(2004) **1/2
[Sigh] I really couldn't point to anything wrong with 2004's Helter Skelter. It's technically well done. The cinematography is good. The script is fine. Jeremy Davies nails his Manson impersonation and the rest of the Manson cast leap with verve into their own performances. It's better paced than its 1976 predecessor and, blessedly, is an hour shorter. It's got modern effects, modern sounds and the whole thing adds up to a polished contemporary spin on a horrific moment in modern history.
Problem is, all that polish simply made it that much easier for me to notice how much I fucking hate these people. I finished HS'76 and was haunted by the Manson family's brazen detachment; I finished HS'04 and felt only annoyed at the Manson family's stunning self-absorption. Deputy District Attorney Vincent Bugliosi summed it up best when he stared Manson straight in the eye and asked, "Where do you get the crazy idea that people don't want to live?"
The mantra for the Manson family is pretty standard acid-trip stuff: death is an illusion; no such thing as good/evil; nothing is wrong/right. Acid users everywhere dwell on these topics before noticing the carpet, "Whoa! It's moving!" Unfortunately for Sharon Tate, the Mansons didn't notice the carpet. They kept chasing that train of thought until it brought them to the conclusion that murdering people was a good thing. They clung to that conclusion so fervently, it was as though nobody in the history of mankind had ever come to a conclusion before.
Death is intimate, they sang; killing someone is the most loving thing you can do for them. This is the same logic followed by the Martians in Mars Attacks, who exclaimed "We come in peace," while zapping everything in sight with their laser beams. I picked this example carefully as I know how much most of you hate the movie Mars Attacks. Now I kind of know how you feel.
As for its Horrorthon merits, the Tate and LaBianca murder scenes are pretty graphic -- again, more polished and realistic than their predecessors. The source material is, obviously, the same as for HS'76, and you'd think that the juiced up modern effects would make the whole portrayal more disturbing. Problem is, these scenes are presented as recollections during courtroom testimonial; so by the time we get there, we've had to watch Manson swagger around spouting inane shit like, "Come to now, where suddenly no sense, makes sense," for over an hour. It's less horrifying by that point, more frustrating.
The two movies present an interesting Horrorthon comparison: are visuals more important than performances when it comes to portraying horror? I submit that both are necessary and that the best horror movies have satisfying amounts of both. In this case, having to sacrifice one or the other, I'm more compelled by horror through performance. Maybe I've just seen too much.
Problem is, all that polish simply made it that much easier for me to notice how much I fucking hate these people. I finished HS'76 and was haunted by the Manson family's brazen detachment; I finished HS'04 and felt only annoyed at the Manson family's stunning self-absorption. Deputy District Attorney Vincent Bugliosi summed it up best when he stared Manson straight in the eye and asked, "Where do you get the crazy idea that people don't want to live?"
The mantra for the Manson family is pretty standard acid-trip stuff: death is an illusion; no such thing as good/evil; nothing is wrong/right. Acid users everywhere dwell on these topics before noticing the carpet, "Whoa! It's moving!" Unfortunately for Sharon Tate, the Mansons didn't notice the carpet. They kept chasing that train of thought until it brought them to the conclusion that murdering people was a good thing. They clung to that conclusion so fervently, it was as though nobody in the history of mankind had ever come to a conclusion before.
Death is intimate, they sang; killing someone is the most loving thing you can do for them. This is the same logic followed by the Martians in Mars Attacks, who exclaimed "We come in peace," while zapping everything in sight with their laser beams. I picked this example carefully as I know how much most of you hate the movie Mars Attacks. Now I kind of know how you feel.
As for its Horrorthon merits, the Tate and LaBianca murder scenes are pretty graphic -- again, more polished and realistic than their predecessors. The source material is, obviously, the same as for HS'76, and you'd think that the juiced up modern effects would make the whole portrayal more disturbing. Problem is, these scenes are presented as recollections during courtroom testimonial; so by the time we get there, we've had to watch Manson swagger around spouting inane shit like, "Come to now, where suddenly no sense, makes sense," for over an hour. It's less horrifying by that point, more frustrating.
The two movies present an interesting Horrorthon comparison: are visuals more important than performances when it comes to portraying horror? I submit that both are necessary and that the best horror movies have satisfying amounts of both. In this case, having to sacrifice one or the other, I'm more compelled by horror through performance. Maybe I've just seen too much.
2 comments:
Excellent review i'mnotmarc. Much food for thought.
Yes, good one! Nicely parsed out.
Having watched some interview footage of the real Manson, I think the a big part of it is that it's actually quite difficult listening to the rantings of genuinely crazy people. In the footage I saw, Manson would make some point and you'd think "well, he kind of has a point there" and then one second later he'd be talking about piles of corpses or something and you'd be waving your hands in your face like you were being menaced by a bat.
My friend Hans's parents were activists in the 60's and met Jim Jones briefly at some demonstration. They said they could tell immediately that he was nuts.
Of course, if you're broken in the right way, crazy can be appealing. But I think the best insight in this review (of many good ones) is about the self-absorbtion. Damn hippies.
Post a Comment