उपयोगकर्ता समीक्षाएं

Director Jim Van Bebber finally got his low budget Manson picture released. Was it worth the wait? Sure, if you're interested in the case, that is. From what I can gather, the film is fairly accurate with its portrayal of events, actions, and even some dialogue. Van Bebber does take some liberty though, showing a few things that were only suspected in the real case. I guess that's to be expected. Anyway, the movie basically shows the story from the Manson Family's point of view, complete with faux interviews, tied together with a running subplot of a modern TV station putting together a documentary on Manson and his followers. Obviously, it is a very violent and disturbing movie, not shying away from the drug use, orgies, or murders. The shot of his three female followers with shaved heads, coming down the courtroom stairs, is a haunting one. The movie as a whole is not great, though I did find it intriguing, horrifically trippy, and ultimately tragic. It's a shame that some youths still look up to the guy, even wearing shirts with Manson's picture on it. The two DVD set includes two feature length documentaries and a short interview with Charlie Manson. Boy, is he out there.

A recreation / fictionalization of a morbid slice of American history, Jim Van Bebbers' The Manson Family relates the story of Charles Manson (an eerily charismatic Marcelo Games), and the intense devotion of his "family" members, who end up willing to do ANYTHING for him. Supplemented by faux vintage interviews and a modern framing device of a TV producer (Carl Day) intending to interview the incarcerated family members, The Manson Family is an undeniably *grim* and *nasty* journey for one to take.

Van Bebber never shies away from the various ugly details, showing lots of nudity, orgies, and drug use, as well as the eventual graphic Tate-LaBianca murders. He does do a good job in showing how supposed "good intentions" from this "peace & love" crowd get perverted into something far more sinister. The result is highly uncomfortable, with a cast of characters that may make viewers feel the need to take a shower afterwards. The cast may be made up of no-name actors & actresses, but this bunch do give incredibly committed performances.

Obviously not to be taken for a true documentary, this does feature some embellishment, although it's at least apparently reasonably close to reality. What's most disturbing is this adoration that the family had for their leader, and the fact that apparently some people still feel some actual *admiration* for the guy.

Overall, this is a very crude film, but fairly powerful in its own sordid way.

Van Bebber appears on screen as Bobby.

Six out of 10.

For those out there not overly familiar with the story of Charles Manson, The Manson Family, The Tate & La Bianca murders, or the crazy drug induced summer of 69 at the Spahn ranch; this will no doubt be an entertaining film to watch.

Plentifully filled with lots of sex, nudity, drugs and tons of blood; this film is an artistic representation of one of the most publicized murders and murderous "family" of the last 35 years.

Done in art house style- "The Manson Family" is full of vivid colors and sets, lots of red blood, and lots of imagination. This is one of the most artistically presented horror movies that I have seen come out of the United States in quite some time.

However, having said that, the film is also extremely disturbing for anyone with in depth knowledge of the Tate & La Bianca murders or anyone who has ever felt sympathy for these victims.

This reviewer loves to indulge in the most disturbing of horror. However, just the fact that these were REAL murders, I find it almost insulting that they were recreated in such a fashion. To watch these people die in such vivid detail - with so much blood and with so much "color"; was a little unsettling to say the least. I just couldn't help but feel sorry for anyone who might actually be connected to the victims if they were to ever have to suffer through this film.

When it's gritty, grimy, bloody, shocking and disturbing, fictional horror is at its best.

True life horror movies can be just as enthralling when left in the hands of a capable filmmaker who respects the victims, while at the same time presenting a honest portrait of murder and mayhem.

Although "The Manson Family" is only based on a true story, and does not claim to be a fictional, nor documentary movie- it manages to weasel it's way out of both categories above.

However, this is a true story that is so well documented, and still so prevalent in our media and our culture- that it holds a certain significance with many people (including myself, who's read "Helter Skelter" and "The Family" twice, in addition with seeing the countless other films made about it all).

To see these shocking and real life murders played out in "art house" style is really an injustice to the actual crimes, victims, and victims' families who are very much alive and well to this day.

"The Manson Family" is a good film, on the basis that you don't know too much about the actual Manson Family History. The more you know, the more respect you lose for Jim Van Bebber's vivid retelling of these murders, and of "The Manson Family" as a film.

I also thought that including Charles Manson's music in the film was downright appalling.

Nobody needs to hear that crap......

**1/2 out of ****

By golly, it's about time that a film about the Manson Family wasn't made to be more of an event then it really was. I mean sure, it is very tragic that those people died, I always will mourn for their families and them, being that they were innocent people who did not deserve to die, but the family isn't something that should be really feared. When you really break it down, the members of the cult were not smart people. They didn't ask questions as to what was the purpose was for murdering all those innocent people, they didn't see Charlie as someone who should not be taken seriously, and they didn't even know who they were murdering. They were very foolish people, and they should be anything but feared. I don't understand the rationale of someone who finds the incident of the cult to be so shocking. I mean sure, it's shocking that these people actually went out and committed these murders, but they were just a group of people who had obviously lost too many braincells. That is why I thought this was a good movie. Because it is honest, shows the incident from the evil side, and does it in a responsible and realistic manner.

The film structure consists of the members of the family being interviewed in jail about what they did. We briefly see Charlie as the ringleader and we see him as a foolish looking funny man who mostly doesn't know what he is talking about. The film builds up to a Roman Polanski's MACBETH style third act in which the family goes on their killing spree, but by the time they begin to do these things, the audience realizes that these people don't have any rationale except for hate, and they gradually became blinded by it and began thinking that they were doing something of purpose, which they were certainly not.

I don't recommend this to the casual movie goer. People who rent this thinking that it's just a horror film are wrong. This is not just a horror film. This is an extremely disturbing, gruesome, tasteless, and senselessly brutal film that just so happens to depict an honest representation of the family. People who will see this film will wonder if it merits any purpose. Indeed, it may not. That is not the point though. The point is that Mario Vanbebbler wanted to make the most realistic version of The Manson Family as possible, so even though the film may not be good, I am happy to say that he has succeeded in doing exactly what he wanted. That is something I greatly admire, and that's why I like this film.

Not Rated. Adults only. contains explicit violence and sexuality, and drug use.

First off, I have to say that this movie was horrible. Amateurish is the best word to describe it as a whole. The acting was absolutely horrible. The direction was absolutely horrible. Everything about this movie was absolutely horrible.

I can tell you exactly where I first realized this: Three minutes into the movie. Jim Van Bebber has no skills as a director and should not be in the movie business. Most of the time the camera stayed on the tripod and did not move an inch. No panning, tilting, zooming, etc. Even an episode of MacGyver has better cinematography. I would have fired the director of cinematography on the first day of shooting.

Oh, and can we talk about the great special effects in the movie? When it comes to the murder scenes it looked like they were killing mannequins. It was that obvious.

Basically, the movie looked like it was shot for an 8th grade class project. It was not interesting, did not make me feel like I was having an acid trip nor did it disgust me. It made me laugh. The director is not a genius. It's a shameful piece of crap that needs to be either thrown away or lampooned on Mystery Science Theatre 3000.

The only redeeming thing about the movie is that I did not pay for it. Otherwise, I would have demanded my money back.

Of all the highly publicized American murder cases of the 20th century, the massacres committed by cult leader Charles Manson's followers in 1969 are probably the most infamous. Despite never personally killing anyone, Manson is still often seen as some kind of embodiment of evil and thus an object of constant curiosity. Several films have been made about "The Family" over the decades, one of them being Jim Van Bebber's semi-mocumentary finally released in 2003 after having been in production for nearly 15 years.

The frame story of the warped cinematic trip takes place in 1996 when a TV reporter named Jack Wilson (Carl Day) is preparing to interview the incarcerated Family members for his program. Some kind of strange modern followers of Manson have sent him a videotape and are not going to leave their interference at that. The bulk of the film consists of faux-interviews with the Family members and psychedelic flashbacks of scenes from the time preceding the murders. The interviewees Leslie, Bobby, Sadie, Patty and Tex seem to regret their actions, while Manson himself is only seen in the flashbacks as portrayed by Marcelo Games.

Instead of a clear, tightly-written plot the jumpy movie favours a fragmented sensory mindf**k kind of approach to its subject. The film's exploitation roots become highly evident during the long home video-like flashbacks illustrating the interviewees' memories full of hazy drug use and gratuitous nudity and sex. The lighting is mostly very richly coloured in red or blue, creating a fittingly otherworldly feel to the scenes of cult bonding under the influence of the charismatic Manson who is seen entirely through the eyes of his followers: he doesn't speak much and remains a distant character throughout. The intentionally grainy, worn-out and damaged look of the film (not only the flashbacks) strengthens the alienating atmosphere as well.

At times the film effectively captures the distressing, insane state of mind that the Family members can be imagined to have been in. The Devil worshipping orgy is a highlight among the bizarre scenes, but the colourfully lit final massacres testing the audiences' tolerance to excessive gore are a must see for any fan of hard horror too. The prolonged knife violence and maniacally laughing killers are pretty much what people (or at least me) are looking for in sleazy trash movies like this one anyway, so in that sense Van Bebber and Co. have achieved their goal with flying colours. Perhaps some of the acting is not the most realistic ever, but I cannot consider that a major flaw in a film that is so heavily focused on the effects of brainwashing and not being in touch with one's regular self.

In a way The Manson Family is a relative of Oliver Stone's controversial media satire Natural Born Killers (1994), but ultimately comes across as sleazier and more nihilistic since the satirical aspect is less pronounced. I am not sure if the filmmakers have taken a lot of artistic license with the presentation of how the actual events took place; in the end it doesn't even matter since the movie never strives to be an accurate portrait of Manson as a person. As an examination of disturbing group psychosis it works enjoyably and is recommended to those into exploitative true crime stories.

I got encouraged to watch this film because I've heard good word of it: it was supposed to be this thrilling true crime milestone, disturbing, shocking... all that jazz. Well, I am disturbed because I spent money on it, and I am shocked that something so God-awful actually got released. That's about it.

This is a supposed "new look" at Charles Manson's family of insane loser junkies and their murders. But if this is a "new look" then it's probably "new" as in "fresh and totally inept": just watching it gave me a headache and I had to give up trying to make any sense of it or even understand just what the director intended it to be.

I suppose I should say something about the plot but fact is, it was so stupid and incoherent that I barely remember if there even WAS a plot at all. There was something about a "Manson tape" delivered to a radio DJ (or a TV producer?), then an hour of pointless random footage of "the family" in '69, then the Polanski murders (looking like a bad school play) and finally some idiotic part about a bunch of skinheads getting drunk and beating the hell out of one another in an alley (I kid you not), and then it ended (thank God) (Don't ask me to make any sense of that, I'm just recalling what I saw!) The performances were terrible, too. And how difficult is it to make a convincing "Manson"? Get a short skinny scrawny bloke, put a dirty wig and a shaggy beard on him. There's your Manson. But this "Manson" doesn't even look right. He just looks like, uh, a bloke in a cheap wig and a glued on Santa beard painted black.

Or maybe that's what this film is actually about: Manson's family didn't make any sense, so this film doesn't make any sense, either. It's symbolic! (Yeah, right) I'm still so angry at spending money on this I stopped my normal lurking on this site and registered just to vote 1 for this film and post this warning that will hopefully prevent others from spending their money on this garbage. Stay away from it, it's not even worth renting.

PS. The recent US TV production "Helter Skelter" got bad reviews here but I saw it last month (I saw the 1976 original too) and let me tell you, compared to "Manson Family", that new Helter Skelter is BRILLIANT and FLAWLESS. And I was disappointed in it! That's how bad "Manson Family" is: it makes a flawed and mostly disappointing TV movie look perfect.

I'm giving the film a 10/10 because of how I feel about it, but ignore that part of this review. What I'd like to do is help you, the potential viewer of The Manson Family, figure out whether you'd love this movie or hate it. It is a polarizing film, as is obvious from the reviews - no genuinely bad films get such an extreme reaction, positive or negative. The worst movies on earth are the ones where you just feel like your time was wasted. At worst, this film will make you feel like your time was violated - remember that the people who give it one star were motivated to find this web page and leave their comments. Go look up any god-awful Fred Olen Ray movie and see what people say: they give 2 or 3 star reviews. I suggest that the only one-star reviews on this entire site are motivated by being offended, not by the movie being "bad" in any objective sense.

Okay, that said, I think this is a well-made film, which I am prepared to support with evidence. The people who said that this is poorly shot ("the camera doesn't move") are clearly out of their minds. Not only does the camera move (and why would it matter if it didn't?), but the filmic technique is a dead-on mimic of the film techniques of the period it is depicting (late 1960s). This is a low budget, 16mm film, so it doesn't have any kind of Hollywood gloss - it is semi-documentary in it's approach. However, I found it to be stylish and evocative of Vietnam documentary footage, Woodstock (the film), and classic drive-in exploitation movies of the period. Again, this is something you'll probably either love or hate, but it is a calculated decision to look "unprofessional" by modern Hollywood standards.

As far as the content of the film, I think it is mistakenly regarded by some as a "message" film, and by others as an "exploitation" film. I think it is neither, or maybe more accurately, both - this is a "depiction" film, intent on depicting the Manson Family as realistically as possible. Why do that? Because Manson and his "Family" is one of the most sociologically interesting phenomena of the 20th century, in many ways comparable to Hitler and the Nazis. Jim VanBebber made a conscious (even a little heavy-handed, lending a little credence to the idea that this is a "message" film) decision to focus on the "family," the actual killers (Manson himself was convicted of inciting the crimes, not participating). Having read a lot of Manson literature including the Vincent Bugliosi book Helter Skelter, I think that this is the most accurate way I've seen the story told, particularly with the "Rashomon"-esque narration of the participants, where they whitewash their own involvement in the crimes, something that frustrated District Attourney Bugliosi to no end.

Now, how will you be able to tell whether this movie is for you, with all the "VanBebber is a genius" or "this is the worst movie ever made" crap out there? Here's the checklist:

1: Do you like low-budget 16mm horror films? It looks low-budget like Evil Dead or Texas Chainsaw Massacre (the original), a look which I find to be raw and immediate, but that's an opinion. The much-debated quality of the acting is exactly in keeping with this style. If, for example, you thought the acting in the Texas Chainsaw was rough and real, you'll probably like this, too.

2: Can you cope with graphic sex, drug use, and violence? The sex is near-X-rated and the violence, though they use 70's-style Karo syrup blood, is intense, grotesque, and on-screen. And really happened to real people, which freaks me out.

3: Do you find the twisted social mores of the Manson family to be interesting? This is not a film about a charismatic leader - it's a film about lost sheep. This type of senseless killing is only committed by people who have lost their empathy, an effect that is all too easy to achieve - it takes a lot less than what Manson did to subvert a person's ethics (see the psychological research of Milgram, Zimbardo, et al).

I thought the film did an excellent job of making an intellectual point at a (mostly) visceral level. The point is that human ethics are incredibly flexible and that hedonism is ultimately selfish, even when the love is "free." My final statement: A person with a (very?) strong stomach who is willing to engage his or her intellect in something that doesn't seem quite worth it on the surface will probably enjoy this movie, and be surprised at how deep the well runs. A crazy gore fan will probably like this movie. Fans of underground and experimental film (esp. Richard Kern fans) will love this movie. Mainstream Hollywood fans will not; non-genre fans will not.

I heard legends about this "film" (quotes used so as not to insult films) for a while, so when I finally got the DVD with it, I impatiently started watching it. By the end, I *had* to fast forward through just a few of the most moronic, ineptly made, nonsensical scenes of this pointless childish mess to make it end quicker.

This may be the worst film I've even "touched" - and I used to be associated with Troma for a while. "Manson Family" makes the bottom of Troma's entries look like daring and groundbreaking art-house filmwork. I could go on and talk about the syphilitic skeleton of a "plot" it has, the revoltingly bad "acting", the painful, inept "directing", the sets and props with their "dollar ninety nine" look (I especially "loved" the plastic toy guns used in the Tate murder scene!) or the nauseating look and feel of this whole bag of garbage (I think it was supposed to represent a drug-induced hallucination; I have absolutely no idea how a drug-induced hallucination looks or feels, nor do I want to find out - but I guess drug junkies with burned out "brains" will love this "film" (they seem to be the ones who made it) I've seen many films from various "Worst 50" lists, traditionally opened by Eddie Wood's ones - and Eddie Wood would be appalled by the sheer ineptitude and talentless of van Webber (or whatever his name is; I certainly don't want to remember it) I've never seen "Superbabies" or its sequel, but I strongly wish that "Manson" joined them on IMDb's rating. Fortunately, this obscure garbage probably won't be seen by enough viewers to warrant it sufficiently many "1" votes - and so much the better!

Many years in the making this is, if ultimately rather sad and depressing with a confused ending, an involving documentary style depiction of what life may well have been like within the notorious 'family'. At the beginning there is a fair mix of youngsters held together largely by sex and quasi religion. Largely it's the girls that talk of Jesus whilst disrobing and the men of, f***ing. Fuelled by dope and acid they go their merry way for a while but then interestingly Charlie reckons a mix of blood and death will keep the group alive. And so it does but always of course spiralling hell bent towards the inevitable, 'helter skelter'. The best and worst of the hippie movement is depicted here in what was essentially it's death throws. Bebber makes considerable play on the racist slant to the 'family' belief structure and their fear of a black takeover, none of which have I been aware of before. Very interesting with lots of gore and bare flesh with much emphasis on the meaning/meaningless of words, gullibility and the mighty power of the promise of sex and violence.

A really demented but compelling take, on the life and times of Charles Manson. Incredible story for all the best (and worst reasons) and a difficult picture to get exactly right. At times this film takes you into a world were madness and mayhem, truly rules the roost. One long acid trip and no doubt a fairly accurate portrayal of events that actually happened (on the Spahn Ranch). To be honest you could never make up a fiction story anywhere near as bizarre as this and whatever your views on Charles Manson, he was a complete one-off!

The only thing of interest about this movie is its subject matter. Taking a look at the Manson "family" from the point of view of the family members themselves is a great idea. However, trying to make sense of the uncomprehensible is something that can really only be accomplished in a masterwork -- and this ain't it.

Presumably because there was so much information to squeeze into a screenplay, this film was done in a faux documentary style, with reenactments thrown in. Trouble is, the writing and directing make it impossible to establish those things that make a movie watchable, like character, story, theme and so on.

Worse, there's an incredibly weak sub-plot thrown in that follows a little band of latter-day Mansonites as they go after a reporter who's working on a story on the anniversary of the killings. It's dumb and pointless, and a complete waste of time.

All in all, this movie is one big wasted opportunity. The one ray of sunshine is the acting of Marc Pitman, who plays Tex, who in real life did most of the actual killing. Whereas the female characters come off as giggly airheads in the 60s flashbacks, Pitman manages to convey real feeling.

In short, don't bother with this movie.

This pile of "merde" has got to be a joke. At first I was revolted by the sheer artifice and cliché, particularly the drug montage scenes which were about as realistic as the drug ravings in reefer madness. Then I thought that maybe the whole thing was some bizarre parody that only the filmmakers understand. Wide angle lenses, naked white people and bad lighting just screams cult movie to me, or porn, which has better production value and far more integrity than "The Manson Family".

I somehow saw a trailer for this at the New Beverly Cinema in Hollywood which normally plays my favorite classic films, plus the popcorn is only 2 bucks a bag. So I thought it would be a good bet when I saw it at the video store next to the release of "Manson" with Jeremy Davies, which by the look of the cover looked to be another Hollywood exploiter. The box for "The Manson Family " made the film seem like an honest documentary, plus I was bamboozled by some intoxicating film review quotes that must have been totally false.

Movies like this make me sad not only for the absurd waste of money and human energy, but for the lies... Oh God, the lies... the deception. I feel used and cheated.

I like the movie a lot, probably not for the crappy set design and poor acting, or even the low budget premise. I just liked the fact that an independent film maker with a vision got to see his dream after 15 years get rewarded. I have to admit, the movie is pretty gritty and I got the parallel between the new Manson zeolites and the original family and found it more intriguing than the usual docu-drama the media portrays. Well done...oh and people that hated this movie, it's too bad because I was entertained throughout and in a way it took out the mystique of the Manson family rather than glorifying it. Yes it was low-budget but if you watch the documentary on the film's creation it's quite brilliant and fascinating.

I couldn't disagree more with the past reviewer of this pile of poo...!The is possibly the worst film of 2003.The film runs for only 95 mins but feels like an eternity.The acting is appalling and makes me wonder if there not all the cast are from some amateur dramatics group!It seems the only reason Marcelo Games is cast as Charlie is that he vaguely resembles Charles Manson,his acting (or lack there of) is worst of the bunch. Production values of this exploitation piece are practically non existent,it seems to have been shot in someones back garden.The murder scenes are badly executed and lack any originality.The gore effects are unconvincing.After watching this I was left with a bad taste in my mouth.

Jim Van Bebber's "The Manson Family" is an extremely violent and bloody horror film that reconstructs the early activities of the Family and their descent into the Tate-LaBianca killings.Van Bebber mixes this with a contemporary sub plot involving tabloid journalist Jack Wilson's quest to film a documentary on the subject.The film is loaded with plenty of sex and full-frontal nudity.The final third of "The Manson Family" is a grueling nightmare with some of the most sadistic and savage murders ever captured on screen.The acting is generally amateurish,although Marc Pitman is truly impressive as Tex.The photography perfectly captures the hazy sex-and-drug fuelled lifestyle that Charlie and his largely female disciples indulged in on their Californian ranch.The killings themselves are extremely graphic and gory as hell,so I was satisfied.The scene of blood drinking orgy is truly frightening as is the slow progression of Charlie from a peaceful Jesus Christ figure to Satan himself."The Manson Family" is easily one of the most controversial and disturbing horror films ever made.Give it a look.

Charles Manson, one of the most notorious criminals in crime history has, as you would expect, a compelling story behind his crimes. This film, The Manson Family, attempts to show the story behind Charlie and his 'family', but never truly succeeds. The film takes a docu-drama stance at events and while you would expect this to be the best way to look at a true story, I was left feeling cold at the conclusion. The truth is, that while the crimes are compelling and make you want to take note; the story behind them simply isn't, and it makes for a less than interesting film. The story plods out like any other story of sex and drugs from the seventies, and while we, of course, know that there's something deeply evil about the father of this family; it isn't portrayed in a way that makes us want to find out what it is; and this isn't good at all since most people already know most of the details of what Charles Manson did. The story pans out with mock-live footage of the exploits of the family, mixed in with fake interviews of the perpetrators as they are today.

This film is well renowned for impressing at the festival is premiered at, but I really don't see why. All the film offers is disappointment, and the story of the 'Manson family' is severely wasted by the way that the filmmakers have seen fit to play it out. There has been a surge of documentary films being released lately, and their high-critical acclaim is what I blame for this film. The action is always made better by the fact that the events in this film really happened, but at the same time much of the movie isn't interesting at all; and while the film picks up towards the end, I think that if you're going to make a film based on true events, you should really focus on the most interesting aspects of the story in order to make the film itself interesting - this film doesn't. Sure, some people will enjoy and be impressed by, the pornography elements of the film, along with the drug culture atmosphere; but I certainly wasn't. I wanted a film about the crimes that The Manson Family committed, not what they were doing while Charlie was brainwashing them. On the whole; I am not amused.

This unflinching flick, nearly 15 years in the making, can hardly be called entertaining by most standards. Instead, Jim Van Bebber has created a flick that reanimates the essence of the stupidity and horror that the disciples of Charley have effected upon the world. The Family's reign of terror is all the more horrifying by account of its random and senseless motivations. The story itself will alienate all but the most ardent of movie fans, those that can see through the ostensibly bad in order to extract the true grit of Van Bebber's intent, which was to tell the story through the eyes of the Family. The acting was at times amateurish, but set upon its chaotic backdrop does not detract from the import of this film. The directing and camera work are MTV on psychedelics intense. For those prudish types stay away, for the leverage of nudity and animalistic gore have tipped the scales and reveal this flick to be on the doorsteps of rated X-ville. A difficult film to recommend, for those interested in the grim fringe of cinema, this might find a receptive audience.

Genruk of Evil Eye Reviews

One can certainly forgive the filmmaker for not consulting with the family for accurate info. Dead end there. As Robin Williams said, if you can remember the sixties, you weren't really there. What remains is a great pop-culture plethora of reconstructions to choose from. What we sicko film fans have been waiting for for years is a truly hardcore no-holds barred version of the Manson saga. The two made-for TV versions are okay, Steve Railsback is great in The Stunt Man as well, and Ed Gein, very underrated actor.

Anyway, mad overdue for an NC17 splatterfest, and as long as it's low budget, you can expect some artistic license and the freedom to inject more social commentary on the subsequent generations who've adopted such an apocalyptic mind-set. JVB does get a bit carried away, integrating modern-day punks, junkies, tabloid journalists,Jim Jones recordings and poseurs into the mix. JVB goes out of his way to mirror the history of nihilistic punk attitude, straight on through the 80s with the Richard Kern film clips (You killed me first, starring the inimitable Lung Leg) So the film is a bit inconsistent. Far from perfect. It also combines remakes of the Manson documentary footage shot in the early 70s, while the girls are all armed and determined to free Charlie and crew. It's all over the place, very NBK. Also a very big dose of processed noise and simulated dirty film effects.

But the performances are good, the frenzy and mania are there. Very queasy and rough recreations of the Hinman/Tate/LaBianca murders. Strong stuff. Managed to cram a lot of character development into 95 minutes, despite also having fictional characters running rampant as well.

Drugs, Too Many Drugs, Going Absolutely Insane, Disturbing. Not recomemded for any setting after you have watched this movie you feel like the guy in "A clock work orange" like your sick from watching a movie. It's not A stupid movie it's just disturbing. I actually wish someone would have told me not to watch this movie. But I watched the whole thing. Do not watch this movie if you do not like disturbing images.I guess it's educational it influence's an anti drug use message.The Acting is Good convincing i sometimes think if the actors actually experimented with the drugs referenced in the movie. because there high seem's genuine. The acting is entertaining. the story is educational. But I can't recommend it If you want to watch it it's on you.