Watch Helter Skelter For Free

People are voting emotionally.

Did you people see the same film I saw?

The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

Actress is magnificent and exudes a hypnotic screen presence in this affecting drama.

I was way too young to have been aware of the Manson killings back in 1969, but obviously over the years I've picked up bits and pieces, but never really knew too many of the details of the story. I decided to watch this 2004 movie (which is a sort of remake of a version made in 1976) as a way of bringing myself up to speed on what happened. I approach any movie that's based on real events with a grain of salt. There will always be dramatic licence taken, but basically from what I've read about these events this movie does a pretty decent job of getting the big picture accurate. There might be a few details that are wrong or missing, but you will have a basic understanding of what happened and why by watching this.Generally, the performances here were quite good. I really appreciated Jeremy Davies' performances as Manson. The cold, hard, piercing eyes - they were quite chilling, actually. He gave me a sense of how people could be led astray into what was essentially a murderous cult. He knew how to read people; he knew how to take advantages of their weaknesses and past hurts; he knew how to draw them into his orbit. We see that through the character of Linda Kasabian (played by Clea DuVall.) Kasabian was emotionally wounded and vulnerable - with a young child and a broken marriage and nowhere really to go until she got invited into "The Family." To watch Manson reel her in was fascinating. Kasabian, though, retained enough of herself to eventually turn on The Family and she became a key prosecution witness at the trials that followed. But to see a lot of this through her eyes gave one a sense of what life in this cult was like.The movie depicts some of the murders - basically the murder of Gary Hinman, the Sharon Tate murders, and the murders of Leno and Rosemary LaBianca. They're not portrayed as graphically as they could have been, but the violence and gruesomeness of the events do come through. The last part of the movie deals with the trial of Manson and The Family. The title refers to the name Manson gave to what he expected to be a race war erupting between blacks and whites, and the suggestion is that he was hoping that at least some of the murders the family committed would be blamed on the Black Panthers and would spark "Helter Skelter." It's a very interesting movie that does do a pretty good job of giving a broad outline of the events. (8/10)

This remake of the 1976 original takes a fresh approach to one of the most shocking series of crimes in the 20th Century, not shocking for the gratuitous and horrific murders of totally innocent people, but for the way the three female perpetrators - Susan Atkins, Patricia Krenwinkel and Leslie Van Houten – danced to the tune of the Devil, the one who called himself Jesus Christ.Of course, the idea that Manson "brainwashed" these women and his other followers is a pathetic excuse, as though there is no such thing as free will. The same can be said of the witchfinders, the Communists, the Nazis, the Khmer Rouge, the Provisional IRA, and today the Islamist terrorists who given the chance would murder us in our beds.Marguerite Moreau shines as the demonically evil Susan Atkins, who did not look quite so evil in 2002 when she was interviewed by Dianne Sawyer, and even less so seven years later when after having her left leg amputated and suffering from brain cancer she was denied compassionate release. Incredibly, Atkins married twice while serving her sentence, and for some time was even permitted conjugal visits. This film ends though with the trial and a brief mention of the conviction of the Manson "Family". Although this is a fictionalised account and contains some poetic licence, it is also an historical document. The horrific murder scenes are shown in this context rather than the usual one of entertainment/special effects. Also excellent is Jeremy Davies as Manson; the actor was born two months almost to the day after the murder of Sharon Tate. And in California.Although a film of this nature will inevitably attract some criticism, no one can in all sincerity accuse this of being either squalid sensationalism or the glamorisation of evil. It is important that films of this nature are made if only to remind us that there are monsters out there, and that all too often they look like us.

After seeing the 1976 version of HELTER SKELTER directed by Tom Gries, which focuses more on the investigation and trial of the Manson "family" than on the crimes themselves, I thought "It would be interesting if someone made a film which focuses on the 'family' rather than the prosecutor and actually dramatizes out the murders." That's exactly what John Gray did here. HELTER SKELTER (2004) provides an in-depth look at the Manson "family," using Linda Kasabian as a frequent focal point. It also gives some illustration of the wacko theories that Manson and certain of his followers developed in order to justify the Hinman, Tate, LaBianca, and other murders, shows the crimes themselves in front-story (rather than the brief flashbacks the '76 film showed), along with giving a new perspective on the trials and aftermaths.I've noticed some complaints that certain details of the crimes, as well as Manson's whole "Helter Skelter" theory, were misrepresented or missed altogether. As one of many long-time obsessives with the Manson murders, I can only say that the creators of this film really strove to be as accurate as possible, right up to details such as a bloody towel inadvertently landing on Jay Sebring's face and being interpreted as a symbolic "hood." It would be well-nigh impossible to capture every detail (some of which are not terribly important for our purposes today) of the murders or to explain/reveal all the justifications (which are themselves subject to disagreement) that the "family" used for committing these horrible acts. This being a drama rather than a documentary, too much analysis of Manson's motives would become quite ponderous after a while.That being said, there ARE one or two rather vague, fluffy scenes. I also read a comment somewhere by former Manson associate Bobby Beausoleil, still incarcerated for the Hinman murder, who, after watching this film, stated something to the effect that, had Manson been anywhere near as obvious a megalomaniacal creep as the one shown in this film, none of his "family" would ever have had anything to do with him. A fair statement, but again, perfectly capturing Manson's personality and his interactions with his accomplices would be virtually impossible.All things considered, this was a very hard and complicated story to pack into 137 DVD minutes, and the creators did a commendable job of choosing what/what-not to show. The acting by virtually all the major players here is quite good, often outstanding. I also like the way that the police, Bugliosi, and the other prosecutors are not represented as the completely squeaky-clean paragons of virtue that they were in the '76 HELTER SKELTER. There will always be those who are dissatisfied with how certain actual people and events are portrayed, especially when it comes to people they actually knew (or were) and events in which they actually took part. Some oversimplication is inevitable. But I repeat, it would be hard to recreate the Helter Skelter murders with a higher degree of accuracy than this film does, and anyone with the remotest interest should find HELTER SKELTER (04) fascinating.

Good narrative movie that gives important information for those who are interested in the Manson's clan modus operandi and the infamous Sharon Tate murder. The problem is that this movie focuses too much on the informative field but forgets about the visuals.There aren't interesting moments for a movie that has a Horrot label. The movie is very toned down for such a brutal concept and plot. The main problem with this movie that I understand it's very low budget is that it lacks of quality production values.If you watch this once, you will quickly forget about it because it does not have much to offer. The information is accurate and very well displayed but as a movie, it fails on every aspect.