Manson (2009)

Thanks for the memories!

This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

It's an awful story, but it's what happened. There has always been a morbid fascination with these crimes and the Manson family in general. One thing I give this docudrama is that they do tap into the public's interest in the whole Helter Skelter thing; but they also explicitly show how brutal and awful it was too. I don't think it was bloody just for shock value. It's what happened. If that sort of thing is disturbing to you; then I would suggest not watching it. But I think it's important to show the brutality of it, because otherwise you're sanitizing it. I'm sure the last thing the filmmakers wanted was to glorify these murders. But in order to do right by the victims you have to tell the truth. I think they did an excellent job. It's very interesting, but wrong as hell all at the same time. I think they did a very good job with handling the subject matter.

Linda Kasabian Has Come Out Of Hiding To Speak For The First Time In 40 Years About The Manson Murders.Okay That Is The Whole Plot Of This Documentary, I Felt Like They Used Up The Actors That Play Their Parts To What Should've Been More Interviews Like About The Tate Murders, I Know Its A Long Stretch But Roman Polanski Should've Said Something, Besides Deborah Tate And Linda Kasabian And Some Historian No One Knows.The Acted Parts Were So Badly Acted That It Looked Like Manson's Motive For Murders Was That He Didn't Get A Record Deal, This However Is A Load Of Crap, Helter Skelter Is His Motive (The War To End All Wars And He Would Reign As King Of The World).Overall I Found This Documentary To Be Interesting From The Point Of View From People Who Were There But The Problem Is That It Is All How They Interpret Things, For Example I Interpret Helter Skelter As "Great Song, Invention Of Heavy Metal", Manson Interpreted This As "The War To End All Wars"...See How Interpretation Can Vary, Sure Manson Was This Crazed F#ucking Maniac But It Proves My Point. Avoid At All Costs.

When I saw that the History Channel was putting together yet another documentary on the Manson Murders, my skepticism was pretty high. Recent attempts to discuss or re-enact the murders and/or trials have added little to the discussion, and in some cases, were downright awful or amateurish at best (see Jim VanBebber's "The Manson Family"). After watching this latest attempt, I was mildly impressed.The acting is decent, although some of the actors chosen were all wrong for the parts (Terry Melcher as a skinny guy with short brown hair...I mean...REALLY). The re-enactments of the murders were pretty well done, although for some unknown reason, the filmmakers got the clothing wrong AGAIN. It is common knowledge that the killers all wore dark clothing (a mistake also made in the latest TV-movie version of "Helter Skelter" five years ago...WHY???) and the houses used to sub for the Tate and LaBianca residences look all wrong. Surely they could have found houses that looked somewhat like the actual sites? Still, it could have been worse! What made this most intriguing was the participation of star witness Linda Kasabian. She has given few public interviews over the past forty years, so it was interesting to see her here. While some may still disagree with her exoneration due to being the star state's witness, the fact remains that she did not kill anyone either night. Was she an accomplice? Yes...but nowhere as culpable as her colleagues in madness. Vincent Bugliosi and Debra Tate also make appearances in the film, although they add little new to the mix. I really think Bugliosi could do Manson material in his sleep at this point! The program also does a good job of showing Manson's shift from "peace and love" leader to the raving maniac he has since become (partly due to his joy in mocking the mass media by being the madman they want him to be). The scenes of the Spahn Ranch are well done, and for the most part, this is a decent documentary. While few Manson programs will reach the heights of the original TV movie from 1976 (even with its over-the-top moments), this little program does a good job of hitting the primary points of the case.Classic or definitive? No. A decent introduction to those who do not know the case? Yes.

Linda Kasabian recounts her 1969 relationships with Charles Manson and his youthful followers as if she were one of those women on TV chatting about how taking an aspirin saved her life. This ridiculous two-hour special from the History Channel shows virtually no interest in the victims who lost their lives at the hands of these people, only in Kasabian's sluggish 'bystander' retelling of events (enacted by performers who seem to have been over-directed without benefit of a script). This is one of those bad ideas which can't even be compensated for by the testimony of case prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi or Debra Tate, sister to slain actress Sharon Tate. The intimate details offered by the special are suspect, the reenacted crimes (broken up by commercial interruptions) are sketchily drawn, and the statistics at the finale (which shows the ACTORS posing for mug-shots!) are half-hearted at best, swiftly wiped from the screen like yesterday's headlines. Shameful, pointless swill. It's difficult to discern whether Kasabian is apologizing for her involvement...or if the show is apologizing for her.