Manson (2009)

Linda Kasabian Has Come Out Of Hiding To Speak For The First Time In 40 Years About The Manson Murders.Okay That Is The Whole Plot Of This Documentary, I Felt Like They Used Up The Actors That Play Their Parts To What Should've Been More Interviews Like About The Tate Murders, I Know Its A Long Stretch But Roman Polanski Should've Said Something, Besides Deborah Tate And Linda Kasabian And Some Historian No One Knows.The Acted Parts Were So Badly Acted That It Looked Like Manson's Motive For Murders Was That He Didn't Get A Record Deal, This However Is A Load Of Crap, Helter Skelter Is His Motive (The War To End All Wars And He Would Reign As King Of The World).Overall I Found This Documentary To Be Interesting From The Point Of View From People Who Were There But The Problem Is That It Is All How They Interpret Things, For Example I Interpret Helter Skelter As "Great Song, Invention Of Heavy Metal", Manson Interpreted This As "The War To End All Wars"...See How Interpretation Can Vary, Sure Manson Was This Crazed F#ucking Maniac But It Proves My Point. Avoid At All Costs.

It's an average movie done in the trendy styles that What We Do Is Secret did, only a bit better. First the actors did try to act, unlike the Germs film. I liked the prospective of the woman who did escape from the Family in the end, that way you saw the acts as an outsider, which I feel is more gory than showing it firsthand and this is better for those of us who want facts about the Manson Family Murders yet don't want to see every violent second, though there are photos of the victims at the end of it.It should probably be more balanced, like show the victims families and their reactions to the case. Sharon Tate's sister is there, so we get her opinions of it. It is especially moving when she talks about Roman Polanski surviving the terrible things that Nazis were doing in Poland, yet broke down mentally when his wife and unborn child were murdered. And maybe Linda Kasabian should have served some time for her passive accessory activity during the murders (she herself, like Manson, didn't directly kill anyone), but her escape and hiding led to the capture of the Family, so without that, they might have kept on killing. I wouldn't recommend it as your first and only exposure to this story, but if you know about the Manson Family already, the prospective of Linda Kasabian's view of her time there might give you new insight. I only encountered it on late night TV, after I found out a Foetus song, DI-19026 was about Spahn Ranch, apparently it was Spahn Ranch's phone number, as least that is what it says on the record. Anyway, weird meshing of events.

This was a good, not great, documentary. The part that was very well done was the realistic reenactment of watching the girls and Tex going into the house and doing the senseless deed. In previous movies and documentaries the reenactments were not at all realistic. In this one, you can actually believe that this is the way the crimes were committed. And the events are not depicted in a gruesome manner, while at the same time there was no question the murders were horrible. The part that was not well done was some of the scenes at the murder site suggest that you could just drive right by the house and you were right there. That was not the case. The house was behind a gated driveway and down the driveway. The LoBianco house was much more accurately depicted. I also think they made an error on the location of the Spahn Movie Ranch. I believe the graphic read that it was in Benedict Canyon. That is not correct. Spahn Movie Ranch was out in the Chatsworth area in the Simi Valley, although they were correct in saying it was about 25 miles from Los Angeles. Minor errors like this cause the documentary to lose credibility. Overall, I thought the documentary was well done. The acting in the reenactments was very believable. Getting the real Linda Kasabian to speak about the crimes was a real fine catch because, to the best of my knowledge, she's been silent on the crimes since she provided the testimony that put away Manson, Tex Watson and the girls. Was her version of things a bit slanted? Probably. But no one has ever said she actually participated in the killings-- not even the people she caused to spend the rest of their lives in prison, and not any member of the Manson family, and all of these people had reason to attack Kasabian's credibility. That doesn't make Kasabian a saint and she should have spent considerable time in prison (she didn't report the crimes, she simply ran away after the Lo Bianco murders)but without her testimony it is very likely Manson and all the others would have walked away without being convicted. This was a good documentary that, with a few improvements, could have been a great documentary. A documentary that includes Bugliosi, Tate's sister and Linda Kasabian is off to a great start and those interviews alone make this an important documentary.

Linda Kasabian recounts her 1969 relationships with Charles Manson and his youthful followers as if she were one of those women on TV chatting about how taking an aspirin saved her life. This ridiculous two-hour special from the History Channel shows virtually no interest in the victims who lost their lives at the hands of these people, only in Kasabian's sluggish 'bystander' retelling of events (enacted by performers who seem to have been over-directed without benefit of a script). This is one of those bad ideas which can't even be compensated for by the testimony of case prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi or Debra Tate, sister to slain actress Sharon Tate. The intimate details offered by the special are suspect, the reenacted crimes (broken up by commercial interruptions) are sketchily drawn, and the statistics at the finale (which shows the ACTORS posing for mug-shots!) are half-hearted at best, swiftly wiped from the screen like yesterday's headlines. Shameful, pointless swill. It's difficult to discern whether Kasabian is apologizing for her involvement...or if the show is apologizing for her.