Rambling Lemurian

I can’t resist a UFO documentary. And I know, a lot of them are…. how should I say this tactfully….. shitty. Until aliens land on the White House lawn and walk amongst us like in the District 9 or Star Wars universes, we’re probably never going to see a UFO documentary that presents such rock-solid proof that even the most hardened skeptics would have to pause before proclaiming “Bullshit!”. But I’m not into this subject for the scientific analysis, I just want the stories and the chance to suspend disbelief for a moment. So I was excited to see a new Netflix docuseries drop about a story I wasn’t familiar with. And of course I watched it with unbridled enthusiasm knowing I’d likely end up unsatisfied. And yes, I was unsatisfied. It’s not a great documentary. In fact I’d say it’s in the “shitty” category.

For those unaware of the story of the Manhattan Alien Abduction, here’s a quick recap. Linda Napolitano claimed that in 1989 she was abducted by aliens in the middle of the night out of her Manhattan apartment, allegedly witnessed by 23 people (including the Secretary-General of the UN, Javier Perez de Cuellar and his bodyguards). She floated out of her window and up into the sky into an alien spaceship. After seeing UFO investigator and hypnotist Budd Hopkins talk about alien abductions on TV talk shows, she contacted him to tell him her story. Budd Hopkins fell in love with her story (and probably her) and promoted it heavily on talk shows and in his 1997 book, “Witnessed: The True Story of the Brooklyn Bridge Abduction“. Budd Hopkins and his clients were often ridiculed on those shows, so he was thrilled to have Linda as his prize abductee, considering her story, her looks, and how natural and “normal” she seemed on camera compared to the typical alien abductee stereotype.

Filmmaker and writer Carol Rainey, who married Hopkins in 1996, helped interview and document Napolitano’s story but quickly grew suspicious of some of the details in her story. While she was an avid believer in alien abductions and UFOs like Hopkins, she began to distrust Napolitano and tried to suggest to Hopkins that she was lying to him, maybe using him to gain fame or some other ulterior motive. Hopkins fully stood by Napolitano’s story which created a rift in their relationship as then Rainey couldn’t be sure if Hopkins was a victim of Napolitano’s possible lies, or Napolitano was being manipulated by Hopkins, or they were in cahoots together to increase the sales of Hopkins’ book.

If you like documentaries that tell fantastical tales in great details and keep you on the edge of your seat, this one is not for you. If you like documentaries that independently investigate extraordinary claims in a scientific approach, this one is not for you. If you like documentaries that provide perspectives and testimony from many different witnesses and experts, then this one is still not for you. But, if you like documentaries that repeat the same, mostly vague, claims without any effort to prove or disprove them and focus mostly on two old women arguing with each other through pre-recorded videos from separate rooms, then this is definitely the one for you.

So what should we make of this documentary? Did this abduction actually happen, or what it all a hoax perpetrated by a former-singer-turned-housewife desperate for another taste of fame? Linda is reportedly upset with Netflix for editing the show in a way that makes her look like a liar. But also Carol Rainey didn’t come across as very credible either and if anything sounded still jealous of all the attention that Hopkins was giving Linda at the time. There was certainly no conclusion or theory offered by the producers of this documentary. It was basically just a reminder or reintroduction of a sensational story from the 90s that most people either forgot about or never heard about. Unfortunately there’s no substance to it.

I don’t think it matters that there wasn’t much there to ponder on though. Suppose they turned this 3-episode docuseries into an 8-10 episode series where they intensely interviewed every possible witness and every possible debunker/skeptic. Maybe they can get more scientific analysis about the alleged alien implant in Linda’s nose, or get some testimony from the people around the Secretary-General. Maybe get some testimony about the alleged blackout that occurred in the area at the time of the abduction and interviews with more of Linda’s family and friends to look for possible inconsistencies, ulterior motives, or confirmations of her and her son’s stories. Would it have made a difference?

I’ve seen enough of these documentaries to know that…. no. It wouldn’t have made a difference. The physical evidence in her nose and from other abductees would either be “INCONCLUSIVE!” or nowhere to be found. Witnesses would seem credible to some people but inconsistent or biased or schizophrenic to other people. Expert testimony will be mixed and/or biased. We’d just end up with more questions and arguments between the skeptics and the believers.

I’ve always had an interest in the paranormal and aliens and UFOs, to varying degrees during my life. While maybe at a time I firmly believed the government was covering up aliens and the media was complicit in this 70+ year campaign. But now I’m convinced they don’t know anything. There’s no grand conspiracy or a secret alien base in New Mexico where the US government gets alien technology in return for allowing aliens to conduct genetic experiments on us and our cattle. I do think there’s something to all the UFO and alien stories throughout mankind’s history though, and all the strange tales of hidden folk and hairy forest beasts and goblins and fae and floating orbs. But I don’t think it’s really for us to know. It’s all a mystery in different forms, perceptible to some at certain times, with or without logical or scientific reason. It’s for us to think and wonder about in awe and excitement and fear and joy. But not for us to know. And we need to learn to be ok with that.

Is that what the producers of The Manhattan Alien Abduction were trying to get across to us? That the story and the personal experiences are what matters, and not the proof one way or the other?

No. Definitely not. It was simply not a good documentary. But that doesn’t mean you can’t take something from it.