Dreadfully Boring

It isn't all that great, actually. Really cheesy and very predicable of how certain scenes are gonna turn play out. However, I guess that's the charm of it all, because I would consider this one of my guilty pleasures.

This is a dark and sometimes deeply uncomfortable drama

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

I was curious to see the outcome of this vicious crime done in 1969 and its consequences.Dubbed at the time by a French-Canadian dubbing company (Sonolab), this was an excellent rendering of this egomaniac guru that was Charles Manson, accompanied by his "Family" who did this horrible massacre, especially that the murders (especially actress Sharon Tate, as widowed husband Roman Polanski suffered this loss... and went into dire consequences as we know today...) still give chills the way it happened.Though Steve Railsback had a very good role in "The Stunt Man" later, I still remember him with the role of Manson: its looks and the attitude stills marks me today. Was real convincing in my books.Most of the actors were not mainstream, but were excellent with a good script and good direction. Rare thing for a made-for-TV movie at the time. And I did not forget the late George Di Cenzo, who did a great job as the role of the prosecutor...I write this 40 years after I watched it, and knowing the real Charles Manson won't read this, he just left for his "Helter Skelter" world...

Really it is a shame that Steve Railsback got typecast due to this role. As he was really good in it. And that he really should had gone onto bigger things. Had he not been typecast by Hollywood.But nonetheless he does a great job. As he plays the maniac Manson. Who used young kids to do his killing as he was the mastermind of it all. And that these young kids fell into such a huge trap over his antics and manipulation.The DA played by the late George DiCenzo who wrote the book, of the same name. Does everything he could and will, to bring Manson and his so- called "followers" to justice. At any and all costs. He does have a soul and care about the victims and families.Mansion was and still is a sick puppy. As he was sentenced to death originally but then, got it commuted to life and he has been up for parole and denied each and every time. As he will never, ever get out no matter what on a post note.

After watching the recent version of the Manson murders "Helter Skelter" (2004) I looked up the 1976 TV movie to have a look at. This version is pretty much a straightforward adaptation of the bestselling book with author and prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi (here played by George DiCenzo) narrating events throughout.The film covers the investigation of the infamous Tate-LaBianca murders and the trial of Charles Manson, hippie-cult leader, and members of his 'Family' for the killings. Although aliases are used for some of the characters, things are pretty easy to follow and nearly phase of the investigation and trial are covered within a full three hours.The staging of it is accurate, with good reproductions of the murder scenes, grand jury indictments and the courtroom. The murders themselves are still dramatised but they are not shown in full with mere flashes of the tragedy mingled in with witness testimony. Despite this, the story is not nearly exploited enough for full dramatic impact.Although Steve Railsback does a credible job as Manson and is actually quite frightening in some moments (especially when he threatens the doomed Shorty Shea), the film does not allow enough scope for him to really develop the character. Also the film does not mention the Vietnam War, one of the reasons for the hippie-cult movement from where Manson picked his followers. The portrayal of Irving Kanarek, Manson's defense attorney (here named Everett Scoville), effectively reproduces the man's destructive attacks on the prosecution witnesses, yet more could have been derived from the buffoonery of his obstructionist tactics.Astonishingly, the portrayal of Vincent Bugliosi is alarmingly dull. Now George DiCenzo is a good fit for the part and he is clear and precise throughout, but he completely misses the sheer passion of the man for his work or the way he does not suffer fools gladly (these traits are evident in all his books and in TV interviews). As a result the film does not have a charismatic hero, and the strange relationship between him and Charles Manson (where Bugliosi comes to understand his quarry, as Manson forms a grudging respect for Bugliosi) is not fully exploited or even explored until virtually the end of the film.A very good effort, and no doubt chilling at the time, but it just wasn't dramatic enough for my liking.

"Helter Skelter" is the three hour and four minute mini-series (made for TV movie) from 1976 about the Manson murders of seven years earlier. Clearly some things have changed in broadcasting since this period, and the lengthy running time is a point of disappointment. The film is an important record and representation of a point of great cynicism and uncertainty in America, and the Manson murders certainly took yet another notch off the country's innocence, given any remained.As was the case with the television at the time, broadcasting was generally for a family audience. Even in a production such as "Helter Skelter" those touches are clear, since the story is told between an even-tempered, fact spewing narrator and a narrative that follows the step-by-step dissection of the murder investigation. Sadly, the narrator becomes intrusive very quickly and the story gets it's point across twice as fast as it thinks it does.The basic premise of "Helter Skelter" is very interesting and Steve Railsback's over the top characterization of Charles Manson remains reasonably engaging for about seventy-five percent of the film, but the highly sanitized and dumbed-down touches make for difficult and tedious viewing.