Helter Skelter (2004)

DIVIDED OPINION

Well this clearly divides opinion. 1st of all Davis does a pretty good job potraying Manson.Unfortunately the 1st scene at Hinmans is historically wrong, do you keep to the book even when you know some of the facts in that book are incorrect.As for the motives the Directors/writers duck out of this, you can tell they dont fully believe in the helter skelter motive.There is absolutely no conviction in the script. The way the film ends is a disappointment-there isnt much depth to the characters at all.Overall its clear the people involved either didnt really understand what happened in 1969 or what led up to it or decided to take the easy way out and not even go there. November 26, 2007

In their eyes there's something lacking...

While there are good moments in this remake, and I like the way it used the perspectives of Linda Kasabian and Charles Manson (probably not coincidentally, the best performances in this production), every time it overlapped with the 1976 Helter Skelter, it increased my respect for the original.

The use of solarized negatives for dramatic effect, and the miscasting of Bruno Kirby as Bugliosi was irritating... but my main beef with this production is that it's so full of wasted opportunities that it feels like a teaser for a much longer, more complete telling of the story (something I'd very much like to see). So much that wasn't known in 1976 but could have been used to great effect in 2004, was utterly ignored. Thomas Noguchi appears briefly, but no mention is made of him consulting a psychiatrist who profiled Manson with remarkable insight. Polanski appears, but we never see his attempts to become a detective and solve the murders himself. The misspelling of 'Helter Skelter' is highlighted, but there's no mention of the Helter Skelter door at Spahn Ranch or getting the murderers to spell 'Helter Skelter' to see who would misspell it. Other murders, murder attempts and disappearances attributed to Manson and the 'Family' - Manson's shooting of 'Lotsapoppa', the poisoning of a witness with LSD, the fate of defence lawyer Hughes, and the many Bugliosi lists in the Afterword of the most recent edition of Helter Skelter: The True Story of the Manson Murders - aren't named, much less shown, and only briefly referred to in a footnote before the end credits. And ending the mini-series in mid-trial only gave the impression that they'd simply run out of time and money (rather like Bakshi's Lord of the Rings). Worth seeing in addition to the 1976 version, but a very inadequate substitute. October 25, 2007

intelligently written and directed

Way better than the 1976 tv version, in fact, superior in every way--with the exception of Railsback's take
on Manson. Pretty damn gruesome, by the way. The actress who portrays Linda Kasabian is very good here.

Writer/director John Gray does fine work. Am glad they showed what they showed of the courtroom scenes--because not only were they dull and went on too long in the '76 flick, but we already know what the verdict was and what happened. June 2, 2007

Not better then the 1976 version but it ain't THAT bad either!

What is missing in the 2006 version of this film is the creepiness that the 1976 version had.

First off the guy who played Manson did a good job. I give him that.

The girl who played Sadie I wanted to smack the smirk off her face.

Where was the court scene? There was no court scene. In the 1976 version those court scenes were magic.

Also the scene where Sharon, Voytek, Steven, Abigail, Leno and Rosemary (The victims) were a bit too graphic for me. I almost threw up seeing Abigail getting stabbed to death. I couldn't bare seeing the Sharon character getting killed.

It's an OK movie but not beter then the 76' version. November 21, 2006

The other side of the mountain

If you saw the original, this DVD shows you the other side. It completes it all. November 3, 2006

More reviews at Amazon.com ...