Flyerplesys Perfectly adorable

SeeQuant Blending excellent reporting and strong storytelling, this is a disturbing film truly stranger than fiction

Siflutter It's easily one of the freshest, sharpest and most enjoyable films of this year.

Benas Mcloughlin Worth seeing just to witness how winsome it is.

Kascha K I'd thought that this was actually going to be a director's cut of the original movie - but then I saw that it was a new take and was very interested to see how they did.The guy who played Manson I think was a bit over the top and trying too hard to be eccentric. All the women in the movie pretty much were gorgeous, which was not the case with the original women. Clea Duvall was good, as were the ones playing Atkins and Krenwenkel. Kudos also to the woman playing Rosemary LaBianca, although the parts for the victims were of course not long enough or complicated enough for the actors/actresses to expand.Facts-wise it was very interesting because they pulled a great deal, especially with the dialogue, directly from quotes attributed to the real people in Bugliosi's book. But then just when I was about to commend them for being that meticulous, they pull out absurdity such as Sharon asking Atkins to cut out the baby, and other real embellishments. I think the real story is horrifying enough. There was no need to try and make things more "bankable" or to try to ratchet up the sadness by making stuff up.I wasn't looking directly at the screen when Bugliosi made his first appearance. You could NOT have told me he was not being played by Joe Pesci until I looked up to see. He sounds exactly like Pesci - it was hilarious in spite of the subject matter.The graphic scenes were well done. They kept on graying out the screen not unlike movies such as Sin City when things got especially graphic - at least partly for effect.Overall not a bad movie. It got most of it right, but left out a lot and embellished a lot. It was far more like a "TV movie" than the original was and overall I'd say if you saw the original you can absolutely skip this one. In fact I'll be watching the original again as soon as this is over - it's still on as I write this.

John Atkins (Charlieluvsyou77) The best in depth depiction of Charlie. Jeremy Davies did an excellent job although..... I don't have time to go into how much I know the facts and certain people of the "real" Charlie and the criticism of NOT REALLY being related to him, so therefor....I think he portrayed him just coming off a much too arrogant and cocky, I think he tried to put to much emphasis n being sly and slick, so forth. Overall though, as of yet. I see NO ONE toping his performance. This one unlike the 76 version, concentrates more on the "family" itself as of the 76 is almost an narration page by page account of the perception of the D.A. Vincent Bugliosi which in my opinion is a complete blueprint for Americas public enemy number one scapegoat. You can feel the pressure boiling as it gets to the climax of the film. As a horror fan my whole life I would say not to gory or lack of. Personally I believe this film was very underrated and ignored for unknown reasons. The cast was at the time very unknown and they really come off as they need to be. I think all of the profound characters put a lot into their roles then now they should not have (lol). All and all, I probably watch this at least 4 times a year all the way threw.

TheBlueHairedLawyer For anyone who doesn't know, Helter Skelter was a psychopathic idea that criminal Charles Manson had after listening to a Beatles song by the same title (which is really too bad because The Beatles had nothing to do with these horrible murders but were likely blamed once or twice). Charles Manson was the leader of a hippie group in 1969 and he influenced various murders and is now spending his life in jail.This remake of the 1976 movie Helter Skelter is very good if you want some more information on the Charles Manson case and his story. However, if you're watching it for the nostalgia of the Sixties, you won't find it. The soundtrack for the most part sounds obviously 21st century and the actors, especially the hippie girls, talk, act and dress like people in the 21st century do. Most of the actors and actresses look like they should be sitting there texting on their pathetic cellular devices, crouched on an electric recliner wrapped up in Snuggies and eating Pizza Pockets right out of the box. I'm not trying to get too technical or anything, but watch the Hair musical (1979), I Drink Your Blood (1970), Running With Scissors (2006) or the original Helter Skelter (1976) if you want to see what the Sixties and Seventies counterculture was really like.

wadechurton I should have seen it coming; there it was right on the front cover: 'based on the true story of the Manson murders'. Fair warning, in other words, that the truth is only one ingredient in the anemic 'once-over-lightly' fare that is 'Helter Skelter (Director's Cut)'. The Manson story is as (no pun intended) meaty a tale as one could want, with indictments aplenty in all directions. In the no-man's land between the intolerant strictures of 'straight' society and the wilds of the willfully unguarded 'alternative' society career criminal Charles Manson gathered his clan into a black bus and set off on a trip into the night-side of the 1960s counterculture which took in psychedelic mysticism, communal living, the Bible, the Beatles, the Beach Boys, Scientology, outlaw biker clubs, big-time drug dealing, intimidation, torture and multiple murders. It was like lifting up 'America' to see the scuttling bugs feasting on the decay beneath, and along with student riots, Altamont and urban guerrilla gangs the whole Manson affair pretty much annihilated the 'peace and love' 1960s. Despite featuring fair-to-good acting (especially an acceptably deranged yet seductive Manson in Jeremy Davis), this movie is a disaster. True, the movie claims to be based on prosecuting attorney Vincent Bugliosi's book, but in this case 'based on' apparently means you can just do whatever you like and sure enough, within a few minutes of beginning we've strayed into fantasy (Gary Hinman had his ear cut through, and not severed as in the movie). The Manson story has been a lifelong interest of mine, and whilst I could fill the page with the jaw-droppers and historical howlers which abound in this movie, consider just this one point which illustrates how wrong 'Helter Skelter' gets it. The entire treatment of Charles Manson's supposed lack musical ability amounts to a running gag throughout the screenplay. He is depicted as downright deluded and his formless efforts laughable. In real life Charles Manson was a remarkably talented singer-songwriter, albeit one with a slight lyrical fixation on prison and incarceration. Go to YouTube, click on 'Eyes of a Dreamer' or 'Cease to Exist' (the one the Beach Boys did) and you will hear melodically attractive compositions driven by a rhythmically strong acoustic guitar style and topped with a pleasantly blues-tinged voice favorably reminiscent of Jose Feliciano. Manson did indeed have talent, not that you'd know it from 'Helter Skelter'. They get it completely wrong there and in chopping great lumps out of the story (e.g. the Family's doomed 'alliance' with the biker gang, the weekend 'attraction' the Spahn ranch offered the young and hip L.A. set, and so very much more) to concentrate on turncoat Linda Kasabian's story, far too much expository dialogue is utilised to fill in the details. The talky and curiously gore-challenged screenplay gives 'Helter Skelter' a shallow 'TV movie' feel (which indeed it was). The real Manson story contains multitudes, and although filmed a number of times now, no-one has yet captured the disturbing, almost cosmic darkness which is its hallmark. 'Helter Skelter' just re-hashes fact and fiction alike and dumbs down what's left into a soap opera with murders. The story (still) remains untold.