Charles Manson Superstar (Video 1989) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
10 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
7/10
Slight flaws and eyebrow-raising moral standpoint aside, an informative Manson documentary
RomanJamesHoffman21 September 2012
Over the last few decades, all but the faintest trace remains of the potently symbolic light in which Charles Manson, his Family, and the murders that brought him notoriety were originally seen. While now sanitised by parody, media-overexposure, and age, it takes some feat to imagine the supernaturally charismatic anti-messiah and serious-threat-to-the-foundations-of-society he was once portrayed as. Yet it is this image which 'Charles Manson Superstar' evokes and explores in a way which begins by mixing erudite objectivity and reasoned (but slightly unnerving-in-its-implications) apologism with the kind of all out glorification writer/director Nikolas Schreck has made no bones about in the past. Indeed, one time associate of the Church of Satan and founder of spin-off, eugenics-endorsing, organisation the Order of the Werewolf, Schreck and partner Zeena (daughter of Anton) LaVey were the driving force behind the 8/8/88 Satanic rally, held on the anniversary of the Tate murders to commemorate the "cleansing" they represented. What's more, during the rally, a movie ('The Other Side of Madness') was shown which depicts the murders in grisly detail and drew cheers from the crowd when the slaying began.

Morally dubious this may well all be, but 'Charles Manson Superstar' is nonetheless a highly rewarding documentary. This is due to the fact that the all-out Manson sympathy agenda only emerges on a few occasions and yet somehow the fearlessness needed to admit this perspective (so readily dismissed as misguided or otherwise condemned as degenerate) has a curiously liberating effect on the remaining parts of the documentary which objectively contextualise the man and the crimes as well as broach the difficulty/futility of attempting to penetrate the body of sensationalist media myths and social paranoia that plagues discussion of the topic. Furthermore, the line separating glorification/objectivity is blurred by the extended interview footage with Manson himself which between some silly karate moves, word-salad, and uber-60s style opining on "the music…you dig?" permits him space to elaborate on the role of the Gnostic God Abraxas, the ecological movement (ATWA) which he founded, and offer penetrating criticisms of the incestuous relationship between the media and society and the parasitic relationship both have to crime and criminals. All of which really does offer glimpses of an attractive anti-establishment philosophy synthesised by a keen mind which could easily offer solace to society's disaffected and certainly shows Manson as far more intelligent than the one-dimensional malevolent-hippie-lunatic he is uniformly presented as.

Having read several reviews over several sites, much seems to have been made of the supposed "numerous" factual inaccuracies which "litter" the film. However, most reviews I have read stop short of actually listing them. As far as I can gather, this is an exaggeration: a few inaccuracies there are, but these include the birthday of Ed Gein and the fact the documentary claims Lennon wrote the song 'Helter Skelter' when we all know it was McCartney. Hardly condemning stuff, and it seems that focusing on these kind of trivialities is designed to detract attention away from the more penetrating and thought provoking aspects of the documentary. However, having said this, there is one inaccuracy of note: the film advocates the apologist argument that Manson's incarceration is due to his anti-establishment ideas and that he was not responsible for the murders nor even present at the scenes of the crime. While there is an argument that Manson's continued incarceration is an unjust political move designed to avoid the uproar that would accompany it, the role of wholly innocent sacrificial lamb really doesn't suit him and it is generally acknowledged that while he never actually slayed anyone, he was present at the scene (albeit in a casing capacity) and it was the acid soaked apocalyptic milieu he crafted that was certainly a fundamental aspect of the atrocities.

This point duly noted, in my opinion the wealth of information and the wholly original perspective the documentary offers makes its limitations forgivable and even though the caveats are that Schreck's agenda should be known and it should be watched alongside other documentaries as a point of comparison, 'Charles Manson Superstar' is nonetheless a fascinating watch and has much to offer even the most knowledgeable followers of the pop-culture phenomenon that ended the Sixties.
9 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
uneven, peppered with irrelevancies, but worthwhile
Jenabel_Regina_del_Mundo9 October 2004
There are many films explicitly about Manson, and even more loosely inspired by him and the deeds attributed to him & 'The Family.' Most of them are worthless except as pure exploitation. This is the only one that provides more than a snippet of actual interview footage with the man himself. It is primarily for this reason that I strongly recommend it. If you have any curiosity, or interest in Manson, whether you despise or admire this legendary American outlaw, you'll want to see "Charles Manson, Superstar" to augment your perception of him. Be advised that the makers of this film are evidently Neo-Nazis, and their biased approach is about as subtle as a brick dropping on your head. Even if Manson was/is a Nazi, I think such indulgences as the interview with James Mason, American Neo-Nazi, detract from rather than add to the film. On the plus side, George Stimson was a consultant on this film, and he was a confidante to CM, and onetime webmaster of the "official" Manson website.

Of all the films about Manson, this one, however amateurish, patronizing and biased, is the most legitimate, if only in the sense that it allows Charles Manson to speak for himself.

Other films of note on the subject are "Manson" [1972] and "The Helter Skelter Murders" aka "The Other Side Of Madness" [1970].
24 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Here it is. The definative documentary.
zenobia-322 December 1999
I must say, this documentary/interview is the purest most uncensored look into the mind of Charles Manson I have ever seen on film. I you are one who is seeking knowledge on this subject, I would recommend "The Family" by Ed Sanders (the definative book on the subject) and this film, which charts it's way through a good part of the history, myth, and reality of Manson. Unfortunately, this video is a little hard to find. Check ebay or search whatever avenues you have to but check this one out.
12 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Good idea sunk by poor execution.
wadechurton11 December 2011
As one long fascinated by the Manson story, watching this documentary movie was a mostly disappointing exercise. The slightly somnambulistic narrative is based on some painfully dodgy research (for example, a woman who is most definitely not Manson's mother is shown, despite what the soundtrack implies), and an equally unfortunate tendency to get rather 'cosmic', in the sense of trying to create an air of malevolent apocalyptic convergence and doom. To this end we learn from the opening preamble that 'the time-grid we know as August 8th to 9th has always been a magnet for events of savage purification'. The narrator lists the bombing of Nagasaki and the inaugural meeting of the KKK, but suddenly runs out of legitimate examples and offers such desperate toe-curling makeweights as the birth dates of Ed Gein and Unity Mitford, and the 1985 LAPD announcement of their pursuit of the Night Stalker serial killer. Thus he proves that the time-grid we know as August 8th to 9th hasn't been a magnet for events of savage purification at all. On a positive note, it is good to see the actual geographical areas in which the original events took place. Thanks to the makers for driving around the LA hills with the camera out of the window. Anyway, we're here for more than just some ultra-cheapo graphics and a stoned-sounding narrator reading out a b minus high school essay, because a large percentage of 'Charles Manson Superstar' is taken up with exclusive prison interview footage with the man himself. Don't get too excited, though. Speaking entirely in vague generalities, Manson has only one thing to say and that is 'I'm an old man. I don't want to talk about my crimes and I don't need the world's attention on me, so I'm acting the crazy-man so that you'll just go away and leave me alone.' Over the decades many a journalist has taken the pilgrimage to go poke Manson and see if he bites, and all they get is the same 'crazy Charlie' show. Ask him something specific and at best he replies with a foggy metaphor. At worst he just starts into one of his elaborately pointless rants and ends up moving the viewer to tedium. True, there are moments when one can discern the sort of sinister persuasiveness, charisma and even the fatal personal charm which could conceivably convince a group of damaged and drug-messed followers to commit bloody murder, but he's on screen far too often blathering away unchecked and the forced familiarity soon breeds contempt and eventual disinterest. Which, one is tempted to believe, is exactly what Charles Manson desires.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Throw blood in their faces and they're like HUH!?!
gainsbarre1328 August 2005
Aside from the "Pro" Manson bent and factual errors this an excellent & intriguing documentary. The best parts (as I'm sure anyone who has seen this will agree) are the one on one interviews with Charlie himself. Sure he seems pretty nutty, but underneath some of the babble he babbles has a ring of truth to it (his thoughts regarding prison for example). At times the narration gets a little monotonous and boring and some facts are presented wrong. But still over all entertaining and it makes you think. If you're really into this s**t like I am, you should check out the 1973 documentary "Manson". The two together make an excellent double feature.
8 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Not What I Thought
texasaccountant20 November 2005
I watched this movie because I was expecting to get an inside look into the real Charles Manson. I wanted to see if I could figure out why he did the things that he did and why in the world anyone would follow him.

This documentary begins with a very creepy voiced narrator telling you that basically this is Charlie's turn to explain things. All the songs in the film are very satanic. The whole thing has a very dark feel about it.

Charlie spends a lot of time preaching or teaching as he would call it. He compares himself with Richard Nixon and discusses how "everyone has Lucifer inside of them". The man really seems a mix of possessed and crazy to me. I did not really gain any understanding of why he did things that he did. I just got further proof that this person is exceptionally disturbed, not gifted as he thinks and as the film tries to persuade you.

The film takes you to the famous Spaun ranch and shows pictures of then and now. Charlie tells stories of the ranch and explains how his "world" is still there. He goes on and on about how he does not live in our world, he is above and beyond us. Our world and the United States is the devil, an evil machine.

I have watched a lot of documentaries about killers and criminals, trying to figure out why someone would do the things that they do, how they must reason it in their mind. This is unlike anything I have ever seen. At times, it is very boring, at times unbelievable. I got a very creepy feeling while watching it and confess, I did not finish the whole film. I lost interest in listening to Charlie rant and rave, he is clearly insane.

All in all, you get a feeling of perhaps what his followers heard and saw from him. I bet that his story has not changed much. It didn't make sense then, and it does make sense now.
11 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
A moron revealed
BandSAboutMovies22 September 2020
Warning: Spoilers
Nikolas Schreck founded the musical magical recording and performance collective known as Radio Werewolf, which also included his former wife Zeena LaVey Schreck. He's also worked with NON, Death in June and Christopher Lee, with whom he conceived and produced the album Christopher Lee Sings Devils, Rogues & Other Villains.

Schreck also worked with the Church of Satan and was a member of the Temple of Set before renouncing Satanism in 2002. This film is part of his study of the philosophy, music and spiritual ideas of Charles Manson, including his ATWA ecology theory and Gnosticism. One of Schreck's main beliefs is that Manson was set up by the media.

For example, Schreck states that the murders of Sharon Tate and the others were the result of a deal gone bad between Charles Watson and Jay Sebring. If anything, Schreck's theories come from a researched place and not sensationalism, which is difficult to do when it comes to Manson.

This film features a 90-minute interview with Manson, edited down to what one can only surmise are the easiest to comprehend moments. The actual breakdown of his life and the influences on his mindset are much better, including the destruction of the claims in The Family that the Process Church had anything to do with Manson and the somewhat tenuous link between the Church of Satan and the subject of this movie.

That said, Manson comes off as, well, Manson. A dope who was able to win over impressionable teens and rock stars looking for some magic in the waning days of the hippies. The best part of it all is the Rising Forth ritual that LaVey used to hopefully bring about the end of the age of free love: "Beware you psychedelic vermin! Your smug pomposity will serve you no longer! We know your mark and recognize it well. We walk the nigh as the villain no longer! Our steeds await and their eyes and ablaze with the fires of Hell!"

For what it's worth, LaVey did speak on Manson: ""These people are not Satanists. They are deranged. But no matter how many they do, they'll never catch up with the Christians. We have centuries of psychopathic killing in the name of God."
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Get to the bottom and see him again
rufasff2 July 2002
This documentary is a dubiously sympathetic, though fascinating; look at perhaps the most famous killer of his generation. The film makers trace the personal history of Manson; challenging conventional takes along the way(and sometimes doing some very sloppy research, John Lennon DID NOT write the song "Helter Skelter") and letting the viewer judge for themselves.

They accomplish this, almost in spite of themselves, by including long slabs of interviews with Manson done in the late eighties. He rails against "PC MFS!(!), shows a truly passionate and poetic side; and reveals that his often sampled, seemingly meaningless ramblings are probably the result of mental illness due to long stretches of solitary confinement. How naturally evil and violent was this individual? The film lets you judge for yourself.

Watch it if you can find it. 9 out of 10.
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Interesting documentary from a pathetic filmmaker
iamsethh15 April 2004
The film itself is interesting to see because it's a great example of a documentary that gets across the exact opposite message of what the filmmaker intended (Triumph Of The Will is another). The basic film goes between two types of footage. One is made up of still photos and stock footage (sometimes "enhanced" by lame psychedelic effects) with narration. The narration, read in monotone, sounds about like what you might expect a pseudo-rebel middle school student to post in a Manson chat room - It's Manson's familiar history told with glowing admiration and peppered with phrases like "Manson only reflects the society that imprisoned him" and references to "the conditioned masses" that consider Manson to be the half witted turd that he is. The narration criticizes Manson's victims and his keepers, while praising Manson. The filmmaker, Nikolas Schreck, also managed to score a lengthy prison interview with Manson. The interview delves only slightly into what Manson is infamous for (the pointless, envious, brutal murders of his racist hate cult), and instead centers on Manson's "philosophy". Manson's philosophy, as anyone who has seen him interviewed knows, is basically that everyone is phony and screwed up except him. He really says nothing else in the interview, and whenever he reaches a point in his monologue where he might otherwise say something informative, he instead makes a contorted face and giggles or does some kind of karate dragon dance. He is un-chained and un-handcuffed in the interview and is free to walk around the room. Whenever the filmmaker asks a difficult question (though, not much more difficult then "say something to the camera that you have always wanted to tell people"), Manson masterfully intimidates him off the topic by standing and approaching him or touching him, at one point taking one of his hands and caressing it for several seconds. The entire thing is scored by bootleg recordings of Manson's tortuously bad music.
15 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Best CM documentary
littlelittlesteven8 June 2001
This documentary is without doubt,for me,the best on the subject. Lots of great information presented from a point of view different than the usual. Add to that a lengthy,revealing,exclusive interview with Manson himself and you've got an exceptional video.Very informative!
7 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed