Save this article to read it later.
Find this story in your accountsSaved for Latersection.
Directed by Mary Harron from a script by Guinevere Turner, the film is framed as a womens-liberation story.
(Californias death penalty was rewritten and reinstated but not for those whod been sentenced prior to 1972.
Manson would allow no books other than the Bible.
Faith begins by having them readOur Bodies, Ourselves.
A bit heavy-handed, that, but true to the early 70s and very much on point.
The Rebecca Solnitinspired coinagemansplaininghas lost some of its seriousness with overuse, butCharlie Saysdepicts its corrosive effects over time.
Manson moves into the womens heads and rearranges the furniture.
Hes a reductio ad absurdum as well as a worst-case scenario.
Does Manson believe his shtick, or is it just that shtick?
Smiths performance successfully blurs the line.
Its a shtick that hardens into an ethos and then a design for living.
If we didnt know where all this was going, we might enjoy the Manson girls exuberance.
At times they recall Pamela Des Barress groupie collective the GTOs (Girls Together Outrageously).
(Kayli Carters Squeaky Fromme is especially radiant.)
But the prison scenes are muddier, harder to read.
She has a satirists eye.
(Wevers performance is characteristically rich and nuanced.)
The problem is that the movies view of its protagonist, Van Houten, is so wobbly.
Thats not the actresss fault.
(The film strongly suggests that all the stabs were postmortem, which was likely not the case.)
The person weve watched didnt seem to give herself to Manson that completely.
you’re free to understand why shed be reluctant to talk, even to filmmakers so obviously empathetic.
But its too bad Harron and Turner didnt have more access to Van Houtens thoughts.
