"MANSON" Banned in England and many other countries!
And now "scenes of the Manson Family" from the new movie
"Inside the MANSON Gang" has been banned from YouTube.

 

We really do understand the disappointment of those who live outside of the United States and perhaps "Stool Pigeon's" email expresses it best:

"Well, I’ve waited 8 years for the official DVD of this documentary, and now that it’s supposedly coming, I see that you won't ship outside USA? Congratulations. First you spend a couple of years complaining about piracy & bootlegs, and now you give 95% of the world a reason to continue obtaining bootlegs of "MANSON". (Yes, you do realize that USA is a mere 5% of the world, don't you?) Congratulations, again. Great strategy. Who came up with it, Squeaky?
Sincerely,
The Stool Pigeon"

BUT, we really do have some very serious problems with shipping to other countries. Besides the piracy problem, "MANSON" was banned in England and many other countries. Did the Queen mom ever lift the "BAN" in the UK? We don't know. Understandably, because civil unrest in the late 60's and early 70's was not confined to the land of the free, many countries with archaic forms of government were actually fearful of a young and more aware generation's new found strength. Try for a minute to imagine a Queen's worst nightmare. The world's most famous singing group at the time, straight from the poor section of town, was the Beatles, whose trademark song was all about "revolution". On top of that, the famous prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi had convinced most everyone that an ex-con, with unexplainable powers like Adolf Hitler and inspired by the Beatle's music had brainwashed America's youth into doing bloody massacres in the homes of Beverly Hills. Get it, Beatles, Manson, revolution, massacre, not to mention, Black Muslims, Nation of Islam, Battle of Armageddon, Black and White race war. The whole world was terrified, or should we say, the rulers of many governments were afraid of a "revolution" that would put them out of business. Remember, the ruling generation of that time had witnessed one man Adolf Hitler and his Army conquer country after country.

Then imagine "MANSON" being unleashed again upon a world that was just getting used to the idea of "the most dangerous man alive" being put behind bars. Remember also, "Little Paul" testified that MANSON's music was supposed to re-program the young. It didn't matter that Mr. Evil was locked up, because his music was out there and ready to be played in movie theaters all over the world. Of course, any ruler with an ounce of brains would simply "ban" such a dangerous motion picture. AND many countries did just that. As a consequence, "MANSON" was only licensed to a handful of countries and we have no idea which countries, if any, have ever lifted their "banish orders." So now what? Should we test the power of a Queen over a $40 DVD? Should Hendrickson get on his knees before the Pope? Should he go before the United Nations and ask for hands from those who no longer feel intimidated by America's most notorious living gangster?

The 1973 "MANSON" was banned in America!

"MANSON" was also the first motion picture in American history to be banned in favor of setting aside Robert Hendrickson's constitutional right to free speech so that "Squeaky" Fromme could get a "fair" trial. Realizing that if the Federal government of the United States could so easily "restrain" free speech, any constitutional right of the people could be abridged, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) took the matter all the way to the US Supreme Court. The ACLU presented the argument that even if Robert Hendrickson's right to express himself could be legally restrained; the people's right to enjoy his speech could not. Because in the 1970's it cost nearly $500,000 in legal fees to do what the ACLU attempted, Hendrickson had to shut down all distribution of "MANSON" until "Squeaky's" so-called fair trial was over.

Scenes from "Inside the MANSON Gang" banned on YouTube !

On top of all this, on February 6, 2008, YouTube "banned" our 4 minute video for having content deemed objectionable. This, in and of itself raises one issue, but more importantly it begs the question: What exactly is considered objectionable and by who's standards? Obviously, some folks would find the very idea of a movie about the MANSON Gang obscene. So now, what do we do about the frontal nudity depicted occasionally in the film? We could probably file some sort of Declaratory Relief lawsuit, but the outcome would take years and hundreds of thousands of dollars. Or we could just superimpose those stupid looking fuzzy spots over the exposed genitalia, but isn't authentic documentary film footage supposed to be real and unaltered? (You can see some of the so-called objectionable material posted at "Scenes - Inside the Manson Gang" Movie Preview) on this site and decide for yourself. As you can see, the Manson Family felt no shame in exposing their naked bodies in front of the cameras and isn't this fact very important in the telling of a truthful documentary. Because we do not want to censor anything, we may require a signed release with your DVD order.

So try and understand our dilemma here. "Inside the MANSON Gang" hasn't even been released and already controversial issues are coming out of nowhere. In order to get some buzz going, all we wanted to do was get some promotional DVDs out. Normally, DVDs would only be sent to prospective distributors and now we realize that offering them to the public also is proving to be somewhat of a problem. We do also realize that by their very nature, the MANSON film materials are going to cause controversy no matter what methods of exploitation are used in making them available. Robert Hendrickson intentionally created the new "Inside the MANSON Gang" with no alterations and not even any visual effects, in order to provide the viewer with a true accounting of his actual experience in filming the Manson Gang. Fortunately, YouTube has just reminded us that showing bloody bodies, even with the word "war" carved in the chest of a dead man is OK, but don't even think about showing a living man's penis.

We should have a DVD order form posted near the end of the month.

One man's opinion

"The Col is just back from the World Premiere of Robert Hendrickson's new film, THE MANSON MOVIE. I went because I had to... I am the Col and I know more about TLM than anyone. You'd want to hear my report first. Well the film ended less than an hour ago. How is it?

IT IS FANTASTIC !!!

And I really mean FANTASTIC. I didn't know what to expect. I mean, Hendrickson has been talking about making this film since 1999 on his site. He spent like three years pursuing eBay and Amazon because somebody bootlegged his first Manson film…

I guess I expected overlap with the old film. There is VERY little of that. Minimal.

I guess I expected Evil Charlie bullshit, while he makes a comment to two in the first few minutes of the film leading me to think that he was heading there, he ultimately does not.

I guess I expected more sound bites (as he called the first film in the Q&A afterwards). But instead you get a plot. A very unique and clever plot. I'd re-title the film MANSON ‑ A Filmmaker's Journey. Kind of like Hearts of Darkness was the documentary about making Apocalypse Now. Except one was fiction and one was a doc. And in this case MANSON I and MANSON II are both docs. But plot wise, this was Hendrickson's story... his journey from drafted soldier in Vietnam to chronicler of the Manson Family...

This is a powerful work. I was hoping it was just watchable. I'm ready to watch it again right now because it is fucking riveting. Congratulations Mr. Hendrickson. The film rocked.

posted by ColScott on his website September 28, 2007

| BACK |

© 2008 TOBANN INTERNATIONAL PICTURES