TheBlueHairedLawyer Charles Manson's murders likely freaked the hell out of people back in '69! And chances are it gave hippies a bad rep. Hippies are annoying, but they're more or less just kids looking to have fun, rebel and make friends....So, how did Charles Manson, who leaded a hippie group at a secluded ranch, convince them to kill innocent people? As the movie explains in its brightly colored film stock and sitar soundtrack, Charles Manson was a psychopath. Many of the hippies following him were under 18, runaways, escapees from mental hospitals and "straight camps" (which were extremely frightening places at the time) or so high on drugs that they had virtually no idea of what they were doing. It's surprisingly disturbing and sad for a 1970's movie, and it's also very nostalgic if you like the style of the Sixties or if you're into that grainy film look that older films have. It's a reflection of the times, of the fear society had of rebellious teens, of the hippie counterculture and of a man who obviously needed psychiatric help but never got proper treatment.

Boba_Fett1138 It's funny how this is being a TV movie, with also a typical made for TV look and feel to it but yet the movie manages to work out so extremely well that you really forgive the movie for its cheap look and typical TV movie performances.What makes this movie especially great is the way it is getting told. It's basically a movie that is like a documentary, that got acted out by people. It has such a great narrative, in which in focuses on about every aspect surrounding the Tate/LaBianca murders, by the Manson family. The movie really goes into detail with everything and show things as they really happened, often with also the real spoken dialog. It's not a movie that is picking sides by for instance letting the Manson family members come across as murderous psychopaths and the jurisdictional system as something well organized and flawless and letting justice prevail. It also shows everything that went terribly wrong during the investigations and it doesn't necessarily condemn the Manson girls for following Charles Manson.In a way you could say that this movie is being like an 3 hour long "Law & Order" episode. Half of it is set in the courtroom, while the other focuses on mostly the investigation of the murders. It still really feels like one movie though, which is I think also really thanks to the fact that it gets narrated by it's main character, even long before he himself actually appears in the movie.It stars mostly TV actors and people without too much experience but yet everyone seems to have been cast really well. Most of the actors really look like the persons they are portraying. Steve Railsback is really perfect as Charles Manson and George DiCenzo also does a great job with his role and really starts carrying the movie toward its end.In my opinion this movie is great way to learn about Charles Manson and the Manson family, as well as the murders they committed and how they got prosecuted for it. It's a very detailed movie that really feels like a documentary, that isn't holding back with anything.9/10http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

Rathko 'Helter Skelter' is a three-hour CBS TV movie chronicling, in almost documentary-like detail, the investigation, arrest, and trial of Charles Manson and the Manson Family for the Tate/LaBianca murders of 1969. Nothing is shown of the killings themselves, just the aftermath, and being told from the point-of-view of the investigators, nothing is seen of Manson and his followers in the period leading up to the murders. The whole thing, therefore, is a pretty standard legal procedural thriller, often highlighting the unbelievable incompetence of the LAPD and associated authorities.The movie has dated, not only in its look, but in its style of storytelling. When the CSI team can wrap up three cases in a 40 minute running time, 'Helter Skelter' seems, at times, overly long and leisurely in its pacing – not so much a fault of the movie as a sorry comment on contemporary expectations. This extended running time does, however, present an opportunity to go into minute detail about the case, and patience is often rewarded.The film is lifted above the norm by exceptional performances from Steve Railsback as Charles Manson and Nancy Wolfe as Susan Atkins. So fascinating and genuinely chilling are the two characters that these actors create that the movie seems to fall flat when they are not around. I, for one, was far more interested in them than the investigation and wanted to know more about their background, the origins of their unquestionable insanity, their motives, their relationships, and how the Family came in to existence in the first place. Though these issues are hinted at, none are developed as much as the brilliant characterizations demand.Worth watching for some incredibly cold and chilling performances, but offers little in the way of real explanation for their actions.

Lechuguilla Despite a hokey opening prologue by a narrator who talks directly to viewers, this three hour made-for-TV docu-drama provides a generally good overview of the real-life Tate/LaBianca murders that occurred in the summer of 1969, and the subsequent trial of Charles Manson and his "family". Based on the book "Helter Skelter" by Manson Prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi, the film has a dragnet or prosecution tone to it, as it describes events from Bugliosi's point of view. That is okay, except that the script minimizes the crucial role of Tex Watson, one of the actual killers. After the murders, Watson fled to Texas, and was initially beyond Bugliosi's prosecution reach. Later, Watson was extradited back to California.The film's first half is confusing because it presents so many Manson family names; this part of the film is somewhat hard to follow. The film's second half concentrates on the courtroom trial and is therefore more straightforward. The film's pace tends to be slow. There are several long speeches. And some scenes are either unnecessary or overly long. One scene in the second half goes on for some ten minutes. Overall, the film has a made-for-TV look and feel. Production design, costumes, and makeup are credible. As Manson, Steve Railsback's performance is ... intense.What makes this film worth watching is that it is a true story ... and a powerful one. Manson had no qualms about killing innocent people. And he sought to sublease that evil to weaker personalities, like Susan Atkins, Linda Kasabian, Leslie Van Houten, and other members of his hippie clan. And that power over others in turn fed his megalomania.Manson was a cultural scavenger, a junk man without conscience. He and his "family" subsisted on food from dumpsters behind supermarkets. And at one point in the film, he even says he wouldn't mind prison chow; "it's better than (eating) garbage". What a statement. It says a lot about him and about his followers.