Hitchcoc I recall being a young teacher in 1976, visiting an artist friend and watching this film. We had read Vincent Bugliosi's book. The Tate/Lobianco murders were fresh in our minds. Manson gained celebrity as a latter day Hitler, enticing young lost souls into his lair and sending them off to do his bidding. Those names, Patricia Krenwinckle, Leslie Van Houton, and the others were a part of the popular culture. And Manson, who remains in prison to this day, with those piercing eyes and crazy antics, that swastika on his forehead, was the stuff of horror fiction. These were part of one of the biggest cases in history, probably the biggest until the O. J. Simpson trial. I wondered where they had found Steve Railsback. He was able to capture the Manson character so well. I'll never forget the stopping of the clock, which, I suppose is a bit of movie contrivance, but I remember shuddering as the network went to the next commercial. This really has worn well. I watched it a couple weeks ago, explaining to my twenty-something daughter what had taken place all these year's ago. It captured the attention of all of America then and while rather primitive in its production values, it still works quite well.

WakenPayne Personally I Think That The Story Of Charles Manson Has Always Been Something I Can Only Describe As F#ucked Up, This Guy Controlled People To Kill People He Never Met. The Movie Is A Courtroom Drama, Whereas From What I've Seen Of The Remake Its A Point A To B Film. I Have To Say Something About Steve Railsback's Performance, He Played Manson A Little Too Well, I Could See He Was Trying His Best To Make Him Seem Realistic And He Did It Very Well.The Plot Is That Manson Is On Trial But With No Actual Murders Next To His Name And With That He Could Walk Away A Free Man.Overall I Liked This Movie, There Are More Reasons As To Why I Like This Film Then Railsback's Performance As Manson And I Actually Recommend This To Anyone Whose Interested In This

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.