"Is that how you describe your Job?"

"What carrying his load? Yeah sounds about right"

aTmAg said:

---

Was that smiling hippie dude supposed to be Charles Manson? I hope not.

---

Yes, it was.

It's actor Damon Herriman (Dewey Crowe from Justified).

Funny thing is, he recently portrayed Manson for David Fincher's "Mindhunters" series, so I think he has the character down.

aTmAg said:

---

Was that smiling hippie dude supposed to be Charles Manson? I hope not.

---

That's pretty clearly him. Why?

He comes off as a "swell guy" in that half second clip. I'm uncomfortable with any movie about those guys since such things might inspire new whackjobs to try outdo it to gain notoriety for themselves.

I doubt things are going to end well for him in this movie.

Fantastic trailer. It made me excited to see the movie and I still have no idea what it is about.

That dude playing Bruce Le seemed like he was doing an impersonation of Jason Lee playing Bruce Lee in Dragon: The Bruce Lee Story.

Awesome. Can't wait for this one!

This looks fantastic as expected. Still really unclear on how the Manson family connects with brad Pitt and DiCaprio characters, but I can't wait to find out.

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

I doubt things are going to end well for him in this movie.

---

A lot of these whackjobs end their killing sprees by shooting themselves in the head. They don't particularly car about how well things end for them. But they do care about their infamy and "legacy". The notion that they someday may be portrayed in a movie might give them all the motivation they need.

aTmAg said:

---

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

I doubt things are going to end well for him in this movie.

---

A lot of these whackjobs end their killing sprees by shooting themselves in the head. They don't particularly car about how well things end for them. But they do care about their infamy and "legacy". The notion that they someday may be portrayed in a movie might give them all the motivation they need.

---

That's giving a huge amount of influence and power to hypotheticals concerning whack jobs. I don't like altering media based on what whack jobs may or may not do.

Great trailer! Extremely excited to see it.

Bones08 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

I doubt things are going to end well for him in this movie.

---

A lot of these whackjobs end their killing sprees by shooting themselves in the head. They don't particularly car about how well things end for them. But they do care about their infamy and "legacy". The notion that they someday may be portrayed in a movie might give them all the motivation they need.

---

That's giving a huge amount of influence and power to hypotheticals concerning whack jobs. I don't like altering media based on what whack jobs may or may not do.

Great trailer! Extremely excited to see it.

---

I'm not alone. The media changed their coverage of teen suicides for the same reason:

https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/12/the-media-needs-to-stop-inspiring-copycat-murders-heres-how/266439/

PatAg said:

---

Yeah you might be overreacting buy an insanely large amount given all you saw was a half-second in a teaser trailer. And it was just of a guy smiling slightly

---

Manson never smiled...slightly....or looked halfway normal

PatAg said:

---

Yeah you might be overreacting buy an insanely large amount given all you saw was a half-second in a teaser trailer. And it was just of a guy smiling slightly

---

It's not just that he's smiling, but that he's featured at all. Would he be in this movie at all if they didn't murder those people in such a gruesome way? Of course not. So let it be known, that if you want to be in a movie in 50 years, cut the baby out of some smoking hot woman.

I assume somebody will ask, "what about Hitler? He's in a lot of movies!" Well it's safe to say guys like him didn't do what they did to get into movies. Where guys like Manson, the Columbine shooters, etc. would be nobodies if it wasn't for their gruesome crimes. So why give them the one thing they want most?

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

Why do you constantly want to have the same debate?

---

Last time I brought this up, TCTTS alleviated my concerns by saying this:

Quote:

---

Just FYI, Manson either has an extremely minor role or isn't in at all. It's mainly focused on DiCaprio and Pitt's characters and the Manson murders are something that's happening kind of as a backdrop. The whole Manson angle was way overblown in initial reports and the filmmakers have since made it a point to say he's not really the focus at all. For instance, Tarantino didn't mention Manson once during his entire CinemaCon presentation yesterday. Instead, as he hinted yesterday, "the movie is going to live on the precipice of a vastly changing film industry, the hippie movement and other bookmarks of the era." I think Manson is simply one of those "other bookmarks."

---

And so I dropped it. But, this trailer implies to me that Manson is a bigger part of the story than that. So now I'm annoyed again.

You mean you wanted attention again.

As for the trailer itself, I expected nothing less, but man, this looks fantastic.

Zombie Jon Snow said:

---

people make movies about historical figures....even bad ones.....go figure.

---

So you wouldn't criticize a movie that glorifies teen suicide? Even if it causes a spike in suicide?

TCTTS said:

---

---

I know you have me blocked, but if they did that I'd be on board.

Sex Panther said:

---

Jesus Christ... can everyone agree to ignore aTm so we don't go off on another insane tangent?

---

Can you guys take a dissenting opinion like an adult? Can threads only contain glowing praise for whatever movie they are discussing? Is that how this board works?

I said my piece and that's that. No reason blow a gasket over it.

I think peeps just don't understand the consternation over a film that involves Charles Manson. There have been tons of movies and tv that covered atrocious, evil, acts, and those that committed them. Ted Bundy, Son of Sam, Jack the Ripper, Pablo Escobar, El Chapo, Zodiak, Jeffrey Dahmer, just to name a few.

As long as Manson is not portrayed in some sympathetic light, don't see what the concern would be?

Urban Ag said:

---

I think peeps just don't understand the consternation over a film that involves Charles Manson. There have been tons of movies and tv that covered atrocious, evil, acts, and those that committed them. Ted Bundy, Son of Sam, Jack the Ripper, Pablo Escobar, El Chapo, Zodiak, Jeffrey Dahmer, just to name a few.

As long as Manson is not portrayed in some sympathetic light, don't see what the concern would be?

---

So to me, there is a pretty big difference between Narcos showing Pablo Escobar killing thousands of people, and a movie about the Columbine shooters killing 13. The reason is that it seems to me that the people who would go out of their way to watch a Columbine movie have a higher likelihood to want to emulate those guys. That is not the case for a movie about Ted Bundy, Son of Sam, etc. Those guys have seemingly random motivations that have nothing to do with being in a future movie. (The Son of Sam was apparently inspired by his neighbors dog for some reason). Don't get me wrong. I would object less to a Manson movie than I would a Columbine movie. But Manson was about making a statement. That's why i consider him different than Son of Sam.

And BTW, I am not arguing that movies about any of this should be illegal. I'm just critical that somebody would make these sorts of movie. (I criticized 13 Reasons Why for similar reasons)