had never been there before.

Does she no longer have those photos? Is that why we didn’t get to see a side-by-side of them? Producers could’ve commented about that one way or another.

4. The Nose X-Ray

The bump on her nose caused Napolitano, who feared it might be a tumor, to go see a doctor. He asked if she’d ever had work done because he saw evidence of scalpel scaring. And when he took an X-ray of her nose, it revealed a spiral-shaped squiggle that she and Hopkins were convinced was an implant of the extra-terrestrial variety. a.k.a. Unequivocal proof of her abduction.

Compelling, sure. But proof? Not even close. Examining the squiggle and determining exactly what is would be.

Rainey offered a suggestion for how the x-ray could’ve been faked. I wasn’t even wondering that. I was hoping for a doctor’s analysis. None was offered.

If so, that’s another thing the producers failed to check into.

Heartbreakingly Exploitative

Okay, admittedly, I tuned in for the controversy. I didn’t know who the red-haired woman in the trailer was when I first watched it. (I now know she’s Carol Rainey.) All I knew was that she was calling Linda Napolitano out.

But Napolitano is no wallflower. “Bring it on,” she taunted.

I’m not proud of myself for being hooked by such theatrics and fireworks, but I’m owning it. Yet, as I mentioned at the start of this post, watching their catfight wasn’t satisfying.

Going into The Manhattan Alien Abduction, I fully expected to pick a side based on the evidence presented. However, two things quickly became obvious.

One, no real investigative work had been invested in the doc (other than what Rainey’s camerawork provided). Two, Napolitano and Rainey each had a truth to tell, but the differences in those truths were being exploited. Which is often what docuseries do, but this felt different.

Instead of finding it entertaining, I felt icky watching their flames being fanned. And mad on their behalf.

I couldn’t help but like them both. They’re both intelligent and characters in their own right. Even though I was hoping for a “did it happen or didn’t it” answer, it started not to matter. Surely they saw they were being used, right? That this docuseries wasn’t going to accomplish anything? Except maybe alienating them and making them reluctant to participate in any future documentaries.

Although, The Manhattan Alien Abduction felt a little more biased in Napolitano’s favor than Rainey’s. That’s why I was surprised to learn Napolitano sued Netflix over it. As Forbes summed it up, Napolitano alleges that “The Manhattan Alien Abduction defames her, paints her in an unflattering light, and steals the work of an author who first wrote about her story more than 20 years ago.”

Pointless

Ultimately, The Manhattan Alien Abduction was interesting but massively disappointing. Yes, it showed new footage, but it didn’t explore the tough questions —or even ask the obvious ones.

Then again, that wasn’t its mission. Its sole purpose was to tell the true story of Napolitano and Rainey’s dispute, which left me wondering, “What was the point of that?”

If you know, please clue me in!

Check-In

Have you seen The Manhattan Alien Abduction? If so, what did you think about it? If not, do you plan on watching?