IMDb RATING
4.3/10
2.1K
YOUR RATING
An unflinching chronicle of Charles Manson's life leading up to the orchestration of the Tate and LaBianca murders..An unflinching chronicle of Charles Manson's life leading up to the orchestration of the Tate and LaBianca murders..An unflinching chronicle of Charles Manson's life leading up to the orchestration of the Tate and LaBianca murders..
- Awards
- 5 wins & 3 nominations total
Max Wasa
- Rosemary LaBianca
- (as Maxine Wasa)
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
What most strikes me about this film is the awful non 60s soundtrack, the horrible soap opera like acting, and the misinterpretation of a culture and a generation. The main character Manson, sort of looks like the real Manson, I guess. It's like the casting director was walking down the street and saw someone who looked like him and said, "Hey you want to be in my Movie?"
Everything about this film is bad, costumes, acting, writing, directing, cinematography, and did I mention acting. It also doesn't respect the dead, remember this is based, I guess, on a true story. The director treats the material like it has been long since been made of legend, it hasn't. How someone could take an interesting event in American history and suck all the interest out is beyond me. You will learn nothing if you watch this, in fact you may forget important things.
I attended the Premier of this film at the Twin Cities Independent Film festival. The film kept my attention at least and there were some things that stood out such as Ryan Kiser's lead role as 'Charlie'. He is obviously a step up from the other actors in this movie and deserves a shot at a higher budget film. I also felt the chemistry of the entire cast was good and made for a believable 'cult family'. The actors playing the parts of Leslie Van Houton, Squeaky Fromme, and Tex Watson were believable and stood out above the other supporting cast. However, the acting for the role of Sharon Tate was unfortunately a disaster. The Susan Atkins actor had the right idea, but I felt she may have just been trying too hard to be crazy/quirky. That being said, I understand that with a higher budget and more time, many scenes could be redone with some extra attention from the director.
During the Q&A with the Director and Cast, it came to light that this movie was filmed in 15 days, covering a 128 page script. Wow ... that in and of itself was amazing! There were some admitted sound and scene transition issues that hopefully will get cleaned up. On that note ... I felt there was a severe over use of music/sound effects. Most every scene had continuous sound effects which was unnecessary. It was distracting at times and took away from the effect of the overall dialog. I assume it was intended to establish a mood, but some of that mood could have been created by the dialog itself. Every scene was shot up close and could have used some wider angles to gain a better experience of the entire landscape (lack of budget most certainly played a role here).
Some people know the Manson story much better than others. The assumption should be that the viewer of the film doesn't know a lot of the details. The characters of the 'family' could have been introduced better. Some of the scenes could have been set up in order to introduce characters instead or relying on the knowledge of the 'Manson' story.
The director said during Q&A that they wanted to show the humanity of Charles Manson and why he may have turned out the way he did (ala Michael Myers - Halloween (2007)). The idea was there, but more time should have been focused on the abuse and abandonment that developed his character. They mentioned that Charlie's mom sold him for a case of beer, so why not add that scene in? Showing Charlie watching his Mom kiss a man (from a crack in a door) does not show a pattern of inappropriate parenting, much less abuse. Dig into that and you might persuade me that he was a victim of poor upbringing at least.
All in all, this was a decent attempt, but I think it could be even more engaging with some additional time and budget. I enjoyed it for what it was. Good job for all who endured the compact 15 days of filming!
This is only my opinion as a movie goer, and I realize it is much more difficult to create an independent film based on what you have to work with. It intrigues me to understand all that goes into creating an entire film with so little budget. I am a fan of the entire scene and wish all involved all the success they deserve for all the hard work they have put into such a film.
During the Q&A with the Director and Cast, it came to light that this movie was filmed in 15 days, covering a 128 page script. Wow ... that in and of itself was amazing! There were some admitted sound and scene transition issues that hopefully will get cleaned up. On that note ... I felt there was a severe over use of music/sound effects. Most every scene had continuous sound effects which was unnecessary. It was distracting at times and took away from the effect of the overall dialog. I assume it was intended to establish a mood, but some of that mood could have been created by the dialog itself. Every scene was shot up close and could have used some wider angles to gain a better experience of the entire landscape (lack of budget most certainly played a role here).
Some people know the Manson story much better than others. The assumption should be that the viewer of the film doesn't know a lot of the details. The characters of the 'family' could have been introduced better. Some of the scenes could have been set up in order to introduce characters instead or relying on the knowledge of the 'Manson' story.
The director said during Q&A that they wanted to show the humanity of Charles Manson and why he may have turned out the way he did (ala Michael Myers - Halloween (2007)). The idea was there, but more time should have been focused on the abuse and abandonment that developed his character. They mentioned that Charlie's mom sold him for a case of beer, so why not add that scene in? Showing Charlie watching his Mom kiss a man (from a crack in a door) does not show a pattern of inappropriate parenting, much less abuse. Dig into that and you might persuade me that he was a victim of poor upbringing at least.
All in all, this was a decent attempt, but I think it could be even more engaging with some additional time and budget. I enjoyed it for what it was. Good job for all who endured the compact 15 days of filming!
This is only my opinion as a movie goer, and I realize it is much more difficult to create an independent film based on what you have to work with. It intrigues me to understand all that goes into creating an entire film with so little budget. I am a fan of the entire scene and wish all involved all the success they deserve for all the hard work they have put into such a film.
Having just read the book Helter Skelter The True Story (THE MANSON MURDERS) by Vincent Bugliosi,(The prosecutor) I looked forward to this film, but I may have enjoyed it more if I had no knowledge of the history of Charles Manson and his family. This film is shallow with bad acting. I felt I knew more than the film producers. It's really tacky, very roughly scripted, and by the end credits which I always read, finding them informative, this has to be the shortest credits of a film, ever!! Even the acting out of the victims was shot as if being filmed by a mobile phone camera! This film has no redeeming features at all.
There is much written about these people and the heinous crimes, it's a disservice to viewers not to tell it well, with good script, production and some good actors.
The recent release of Restless Souls might make a better subject, as I have yet to see a really decent film about Manson, perhaps if a film was made from the view of the victims...?
There is much written about these people and the heinous crimes, it's a disservice to viewers not to tell it well, with good script, production and some good actors.
The recent release of Restless Souls might make a better subject, as I have yet to see a really decent film about Manson, perhaps if a film was made from the view of the victims...?
"House of Manson" is a film that chronicles the life of Charles Manson and focuses in on the events leading up to and including the Sharon Tate murders of 1969. Unlike other Charles Manson biopics that focus in on the sex or the over the top nature of the Tate murder, this one focuses in Charles Manson's influence and connection with his followers, the Manson family as they call themselves.
Charles Manson is portrayed by Minnesota born actor, Ryan Kiser, who seemed to approach the character in a very serious tone and does a fantastic job conveying the crazy yet brilliant way Charles Manson was able to draw followers into his cult.
Devanny Pinn co-stars as one of Manson's followers Susan Atkins and gives a chilling performance as her screen presence is freaky. Pinn truly becomes Atkins on screen as the facial reactions make you think this women is completely off her rocker and has no moral compass at all. An overall amazing performance by Pinn.
"House of Manson" does suffer from some technical flaws as the sound isn't completely smoothed and could use some more attention by a sound mixer. The filmmakers even admitted in a Q&A following the world premiere that some of the sound transitions were going to need to be looked at. The film also has a saturated look that doesn't look completely intentional. The image doesn't pop off the screen as some movies do that have a more crisp and sharp look to it.
Overall, "House of Manson" is a great portrayal of the events surrounding the infamous Charles Manson. It doesn't get too crude or violent as previous films about the same subject matter, it takes the source material as it is and conveys the story in a very tasteful matter. With a great cast and direction by Brandon Slagle, "House of Manson" is definitely worth checking out when it later finds distribution.
Charles Manson is portrayed by Minnesota born actor, Ryan Kiser, who seemed to approach the character in a very serious tone and does a fantastic job conveying the crazy yet brilliant way Charles Manson was able to draw followers into his cult.
Devanny Pinn co-stars as one of Manson's followers Susan Atkins and gives a chilling performance as her screen presence is freaky. Pinn truly becomes Atkins on screen as the facial reactions make you think this women is completely off her rocker and has no moral compass at all. An overall amazing performance by Pinn.
"House of Manson" does suffer from some technical flaws as the sound isn't completely smoothed and could use some more attention by a sound mixer. The filmmakers even admitted in a Q&A following the world premiere that some of the sound transitions were going to need to be looked at. The film also has a saturated look that doesn't look completely intentional. The image doesn't pop off the screen as some movies do that have a more crisp and sharp look to it.
Overall, "House of Manson" is a great portrayal of the events surrounding the infamous Charles Manson. It doesn't get too crude or violent as previous films about the same subject matter, it takes the source material as it is and conveys the story in a very tasteful matter. With a great cast and direction by Brandon Slagle, "House of Manson" is definitely worth checking out when it later finds distribution.
There is very little that can be done in a new way with a Manson Family movie at this point. There has been made at least a dozen movies about that case since 1971, one of which came out while the trial was still going on.
The formula is always the same, and anyone who at least read through the Wikipedia page about the Tate/La Bianca case would know exactly what's about to happen: first Charlie is loving and philosophical, then he becomes gradually more crazy, building up to the point of Helter Skelter and, ultimately, the climax.
So it's at least refreshing to see a new sort of Manson, sort of timid and meek, just a misguided ex-con who created a situation that got out of control. It's a little provocative, probably appealing to the pro-Manson crowd, but nevertheless, it is something new.
Problem is, this performance by Ryan Kiser comes off as bleak and dispassionate, and the change in Manson's behavior does not make sense, the character doesn't change gradually - in fact, he almost doesn't change at all, he sleepwalks through the movie up till the end, and there is zero of real Manson's energy put into this performance. I never seen Charles Manson outside his prison interviews and rare footage available on the Internet, but I am sure that he was never this boring in real life. People have always described him as wild and energetic, and Ryan's Manson is anything but these.
In short, if you are interested in Manson Family, check out this movie, but don't expect anything radically new, the story has been told a dozen times, and there's little that can be added to it but speculations and interpretations.
The formula is always the same, and anyone who at least read through the Wikipedia page about the Tate/La Bianca case would know exactly what's about to happen: first Charlie is loving and philosophical, then he becomes gradually more crazy, building up to the point of Helter Skelter and, ultimately, the climax.
So it's at least refreshing to see a new sort of Manson, sort of timid and meek, just a misguided ex-con who created a situation that got out of control. It's a little provocative, probably appealing to the pro-Manson crowd, but nevertheless, it is something new.
Problem is, this performance by Ryan Kiser comes off as bleak and dispassionate, and the change in Manson's behavior does not make sense, the character doesn't change gradually - in fact, he almost doesn't change at all, he sleepwalks through the movie up till the end, and there is zero of real Manson's energy put into this performance. I never seen Charles Manson outside his prison interviews and rare footage available on the Internet, but I am sure that he was never this boring in real life. People have always described him as wild and energetic, and Ryan's Manson is anything but these.
In short, if you are interested in Manson Family, check out this movie, but don't expect anything radically new, the story has been told a dozen times, and there's little that can be added to it but speculations and interpretations.
Did you know
- TriviaWhile the film contains references to many different accounts of the true story, the version it most closely resembles is the original accounts from Charles "Tex" Watson.
- Alternate versionsA montage featuring Charles Manson's time in San Francisco before meeting Mary Brunner was shot but cut for pacing reasons.
- ConnectionsReferenced in The Manson Family: Making House of Manson (2016)
- SoundtracksOut Of Control
Written by Around Town
Produced by Mike Godfrey
Transcendental Records (c) 2014
- How long is House of Manson?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official site
- Language
- Also known as
- Hollywood and the Manson Murders
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
- Runtime
- 1h 38m(98 min)
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 2.40:1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content