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.

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.

MARIO GAUCI Although I was still a generation or two away, I have always thought that the Sixties must have been a great time to be alive – the "Nouvelle Vague" and the full blossoming of art-house cinema, Bob Dylan, The Beatles, psychedelia, the birth of the all-star rock festivals, etc. – and, where I to have a time machine at my disposal, I would probably decide to be a 25-year old stranded in 1967 for the rest of my life (either that or during the Roman Empire)! However, when I eventually realize how painfully naïve and misguided that whole "Flower Power" generation was (the fantastic notion that somebody could change the world through music or achieve world peace through free love) soon makes me reconsider and come back crashing to reality – the same way that the Tate-LaBianca killings brought America back to its senses from its hippie dream-state in the Summer of 1969. Given that the death of imprisoned ex-Charles Manson acolyte Susan Atkins and the surprise arrest of Roman Polanski in a Switzerland airport occurred within days of each other, I thought it was high time that I watched this much-lauded dramatization of The Manson Family court hearings. Since the horrific events were a mere seven years old at the time this 3-hour TV-movie was made (becoming one of the most viewed of all time), it is not surprising that the murders themselves are not inordinately dwelt upon and, being based on the prosecuting District Attorney's best-selling-book, its focus lies on the accumulation of the evidence and the lengthy trial itself. Although eventually a shorter cut of the film was prepared (probably for theatrical distribution in Europe), I cannot say that I found the considerable running time a burden so fascinating were the events unfolding on the screen. Sparked by a formidable performance by George DiCenzo (as the dogged D.A. Vincent Bugliosi) and an electrifying one by Steve Railsback (as the loathsomely hypnotic Charles Manson), the film also gives the opportunity for two supporting female performers to shine: Nancy Wolfe (as the boastful Susan Atkins) and Marilyn Burns (as the Prosecution's key witness, former Manson follower Linda Kasabian). Tom Gries' direction is admirably matter-of-fact and only lapses into flashiness during the re-enactment of the murders themselves (with Kasabian providing voice-over narration from the witness stand) – scenes which, I thought, were further marred by the overly loud playing of The Beatles' all-important songs on the soundtrack…only, what we actually hear are cover versions by an obscure band called Silverspoon! The sequence in which another collaborative male witness explains to Bugliosi how much Manson's mantra was 'influenced' by the music of The Beatles – especially "The White Album" (1968) and "Revolution 9" in particular – is a fascinating one but even a small fragment of said song underscoring it – or elsewhere in the movie – would not have been amiss (but, perhaps, the covering band did not quite know how to tackle that "mind-blowing" epic)! On a personal note, the same witness reveals that, in Manson's mind, the song was referring to the Holy Bible (Revelations Chapter 9) and, for what it is worth, a quote from that book, Revelations 9:15, is also heard (by sheer coincidence, I might add!) in my own first "unpublished" screenplay (which I co-wrote with my twin brother)!! Besides, it seemed awkward to me that no reference whatsoever was made to the reason behind the fact that the fourth Manson Family member personally involved in the Tate-LaBianca murders (Charlie "Tex" Watson) was tried separately than the other four. Apart from the utterly chilling portrayal of the dominance Manson held over his drug-crazed followers and their animalistic lifestyles, I must say that HELTER SKELTER (which, of course, refers to another song off of "The White Album" – arguably The Beatles' heaviest and one of my own personal favorites) also served to reveal a few new tidbits and dispel some myths that I had heard on the now-40-year old events: Charles Manson was not actually present on the premises of Sharon Tate's rented house the night she and her four guests were brutally murdered; Susan Atkins did not cut out Tate's unborn baby boy; Manson's only actual participation in the LaBianca killings was to tie up the two victims; the words "Helter Skelter" – apparently misspelled as "Healter Skelter" – were written in blood on the LaBianca's refrigerator and not Tate's; Charles Manson, who was 34 at the time of the killings, actually admitted to 35 murders; Manson had, by then, already spent half his life locked up in jail and other similar institutions; Manson and his gang were originally only arrested by the L.A.P.D. for setting an 'earth machine' on fire, etc. Seeing how VALLEY OF THE DOLLS (1967) is the only remaining film (from the six significant ones that Sharon Tate appeared in) left for me to watch, it might have been a good idea to give it a first look right now as well but, having just been made aware how one of the most beautiful actresses ever had her life callously ended at 25 years of age thanks to the megalomaniacal delusions of Charles Manson et al, I believe it would be better to leave that campy pleasure for another time.

maryaha I saw this movie in 1976 when I was 16 years old and it scared me to death. The first half came on Thursday night and I did okay with that. The next day I bought the book and watched the second half of the movie. The book states "the book you are about to read will scare the hell out of you". And it did. When I went to bed that night, I had nightmares so vivid that I could see the killer's car pull up in front of my house. This terror went on for several nights more and I decided that I was too dang scared to read the book so I threw it in a dumpster. It was 15 years before I would pick that book up again and actually be able to read it. Even then though, it frightened me something terrible. I rented the movie on VHS a few times and it scared me each time, but I loved the movie. I now have it on DVD and I watch it from time to time. The movie, with the clothes and hairstyles is indeed dated but it is still an excellent movie. On a scale from one to ten, it is a ten. I have since read the book numerous times, but I always heed the warning about it scaring the hell out of you. Anyone that has not seen this movie needs to see it. For me, it is not about the control that Charlie had over his family that is so evil. It is the fact that there are people in this world evil enough to do what they did to their helpless and innocent victims. These murders changed the U.S. forever and maybe that is why people are still so interested in this murder case, and that includes me too. I read everything I can find about the case, the victims, the killers and everyone else involved. I would like to be in contact with others that are still interested in this bizarre story. My contact information is [email protected].