Save your money for something good and enjoyable

Just what I expected

Good movie but grossly overrated

This is a tender, generous movie that likes its characters and presents them as real people, full of flaws and strengths.

Firstly let me start out by saying I've watched every interview every documentary and read/soaked up as much information as possible about this case. I've also watched just about every film made on the Manson Family and this one takes the cake. Jeremy Davies' raw talent and in depth work as an actor really shines here. There's appearances from many many established actors and the plot is riveting whilst being spot on with the exact event of the case. Not only that but the lead detective helped to write and produce this film so you can rest assured that the depiction of this case is factual and offers a hard look into the characters involved and horrid events that transpired. Very deserving of it's Emmy nomination. Jeremy Davies should've been nominated for his work in this role as well. Watch all the films on the character that was Manson and you see just how wonderfully Davies nailed his mannerisms and truly embodied this role.

The best in depth depiction of Charlie. Jeremy Davies did an excellent job although..... I don't have time to go into how much I know the facts and certain people of the "real" Charlie and the criticism of NOT REALLY being related to him, so therefor....I think he portrayed him just coming off a much too arrogant and cocky, I think he tried to put to much emphasis n being sly and slick, so forth. Overall though, as of yet. I see NO ONE toping his performance. This one unlike the 76 version, concentrates more on the "family" itself as of the 76 is almost an narration page by page account of the perception of the D.A. Vincent Bugliosi which in my opinion is a complete blueprint for Americas public enemy number one scapegoat. You can feel the pressure boiling as it gets to the climax of the film. As a horror fan my whole life I would say not to gory or lack of. Personally I believe this film was very underrated and ignored for unknown reasons. The cast was at the time very unknown and they really come off as they need to be. I think all of the profound characters put a lot into their roles then now they should not have (lol). All and all, I probably watch this at least 4 times a year all the way threw.

Helter Skelter: its a confusion, confusion based on fantasy, paranoia, hate and lies of a prosecutor. This is what the phrase means. Helter Skelter as a movie: 1976 it was a good movie according to the 70'ies but it was a movie and not reality, it was more a sci-fi movie again based on the same lies, paranoia, jealousy etc of the prosecutor. Helter Skelter as a movie: 2004 it was absolutely fake and boring on the first place. Secondly it was very a poor directed movie with bad characters and extremely bad actors who most probably didn't take a little bit extra time to look at the facts and read the trial transcripts. They believed all that they heard in the TV from Geraldo Rivera etc interviewers. That lead them to a totally misunderstanding. The leading role Jeremy was the only one who tried at least to give a little extra to the movie but he was fighting alone against all those lies and the whole crew without any other help his efforts were in vain and ultimately failed. The story line is very boring with all those practical and comfortable lies that they presented again as facts of the reality. So what did they do really? Luckily this movie failed everywhere in every stage and it will fail in the future totally to the lies and garbage of the worst movies of history when the justice finally will be served and the US supreme court will have a look into the case again! And they will read the transcripts instead of the Helter Skelter book or movie. Which is both well deserved the title: The book of lies and the movie of lies. Sad to see that these people are so locked up into their fantasy world so they can't see the forest from the tree or from their Ferrari?

I am about to watch it again, for the third time. Just finished Paul Watkin's "My Life With Charles Manson" book for the third or fourth time. I have a few books on the "subject". My brother and I "met" Charlie just about the time of the murder(s). We were poking around his abandonded heap of stolen V.W. bodies at Spahn when he ran at us, gun in hand, spewing obscenities I had never heard before. ("love" was not among them). He was mad at us 'cause we were going to steal parts from the cars he stole! I think it was after the murders but before the raid on Spahns. I lived over the hills in Thousand Oaks. At any rate, the movie is lame. What irritated me the most was Charlie's dialog was in a whisper. He just whispered. Weird. Oh, sure, when he was yelling he was just upset over something major, like somebody asking him a question he couldn't answer. I'd be "mad" too! If you are a Manson collector (not a fan) you need this movie. Summary: Charlie knew not a thing about love. He grew up (until his release in '67) in prison and love was not there. He learned from the best how to con people, assume roles and intimidate. There was/is nothing good about the "scruffy little guru". Until he tells why (the real motive) these senseless killings occurred and apologizes, he is nothing. "Jesus"? Hmmm. "The Devil"? He isn't even good at that.Some "expert" claim he is very intelligent. How? Couldn't hold a job, a terribly stupid thief, no ear for music, yet, continued on trying to be a rock star. His only fans/followers are probably a bunch of Goth-Dressing spoiled kids that probably still live in their parent's basement anyway. internationaldave@gmail.com