Chaos: The Manson Murders

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.

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.

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.

A deep dive? Hardly, more like a disjointed mess with quick cuts of old documents and photos with little or no explanation.

There is no narrative here, no explanation of the theories on which the film is allegedly based, namely the book by Tom O'Neill. I've read the book, which is quite fascinating, but if you haven't, there is just no way to follow the random bits and pieces thrown out by this documentary.

Case in point, O'Neill is briefly interviewed, but without any explanation of who he is. O'Neill briefly discusses some of the shadowy players associated with the Manson saga like Jolly West and Roger Smith, but little information is given about why they were relevant and what they did or might have done. Music industry people like Brian Wilson, Terry Melcher and Gregg Jakobsen are briefly mentioned, but with little background on their relationship to each other or Manson.

The film is a complete waste of your time. If you are truly interested, read O'Neill's book and skip this incoherent trainwreck.

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.