Navigation

The Helter Skelter Murders (1970) ?

Dir: Frank Howard

This mainly black and white film (shot and edited by director Howard) opens with 3 women and a man (who is obviously meant to be Manson's right-hand man, Tex Watson) sharing out pills and picking out weapons.
Another man, standing in the shadows, throws down a piece of paper with an address on it.
The man is Charles Manson, and he has just sent his followers out to kill.
Gunshots cut us into the colour title as Thomas Sean Bonniwell's excellent psychedelic funk soundtrack plays over footage of a spider trapping its prey.

Manson himself is heard singing 'Mechanical Man' over the footage of the characters in their prison cells, which then flashbacks to the 'Spahns Ranch' where Manson's 'Cult' laze around and drop out. Supposedly this was shot on the actual ranch as well.
Flash forward to the Courtroom where evidence is heard, resulting in more flashbacks about events before, during and after the Beverly Hills murders that would shock generations to come...

The first person to give evidence is an ex member of Manson's 'Family' who is given some typical 'Hippie' prose to belt out ("Sure there was some grass in the beginning. There were some pretty freaked out folks there, man they flew. I mean like a real trip, they were stoned") as we cut to what looks like a mini version of "Woodstock" as much time is spent watching a band set up before playing to the gathered crowd of tripping 'Free Lover's'.
As the band play (some marvellous 'Hippie Rock' actually) we are treated to such sights as naked cliff climbing, naked yoga, grooving 'kids' and, as night falls, we have a bizarre reverse shot showing an American flag rising off the ground to cover the lady who obviously dropped it.

As the testimony continues we learn about how drugs and sex held sway in 'The Family' and how Manson controlled them all.
Which leads to another long sequence of drug snorting and tripping as the kids dance on dirty mattress in a fallen down outbuilding as Charlie looks on, before some topless sex tries to enliven things.

An Actress is on the stand now, giving evidence about the victims. We flashback to the dead Sharon Tate (Debbie Duff), though not named in the film it's obvious who it's meant to be, who has arrived in town looking for some acting work.
The film then shifts into colour to show a supposed scene from one of her films which as simply a costume drama with no dialogue, cheesy romantic looks and ballroom dancing.

The brief courtroom scenes and a few Manson voiceovers aside the film has almost no dialogue, creating a weird feeling but sapping the film of any actual connection to the viewer.
And Manson himself is simply a brooding character in the background, never actually doing anything.
Tex Watson would later say that the ranting Manson was a latter incarnation, and that before this the man was indeed a strong and above all rational (as far as he could ever be) presence. So again, perhaps the fact that this was filmed so early on in the proceedings has dictated this view of the man. And perhaps, although far from interesting cinematically, it's a more accurate representation of Manson before the trial brought the man's true mania out into the open.

We then have a bizarre sequence showing two Black men with guns robbing an empty store (despite blasting way at a woman, and missing, no one arrives), then bashing an old lady and robbing her house, (including taking the furniture and her pet bird!) before torching the place. All with no dialogue again.

Finally we go back to the opening scene and follow the members on their murder spree, which starts off as nothing but seemingly endless slow, silent walking around in the dark sequences or driving along roads as Manson's self indulgent, pretentious waffle drones over the soundtrack, "Satan is God and God is Satan", "Leave The Family and you will cease to exist…You are death", "Don't just do it for me…Do it for yourself".
And as the members chant. "Kill ever white mother, kill every white pig" the killers finally enter the Tate house.

And sadly it is only in the brutal sequences to come that the film actually comes alive for the first time.
They hold the occupants at gunpoint, tie the two women up (including the now pregnant Tate) and shoot one of the men.
As the mania grows the others are then killed one by one.
Filmed again with almost no dialogue and an effective, minimalist music score, what follows is exceedingly violent and sadistic.
One of the male deaths is especially drawn out and agonising. The man is nastily knifed before being shot and beaten to death (after a hard fought and very violent struggle) and only the black blood saves this death from being a true punch in the guts.
But it at least shows (whatever the motives may be) how nasty the killings were. Nothing here is glamourised or made to seem 'easy'. These were brutal, calculated slayings and the movie does indeed show that.

But was this done for moral reasons to show how cruel and brutal the murders were, or purely for exploitation?
I have to say I think that it's both. Yes, it's exploitative, but at the same time Howard never, ever makes light of the deaths. There is no cheap blasting music, or bared breasts, all the deaths are explicit, but somehow never gloated over.
Tate's death is powerful because she is tied up and helpless and pleads to keep her baby (as in reality) more than what is shown, but again it's cold and casual, and never exploited for cheap thrills.
This attitude to the killing is best shown in the savage death of the other woman, as she attempts to flee outside, which cuts to silhouetted branches swaying in the wind edited into her brutal beating and knifing. There is almost a requiem feel to the proceedings. It's superbly crafted and genuinely unsettling.

But having this re-enacted so soon after the real thing, with the trial still on, does smack of exploitation bandwagon jumping. The victims were barely cold in their graves
Such an explicit re-creation, so close to the real life events, is a classic example of Exploitation filmmaking. Right or wrong.
But in the end it is a tear from Tate's corpse, rolling down her blood spattered cheek, that really says it all.
A few pointless scenes later the film ends…with no conclusions because the trial was still going on.*
And indeed facts and rebuttals would still be creeping out for years to come, so there is no chance of anything conclusive here.

So we have a mainly a dull and less than engaging film, cranked out at shockingly fast speed, with no insight into the killers or their victims.
But it has a great soundtrack, an almost surrealistically minimalist way of telling the story and a surprisingly mournful feel to the actual Tate murders in it's brutal and superbly well crafted and disturbing finale.

 

*note* Later re-issues may have included a screen of text stating the trial outcome.