After watching the recent version of the Manson murders "Helter Skelter" (2004) I looked up the 1976 TV movie to have a look at. This version is pretty much a straightforward adaptation of the bestselling book with author and prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi (here played by George DiCenzo) narrating events throughout.
The film covers the investigation of the infamous Tate-LaBianca murders and the trial of Charles Manson, hippie-cult leader, and members of his 'Family' for the killings. Although aliases are used for some of the characters, things are pretty easy to follow and nearly phase of the investigation and trial are covered within a full three hours.
The staging of it is accurate, with good reproductions of the murder scenes, grand jury indictments and the courtroom. The murders themselves are still dramatised but they are not shown in full with mere flashes of the tragedy mingled in with witness testimony. Despite this, the story is not nearly exploited enough for full dramatic impact.
Although Steve Railsback does a credible job as Manson and is actually quite frightening in some moments (especially when he threatens the doomed Shorty Shea), the film does not allow enough scope for him to really develop the character. Also the film does not mention the Vietnam War, one of the reasons for the hippie-cult movement from where Manson picked his followers. The portrayal of Irving Kanarek, Manson's defense attorney (here named Everett Scoville), effectively reproduces the man's destructive attacks on the prosecution witnesses, yet more could have been derived from the buffoonery of his obstructionist tactics.
Astonishingly, the portrayal of Vincent Bugliosi is alarmingly dull. Now George DiCenzo is a good fit for the part and he is clear and precise throughout, but he completely misses the sheer passion of the man for his work or the way he does not suffer fools gladly (these traits are evident in all his books and in TV interviews). As a result the film does not have a charismatic hero, and the strange relationship between him and Charles Manson (where Bugliosi comes to understand his quarry, as Manson forms a grudging respect for Bugliosi) is not fully exploited or even explored until virtually the end of the film.
A very good effort, and no doubt chilling at the time, but it just wasn't dramatic enough for my liking.
The film covers the investigation of the infamous Tate-LaBianca murders and the trial of Charles Manson, hippie-cult leader, and members of his 'Family' for the killings. Although aliases are used for some of the characters, things are pretty easy to follow and nearly phase of the investigation and trial are covered within a full three hours.
The staging of it is accurate, with good reproductions of the murder scenes, grand jury indictments and the courtroom. The murders themselves are still dramatised but they are not shown in full with mere flashes of the tragedy mingled in with witness testimony. Despite this, the story is not nearly exploited enough for full dramatic impact.
Although Steve Railsback does a credible job as Manson and is actually quite frightening in some moments (especially when he threatens the doomed Shorty Shea), the film does not allow enough scope for him to really develop the character. Also the film does not mention the Vietnam War, one of the reasons for the hippie-cult movement from where Manson picked his followers. The portrayal of Irving Kanarek, Manson's defense attorney (here named Everett Scoville), effectively reproduces the man's destructive attacks on the prosecution witnesses, yet more could have been derived from the buffoonery of his obstructionist tactics.
Astonishingly, the portrayal of Vincent Bugliosi is alarmingly dull. Now George DiCenzo is a good fit for the part and he is clear and precise throughout, but he completely misses the sheer passion of the man for his work or the way he does not suffer fools gladly (these traits are evident in all his books and in TV interviews). As a result the film does not have a charismatic hero, and the strange relationship between him and Charles Manson (where Bugliosi comes to understand his quarry, as Manson forms a grudging respect for Bugliosi) is not fully exploited or even explored until virtually the end of the film.
A very good effort, and no doubt chilling at the time, but it just wasn't dramatic enough for my liking.