Good concept, poorly executed.

The film was still a fun one that will make you laugh and have you leaving the theater feeling like you just stole something valuable and got away with it.

The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

Manson (2009)*** 1/2 (out of 4)This made-for-TV documentary takes a look at the brutal and ghastly murders committed by Charles Manson and his "family." Linda Kasabian was on hand for the Tate/LaBianca murders and she's interviewed here as she talks about her life in the family and what happened on those two nights.There have been countless documentaries on Charles Manson so it's hard to find one that offers something new or different. This one here benefits from getting to hear from not only Kasabian but also Vincent Bugliosi, Catherine Share and Debra Tate who discusses what Roman Polanski was like when he got the news. Another benefit is that the re-enactments are quite effective here and we get some nice performances from the actors including Adam Kenneth Wilson who plays Manson.There's plenty of discussion about the main events of this story including Manson's race war plans and of course the two nights of terror. Sensitive viewers should be warned that crime scene photos are shown and it's just amazing how crazed these people were when they were doing these crimes. The interviews themselves are quite good and contain plenty of details. With that said, I honestly can't see Kasabian as any sort of hero even though she did testify against the family.

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.

It's an average movie done in the trendy styles that What We Do Is Secret did, only a bit better. First the actors did try to act, unlike the Germs film. I liked the prospective of the woman who did escape from the Family in the end, that way you saw the acts as an outsider, which I feel is more gory than showing it firsthand and this is better for those of us who want facts about the Manson Family Murders yet don't want to see every violent second, though there are photos of the victims at the end of it.It should probably be more balanced, like show the victims families and their reactions to the case. Sharon Tate's sister is there, so we get her opinions of it. It is especially moving when she talks about Roman Polanski surviving the terrible things that Nazis were doing in Poland, yet broke down mentally when his wife and unborn child were murdered. And maybe Linda Kasabian should have served some time for her passive accessory activity during the murders (she herself, like Manson, didn't directly kill anyone), but her escape and hiding led to the capture of the Family, so without that, they might have kept on killing. I wouldn't recommend it as your first and only exposure to this story, but if you know about the Manson Family already, the prospective of Linda Kasabian's view of her time there might give you new insight. I only encountered it on late night TV, after I found out a Foetus song, DI-19026 was about Spahn Ranch, apparently it was Spahn Ranch's phone number, as least that is what it says on the record. Anyway, weird meshing of events.

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.