What a waste of my time!!!

Best movie of this year hands down!

The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

I first heard of 'The Helter Skelter Murders' (under its alternative title 'The Other Side of Madness') when reading about the 8/8/88 Satanic rally, organised by Zeena (daughter of Anton) LaVey and founder of the Werewolf Order Niclaus Schreck. During that rally, held on the anniversary of the Tate slayings, the movie was shown and when the depiction of the murders began the crowd actually cheered. Whilst certainly ghoulish, I was nonetheless intrigued and sought out the movie and soon saw why it was chosen: the film is a grimy, low-budget, quasi-documentary style exploitation movie shot mostly in black and white which gives it a creepy and authentic feel. The first half is a bizarre collection of scenes including a (pretty cool-looking) desert rock concert, life on Spahn ranch (where Manson and his family lived), court-room scenes, and, in the movie's only colour scene, a fairytale introduction to Sharon Tate. Actually, this first half is not particularly well-done as the aforementioned scenes don't gel together and, crucially, even though it was presumably made to cash-in on the notoriety of the Manson Murders, which were then very much in the news, apart from a few shots of vaguely Manson-looking guy and a recording of Manson's 'Mechanical Man' (not his best composition by a long shot) there is very little mention of Charlie and little-to-no development of the various members of his family who appear in the court-room scenes. However, it's with the shift to the second half that you really see the appeal to LaVey and Schreck as the whole remainder of the film is given over to a detailed, brutal, and drawn-out recollection of the Tate murders by one of the defendants. This section is quite well directed as it takes its time, building tension which is accentuated by the fact that we know what will happen but we don't know when the movie will show it (and how much it intends to show) and it certainly doesn't disappoint when it kicks off. It's unsettling to think that the scenes drew cheers from people and, for me, this knowledge added an uncomfortable post-script to an already uncomfortable viewing experience. All told, the movie is an interesting addition to the Manson mythology although just barely managing to raise itself above its limitations by the impact of the murder scene. Gruesome and sensationalist it may be, but then so were the murders it depicts.

I watched this production because I was watching every piece on the Manson murders I could find for research on a Discovery Channel doc I'm producing on the Manson family. It has been two days since I watch the DVD and I am still bored. I cannot imagine that a movie could be worse than this one. Words fail me. The best indication of the talent of the participants is to look at the other IMDb credits (or should I say "blames") of the cast and crew. Only cast member Duke Howze is listed as appearing in any other production...ever! The director/cinematographer/editor, Frank Howard, has no credits before or after this joke of a flick. No need to search further. This IS the all time celluloid turkey, without question.

As the title suggests, it focuses almost solely on the famous murders in the Tate house - interspersed with flashes of the preliminary court hearings and flash-backs to life on Spahn Ranch. These scenes at the ranch have an authentic kind of feel - due to a mixture of stuff (supposedly) being shot on the actual location and the film's own low-budgetness that works in it's favor... the actors all look and act like lost kids (although all are much better looking than the majority of the real Family members). The "documentary" footage the film purports to have seems isolated to one scene - a pretty good one, though: the hippie-rock-jam in the desert.. a real far-out scene, man... It's good and some of the Family actors wander in and out of it to connect it to the rest of the film. But that's it as far as documentary footage goes. The settings, however, have authenticity and a sense of place that give a good, if limited, glimpse into the L.A. of the time. The look of the film, in general, is really inspired - beautifully shot with many creative choices that, sometimes, get a little TOO arty... but, for such a seemingly low-budget movie - it does have a really polished look. (And a great soundtrack.. well scored and with good period-rock - including Manson's own recording of "Mechanical Man"...) It does, however, have some major flaws - the hardest to get past being the complete lack of characterizations... not one person has a personality. No one is developed - not even Charlie. This leaves us with a film we can only look at - there is no one to feel for - even the victims are only that: bodies that get victimized. In a way, it's interesting - we don't need or want to feel a human connection to these killers - but, by stripping all human-ness from everyone all we can do is watch. There's very little to FEEL, here - save a creepiness in the playing out of the murder scene. It is brutal and flatly played - and, maybe, that was part of the point in the film... it does have a strangely haunting quality to it. There's the real-ness of the settings and Family group, the disquieting night drives up the canyon - headlights on a dirt road - and the bleak, almost real-time playing out of the murders, themselves - that linger after it's over. Also, the unfamiliarity with any of the actors - none of whom seem to have done any thing other than this - give it an even creepier, too-real quality. There's a feeling that the filmmakers were trying to show a kind of "facts as they're known" at a time very close to the actual events - when not all the facts were really known. This adherence to what, supposedly, happened; combined with it's lack of characterization and lack of scope outside of just the night of the murders - leave the film somewhat one dimensional and, ultimately, drains it's emotional impact.

Horrible re-telling of the infamous Charles Manson murders in Beverly Hills, California. Made in a style that Charles Manson and the others would appreciate. I would also say this film was made as if through the eyes of Manson himself. However, if you are curious to see a chilling, gruesome dramatization of the murders (that in real-life included the pregnant actress, Sharon Tate , who was in the tv-series Beverly Hillbillies), this filming is perhaps too realistic. This film contains use of drugs, poppers, full frontal male and female nudity and sexual situations.If you are looking for a serious, dramatic telling of the real-life story, beginning with the murders, the capture, and the ending of the final trial, then may I suggest "Helter Skelter" (1976). This was a television movie originally shown in two-parts, starring Steve Railsback as "Manson" and George DiCenzo as D.A. Vincent Bugliosi.