Chaos: The Manson Murders

As "Chaos: The Manson Murders" (2025 release; 96 min.) opens, the documentary states its opening premise: how did Charles Manson get total control over the minds of the so-called Family, ordering them to murder innocent people? We then go to "August 9, 1969", the day after Sharon Tate and 4 others were murdered and before 2 more innocent people were killed later that day. At this point we are less than 10 minutes into the documentary.

Couple of comments: this is based on Tom O'Neill's book "Chaos: Charles Manson, the CIA, and the Secret History of the Sixties", in which he wonders whether the CIA somehow was involved in all this as it was working on a secret project called CHAOS to understand how to control people's minds. I have not read that book, and frankly I would not have been all that interested in watching this documentary, but for the fact that this is directed by the Oscar-winning Errol Morris ("The Fog of War"). Morris interviews O'Neill extensively, and makes it clear that he (Morris) is quite skeptical about O'Neill's original premise. One of the things that sets this documentary apart from the many other documentaries about these events is that Morris pays close attention to Manson's music (the lack of getting signed by a label; even better: the use of 8 songs sung by Manson, culled from his 1968 demoes).

"Chaos: The Manson Murders" recently started streaming on Netflix. After reading an interesting review on it in yesterday's NY Times, and realizing that Errol Morris directed this, I watched it last night. The documentary is currently rated 66% Certified Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes, which sounds about right to me. If you have an interest in the Manson murders now 56 years later, I'd readily suggest you check this out, and draw your own conclusion.

While it is understandable why Charles Manson was regarded back then as having a supernatural charm and ability to influence his followers to commit unspeakable acts, the growth of knowledge into psychology, especially childhood trauma and personality disorders, in the past 50 years will easily dispel any conspiracy theory that arose in the 1970s following the murders. The roll-call of cultish personalities that followed Manson, such as Jim Jones, Marshall Applewhite and David Koresh, is proof that there is nothing magical about their ability to indoctrinate those who are susceptible to their influence; they are all basically following the same set of rules used by the greatest con-artists.

At the start of the documentary, Manson is shown proclaiming that he is not a nice man, but his would-be followers insisted that he is; they needed to view him as "nice" and thereby safe, perhaps helped by his diminutive stature, so he admitted to "reflecting nice back to them". People like Manson wield enormous influence over some simply because their superpower is sniffing out the weaknesses and vulnerabilities of others, and using that to their advantage. This superpower is often the result of severe childhood trauma and/or neglect, where the child does not have any healthy adult role models to learn empathy from, and views other people as merely tools to survive and get their needs met.

A cursory search into Manson's childhood revealed an alcoholic mother who was ill-equipped to raise him, a biological father that he never knew, and a step-father who flagged the mother for "gross neglect of duty". It is therefore no surprise that Manson's life was characterised by anti-social and criminal behaviour. In an ironic twist, the people most susceptible to those like Manson, such as Manson's followers, are usually themselves lost children seeking the guidance and love they never received from their parents. This shared experience of childhood trauma, and subsequent trauma bonding, is why Manson had such a hold over those he sent out to do his bidding. Manson himself was a scared child faking bravado to face the big bad world; that he ran away after injuring Hinman, leaving Beausoleil to deal with it, and how he delegated the killings to his followers proved what a coward he truly was.

As Beausoleil put it, Manson was not a mastermind. Far from it, he was instead a broken child in a man's body, hateful at the world for thwarting his desires, and the murders were his misguided way of taking revenge and exerting his will. That the documentary failed to explore any of his psychology and childhood, as well as that of his followers, makes it incomplete because the conspiracy theories are ultimately not as compelling as the truth behind Manson's deranged machinations. The only thing I got out of it was that Manson was a competent musician and songwriter. Perhaps in a parallel universe, where he had better parents and childhood, he might have become a successful musician, adored by many, instead of this infamous trainwreck of a human being.

I have yet to read the book that this documentary is based on ("Chaos: The Truth Behind the Manson Murders" by Tom O'Neill and Dan Piepenbring. I believe the hardcover version was titled "Chaos: Charles Manson, the CIA, and the Secret History of the Sixties"). I've read several reviews of the book that go into the specifics O'Neill uncovered in greater detail than this documentary did. This documentary touches on some of what he found, but not all of it. O'Neill's book appears to be a much more thorough and truthful book on the subject than Bugliosi's Helter Skelter (O'Neill proves that Bugliosi purposely lied and left key facts out of his book). For a good introduction to O'Neill's book, check out Abby Aguirre's Substack post about it, or her excellent review "Down the Manson Rabbit Hole" in the LA Review of Books.

It's worth watching if the subject interests you, but from the reviews I've read the book sounds much more comprehensive. The documentary has some interesting interviews with one of the prosecutors, some Manson family members, and O'Neill himself. It brings up some of the questions found in the book, such why did Manson's parole officer continue to insist that Manson was doing great when meanwhile he was arrested repeatedly (and not locked up for violating his parole)? Why have Manson's complete parole records never been released? Why were his parole files not permitted as evidence in his trial?

I feel the documentary could have been edited better and should have been longer and included more of the details from the book, but it is still interesting for people who want to learn more about this subject.

Was it just me? Or did this 90 minute production feel as though it was hacked together and rushed out. I went on and on about Chaos, begging people to read it, it absolutely had me captivated, what a binge read, I don't think it translated well here.

Massively overproduced, it jumps from one theory to the next, not explaining anything in that process, if moves from cutaway to split screen interviews in the most erratic fashion.

Honestly just stick to the book instead, it truly is the most fascinating read, contrast that to this chaotic film, night and day.

Good luck if you can stick with it, I found myself skipping back to try and see what point they were tying to make.

There's clearly some interesting footage, but it's lost in a myriad of cutaways and shots.

Netflix, this sucked.

4/10.

So sloppily done. I couldn't even tell who was speaking most of the time as there were no titles. We were to assume we knew who they were. So the author made the claim that the author of Vincent bugliosi was way off in his theory about why Manson and followers murdered in cold blood. Yet the author of this book did not offer any evidence to the contrary. He uses the term "brainwashing " which can not be used in a court of law because there is no such thing as brainwashing. It's correctly called thought conditioning or thought reform, supported by peer encouragement. The idea that the CIA had anything to do with this event was ludicrous. They were freaking high on drugs and in an isolated cult which removes them from any sort of consciousness or morality other than what they were told. The author Tom O'Neill was simply not credible enough for me to believe.