The Other Side of Madness

This was an interesting sit through. It was the very first film to capitalize on the Manson Family murders and was actually being made WHILE the trial was still going on. Though it is surely an exploitation film, it's a lot tamer than you would expect. It isn't gory, and any sexual exploits were the depictions of hippies doing hippie things back in the late 60's.

Any exploitation director could've made the whole film about the murders with a lot of blood, women getting their clothes torn off a midst torture, and the killers acting maniacally for shock value but this film... took its time.

I'd say it's like if Terrence Malick tried to make Funny Games. The director took time to show the life of the Manson family, but didn't give them an identity or something to care about for them. The killers are given a perfect empty shell of character--they aren't even given names. Obviously the victims aren't named out of respect but the actual members of the Manson family, I believe, aren't given names because they're cold blooded murderers stripped of their humanity.

The black and white cinematography really did well to capture the mood, especially during the home invasion sequence. Frank Howard really knew how to use shadows to his advantage to make a dark and depressing event, and made the Manson Family members look menacing. It's really surprising that he never went on to do anything else because for someone obviously having no prior experience, he certainly did show a lot of competence and ambition.

I really have to hand it to Brian Klinknett as the lead killer for delivering a crazy and terrifying performance and it's also a shame that he didn't really go on to do anything else. When his character says "I am the Devil, coming to do the Devil's work", I genuinely believe what he is saying. Barely at all did I see an actor seeming like they're just reciting a line.

Speaking of great performers with lackluster careers, the music is amazing. Sean Bonniwell supplied songs from his band The Music Machine and wow, their psychedelic blues infused proto-punk is a hidden gem from the 60's and their song "Dark White" should have been a hit but in my research, their marketing was terrible and they broke up in 1969. So I'd definitely seek out some of their music and give it a listen.

All in all, it's a very rough film and you should know a bit of details about the Manson Family before watching it, but for a small, forgotten exploitation film, I think it's worth watching.

I am the "Smug Whitness" and wanted to tell all viewers that it was a great time doing this movie, meeting the Director from Los Angeles, and watching how it all comes together. I started as a secretary to Wade Williams who is the producer and prime financier, then found myself doing some acting that I had never done. Granted, I wasn't that good but the scenery at the rock concert is worth seeing. We filmed it in an old rock quarry outside of Kansas City and it was a whole day of drugs, wine and buses of people being brought in from the big park in KC called Loose Park. We had put out fliers all over ahead of time so there were plenty of hippies that showed up for the free food and fun !Later, watching the "dailies" to see how it all looked after the filming was interesting and educational. Some few months later, I moved to Hollywood and really wanted to feel a part of the movie business but then realized so do millions of others. But, I met my future husband of now 28 years who is the son of a TV producer who worked with Bob Barker on Truth or Consequences and later moved back to KC.

This movie (aka The Other Side of Madness) is not to be confused with the television movie based on the Vincent Bugliosi book. This is a cheaply shot, crudely made documentary-like movie that was filmed while the Manson trial was taking place in Los Angeles. There are some weaknesses, but this is a fascinating movie for anyone who has an interest in the Manson story. First, the negatives:

First - for anyone who does not know the story of Charles Manson and his "Family", you may have no idea what is going on. You never hear the words "Manson" or "Tate". You do hear the words "Charlie" and you actually hear the voice of Charles Manson himself singing one of his own songs, "Mechanical Man". After hearing this, it is no wonder that Manson's recording career never took off.

Second - there is one long scene of a rock concert in the desert. It has absolutely nothing to do with the plot, except it puts the actors playing Tex Watson and Patricia Krenwinkle at the concert. The rock concert features some full frontal nudity, but mostly from skinny men and overweight women.

Third - there is little to no dialogue in the movie. The majority of the words you hear spoken are either off camera or look like they were dubbed in later. The whole movie is in black and white, except for one scene in color, where the actress who is playing Sharon Tate is being filmed in a "My Fair Lady"-type movie.

Fourth - the movie has no conclusion. While the movie shows the Tate murders, the movie ends with the killers entering the LaBianca home.

These are the negatives, including a cheesy "Keep your kids off drugs" warning that comes at the end of the movie (similar to "Reefer Madness"), but there is one huge positive. I have watched four movies about Manson (both "Helter Skelters" - original and remake, this movie, and Jim van Beber's sickening "The Manson Family"). This movie has probably the most frightening filming of the Tate murders of the four. The only drawback is the actress who plays Sharon Tate (Debbie Duff) can't act. She is beautiful, but looks confused instead of terrified. But the eerie black and white filming of the murders is very powerful.

Worth a look for anyone who is interested in this frightening case.

As someone who has studied this case from beginning to end, this movie is completely flawed. It sticks only to the facts when it serves the purpose of being completely sensational. The beginning is a mix of jumbled scenes that seem to have no correlation to each other with the exception that it has the actor playing Charles Manson reiterating Manson's 'isms' to ad nauseum. "Cease to exist". "Death to the piggies". This type of garbage used along with Manson's own music makes this movie too disturbing for words. The depiction of the actress Sharon Tate, one of the most famous of the seven Tate-LaBianca victims, is depicted here as a screen goddess. The Waltz number in this movie is laughable, suggesting that due to her 'star-status' Sharon Tate deserved what she got living so high on the hog, as it were. That the victims lived high and that is what this movie does to the detriment of the memory of the victims: Sharon Tate, Jay Sebring, Abigail Folger, Voytek Frykowski, Steven Parent, Leno LaBianca and Rosemary LaBianca. It makes the viewer who is not acquainted with the facts think that this is the truth of what happened, when it only sketches the truth with one outrage after another. The movie shows in graphic detail what was done at Miss Tate's home, taking almost a full half hour of the movie to do so. Almost the time it really took to commit five homocides then leave the scene of the crime. Mercifully it stops short of going into the murders of Leno and his wife, Rosemary. All one sees is a street sign that tells you it is the street where the LaBianca's lived and the murderers walking up the lawn to a house that bears again, only a vague representation of the house on Waverly Drive.

It is told in black and white for the most part which gives it a scary feeling when you watch it. The only time it adds colour is when we see the 'revered' Sharon Tate playing the part of an Ingrid Bergmanesque 'Anastasia' arriving at a grand ball where a handsome 'Prince Charming' leads her in the dance. This scene is used again when we are forced to see it intercut between the dead actress and the live 'Anastasia' dancing at the ball. Where this movie botches its facts it tries to cover with shock value nonsense. It has a scene where victim Steven Parent is stopped in his car before arriving at the gate, and there is an agonizing few moments in which we see the actor playing Tex Watson taunting the young man before he shoots him to death. Again, no facts and big on propaganda. So do I suggest you see this movie? No. If you can get the video or see the superior 1976 version with Steven Railsback as Manson and George DiCenzo as Prosecutor Vincent T. Bugliosi, I highly suggest you do. If only to get the real facts of the case, and to get the memory of this one out of your brain. Disturbing. Disgusting. Forgettable.

I watched this production because I was watching every piece on the Manson murders I could find for research on a Discovery Channel doc I'm producing on the Manson family. It has been two days since I watch the DVD and I am still bored. I cannot imagine that a movie could be worse than this one. Words fail me. The best indication of the talent of the participants is to look at the other IMDb credits (or should I say "blames") of the cast and crew. Only cast member Duke Howze is listed as appearing in any other production...ever! The director/cinematographer/editor, Frank Howard, has no credits before or after this joke of a flick. No need to search further. This IS the all time celluloid turkey, without question.