Charlie Says

Kudos to the creative side for taking a look at this from the side of the female members of the Manson Family. As others have said it was just a little slow and didn't seem to get the most out of a pretty good cast. I don't think the film seeks to absolve the females of their guilt. I think they just tried to take an honest look at how vulnerable people can get indoctrinated. I would also disagree with those who call this a feminist movie, the movie does not seem to have any agenda just looks at these tragic murders from a different perspective. There is some nudity and sexuality which I think is necessary to accurately reflect the nature of the Manson Family Cult. As others have said, the movie is split between the flow of events in 68-69 and jail interviews after the trials. The jail scenes IMO are the best. The scenes at the ranches are a bit dark and tedious at times. There is one odd historical inaccuracy listed below. WARNING ONE SPOILER: In the film, Manson accidentally meets Sharon Tate then immediately sends the family out to kill her. This accidental meeting did take place but was several months before the murders.

If you didn't already know who this guy was, what his crimes were, and what his motives were then you probably won't much of a clue as to what happened from scene to scene in this movie. So much time is spent on showing shocking things without actually explaining what is going on.

Characters are surface level.

As a plus, I thought the acting was pretty solid, especially for Manson. With stronger writing, this film could have been a lot better.

"Charlie Says" is ultimately a white wash of the horror committed by the Manson Family--it features the roles of the females in two of our nation's most gruesome and horrifying slaughter of completely innocent people to date which no one will forget--least of all the victims' families.

The true facts of the atrocities committed by the Manson Family (including the three women featured in this movie) and historical events are either omitted or not nearly accurate in the movie--the facts and events have been tweaked, whitewashed, slanted to tilt the viewers' feelings towards sympathy for the three Manson women rather than towards legitimately earned feelings of horror, shock, and disgust for the heinous murders they committed.

The movie shows Charlie Manson as the leader of these misfit women of the Manson Family supposedly by using mind control but this was not clearly shown as the women did have freedom and were free to leave. So, the power of mind control theme in the movie falls apart here. One is left to think that these women of the Manson Family went from a herd mentality of sociopaths to psychopathic murderers willingly--just following the herd.

The movie is not great, by a long shot.

This film tells the story of three women who are jailed for murdering strangers.

Instead of drilling the details of the murder, the plot concentrates on the brain washing done by Charles Manson and its devastating effects on the women. The result is an engaging story of how the women get to the brainwashed state, which most people will struggle to understand.

"Charlie Says" (2018 release; 101 min.) brings the story of the Charles Manson murders, but this time for the perspective of the three "Manson women" involved in the killings. As the movie opens, one of the women is taking a shower, the blood coming off of her hair and body. We then go the "3 Years Later", and we see the three women in jail at the California Institution for Women, on a separated wing with just the three of them: Lulu, Sadie and Katie. A graduate student at UC Santa Cruz is given the opportunity to teach these three some classes. When then go back in time, to when Leslie (later named Lulu by Manson) arrives at the remote ranch where Mason and his entourage live... At this point we are 10 min. into the movie, but to tell you more of the plot would spoil your viewing experience, you'll just have to see for yourself how it all plays out.

Couple of comments: this is the latest from Canadian director Mary Herron, who previously brought us the worthwhile "I Shot Andy Warhol" and, even better, "American Psycho". Here she revisits the events that are often referred to as "having ended the 60s" (the murders took place in August, 1969). The film is based on several books, including the one written by the graduate student on specifically Leslie/Lulu, but there are certainly additional source materials on the Manson women. Indeed the eternal question seems to be: are these women victims themselves? are they just part of the gang that committed these vicious killings? The movie attempts to address that, and while at times it shows promise, in the end the movie lacks depth and what we are stuck with is something that certainly isn't a bad movie, but given the underlying facts, it feels more like a missed opportunity. Leslie/Lulu is played with conviction by up-and-coming British actress Hannah Murray. Manson is played by Matt Smith as if he's Jim Morrison (check out Smith instead in that other recent indie movie "Mapplethorpe"). Beware: there is a fair amount of nudity in the film, so if that is a concern for you, better stay away and check out another film.

"Charlie Says" premiered at last Fall's Venice film festival to ho-hum reaction, and is now getting a limited US theater release. It opened at my local art-house theater here in Cincinnati this weekend for just a one week run. The early Sunday evening screening where I saw this at was attended so-so (7 or 8 people). Maybe this will find a larger audience as it is launched on other platforms. If you have any interest in the Manson murders, and in particular the women that were involved in it, I suggest you check this out, be it in the theater (unlikely), on VOD, or eventually on DVD/Blu-ray, and draw your own conclusion.