MovieChat Forums > Once Upon a Time in... Hollywood (2019) Discussion > I thought I'd put this here: Roll Call o...

I thought I'd put this here: Roll Call of the Dead


These are the victims of Charles Manson and on whose graves Tarantino is stomping on with this travesty.

Sharon Tate - Stabbed 16 times, six of which were in and of themselves fatal. Was 8 1/2 months pregnant with a healthy baby boy named Paul Richard Polanski. Baby was unharmed as Tate curled her legs up to her abdomen to protect it from wounds. She also had many defensive wounds including three to four on her arms and legs. Was hung prior to murder. Received a rope burn on the side of her cheek.

Jay Sebring - Bludgeoned, shot once and stabbed at lest six times all of which including the gunshot were fatal.

Voytek Frykowski - Shot twice, clubbed over the head thirteen times with the butt of a revolver and stabbed 51 times.

Abigail Folger - Stabbed 28 times, many causing one or more of her internal organs to protrude from her body and at least 20 of those stab wounds were in and of themselves fatal.

Steven Parent - Stabbed twice, slashed with a knife, and shot four times. All gunshots were in an of themselves fatal.

Leno LaBianca - Stabbed multiple times, neck was slit with his own kitchen knife, abdomen pierced many times with a double tined fork totaling over at least a dozen wounds, that fork was found still protruding from his body when found next morning by step-son.

Rosemary LaBianca - Stabbed over 40 times in the back and buttocks, many including post mortem wounds.

Both LaBiancas were found with pillow cases over their heads and lamp chords tied around their necks.

Gary Hinman - Found with right ear cut almost to the bone, many stab wounds, shot many times.

The other victims suffered same amount of brutality.

These victims are not the only ones. There are others including family members of the victims. Included: Leno LaBianca's mother passed away shortly after Leno's murder because she could not cope with what had happened to her son.

Doris Tate and Patti Tate, Sharon's mother and littlest sister died of brain Cancer and breast Cancer respectively having to deal with the many parole hearings and their attempts to keep Sharon's killers behind bars.

Janet Parent, Steven's sister also dead of Cancer from the stress of dealing with parole hearings.

Angela Smaldino and Tony Smaldino, niece and nephew of Leno LaBianca. deal with varying degrees of depression due to the many parole hearings they must attend to keep the killers behind bars.

Alice LaBianca, Leno's ex-wife suffered from depression knowing what happened to Leno and dealing with their children in the aftermath.

And there are many other living victims who must deal with yearly parole hearings who wouldn't have to if not for the murder of their loved ones.

There you have it. All this suffering and Tarantino wants to make money and trade off of this tragedy. I hope he likes what he's doing in once again depicting Manson and his followers in a film. This will harm the families of the victims who still live. I hope it's worthy it Mr. Tarantino.

reply

LOL! A tad obsessive and angry, are you? More than half the people you reference aren't even in the film!

reply

Clearly you didn't comprehend why I posted this. The reason is simple: Negating the tragedy this was is Tarantino's version of rejiggering deck chairs on the Titanic. The point is too many have suffered for the actions begun by Manson and his ilk. The deaths of Doris Tate, Patti Tate, Mrs. LaBianca, et al were directly caused by the actions by MANSON. That Tarantino featured him in this film shows Manson has pop culture status. He's achieved what he always wanted and Tarantino has enabled that. Doesn't matter that "more than half the people" I referenced aren't in the film, by proxy they are. Sharon's mother who worked to keep her daughter's destroyers behind bars by lessening their rights behind bars isn't mentioned. The work Patti Tate did in forcing Geffen Records and Guns'n'Roses to be responsible and not put a song on The Spaghetti Incident to glorify Manson. Putting Manson's photo on t-shirts, etc. I'm not "a tad bit obsessive or angry" I've worked on behalf of these victims to keep their murderers in prison. I thought a bit of a leveler to see what was actually done to these victims and the ongoing victims needed to be said. Sad you skipped right over what I said about Tarantino wanting to make money off of this tragedy.

reply

ZZZZZZzzzzz...

reply

It’s a historical event that frames the film....Manson is definitely not “featured”.

The idea that any historical event that can cause someone pain is off limits to art is absurd.

reply

Relax man.

reply

Do you work on behalf of the victims and writing letters to the Board of Prison Terms and Pardons to keep these people in prison?

reply

No I do not.

reply

I do. Nuff said.

reply

I too agree that these people should remain in prison. Do you work on behalf of the victims for free?

reply

Yes I do what I do for free. It takes no time to write those emails to make sure these killers remain behind bars only to be taken out in a pine box. This case has affected me since 1976 and it's because of what it did to Doris Tate and Patti Tate particularly, I do what I continue to do. But this film trivializes these victims and what Doris and Patti did to keep these killers in prison. Having them "live" in the film will only make younger members of the Board of Prison Terms and Pardons feel less for the victims. There have already been three of these killers who have been deemed "suitable" for parole. Those are Bruce McGregor Davis who helped in the murder of Shorty Shea. Leslie Van Houten who took part in the murders of Leno and Rosemary LaBianca, stabbing Rosemary over 40 times in the back and buttocks. And lastly Patricia Krenwinkel. All three were given parole dates by younger members of these parole boards who seem to think "enough is enough". However, thanks to both Governor Jerry Brown, who remembered the chaos and fear these killers caused, vetoed the parole board's decision. Governor Gavin Newsome just recently vetoed Leslie Van Houten's parole.

My reason for posting the original post is to have a permanent record, of sorts, for what happened to these people. So no one forgets. People already think Leslie Van Houten has spent enough time in prison and should be released. They think she's a "kindly old lady who is of no threat to anyone". There are two tenants of the legal system. The first is to assign punishment for the crime committed. They all were initially sentenced to death. The other arm of the law is to make an example of the act done. So the next time someone commits the same type of heinous crime, just allow the perpetrator to percolate a bit in prison and wait till he/she are old and not a "harm" to anyone. Stephen Kay who was the co-prosecutor with Vincent Bugliosi has stated many times, none of these people should get out. Ever. However, when someone like Tarantino glorifies them by putting them in his film.... It denotes a certain status Doris Tate and Patti Tate gave their lives to shut down. And again I'll state Tarantino could have used a fictional cult. But he did it to capitalize on the 50th anniversary this month. There's nothing right about that.

reply

Ah, OK.

reply

Oooh, good one! Do Titanic next! Lots of people died and a they've made a couple movies out of it. Don't forget the Holocaust. Hella movies have been made about that one. Better do World War II, Vietnam, heck, all the wars. And 9/11, because I'm pretty sure that's been included in a bunch of recent movies.

Better yet, make a list of everyone who has ever died, just in case someone somewhere says something offensive about someone. Update it for us daily, please!

reply

The Titanic disaster is different in nature. James Cameron gave the proper respect to the dead by depicting their fight for life that night. Revisionisim does nothing in terms of the point these victims are dead. As Doris Tate said, "They won't magically rise from their graves" just because Tarantino put them in a film. And the depiction of Sharon was just so ridiculous. Having her voiceless and dancing all the time reduced her to that which history has defined her. So way to go Tarantino. Sharon is once again voiceless, and reduced to a bimbo. Nice work.

reply

No, it's the same thing. You just want it to be different to make your (non-existent) point. Cameron threw fictional characters into the Titanic disaster, and turned real people's tragic deaths into fodder for a tale of star-crossed lovers battling income inequality.

Now get to work on a post about the makers of the film Airplane. How many people have died in airplane crashes? How offensive to see their deaths mocked for cheap laughs!

reply

Forgot stuntman, Shorty Shea, killed by Manson and Scramblehead Clem and other members of the family.

reply

I just wish the story ended like it did in OUATIH. I don't think QT disrespected the victims at all. The fact that they survived and the Manson followers were killed, made me feel relieved. I did not want to see the real murders anyhow and the fact that the movie ended the way it did was a complete relief.

reply

It's not a "story". He did disrespect the victims in his even depicting them in this thing. They didn't survive. They were massacred. There is no relief for the relatives of the victims. Had Tarantino concocted a cult of his own and created fictional characters for this film I wouldn't have an issue. Not one. However, he chose to trivialize the actual event in order to capitalize on the 50th Anniversary this month. I give him no credit at all.

To use the above analogy of the Titanic disaster, the disaster was told through two fictional people in Rose and Jack. James Cameron did not have people survive who didn't survive and didn't trivialize the disaster by having the ship not sink or the people on board not exist. He honoured the victims and survivors of the Titanic rightfully. He did not say none of it happened, nor did he even try to go there. Tarantino went there even though Roman Polanski asked him not to. He didn't even show Polanski the script. Instead he showed it to Debra "Lyin" Tate who is not the official head of the Tate family. Heck Tarantino even pissed off Shannon Lee, the daughter of Bruce Lee. So he didn't even honour Lee's legacy. That shows hubris on Tarantino's part that he could muck with whatever he wanted without any scrutiny. The scrutiny he knew he'd get from Polanski and Shannon Lee.

reply

I think you've pretty much convinced me of your point, but I will say that I don't think that's how cancer happens.

I didn't know the details about Manson and his victims prior to seeing this movie. It did get me interested in finding out more information. So there is a silver lining in the movie existing, at least. Your post gave me a lot of information to think about. Thank you

reply

You're welcome and thank you for even caring to understand why I posted it.

reply

Tarantino's depiction of the victims was pretty sympathetic, I thought, especially Sharon Tate. I saw no disrespect.

reply

MAJOR SPOILERS

This roll call is particularly valuable given that a few critics have criticized QT for the ending as being "violent towards women."

If we understand exactly how monstrous and savage these women were in terms of the real crimes they committed(multiple stab wounds, a refusal to show mercy to an 8-plus-month pregnant woman), the "fictional" vengeance wreaked upon them(and Tex Watson) is most satisfying.

Keep in mind that QT had selected other inhuman monsters in history -- the Nazis(Inglorious Basterds) and white slave owners(Django Unchained) for fictionalized payback in those two films . This is his third.

I expect he won't throwaway his "tenth and final film," but one wonders if maybe he'd like to punish the 9/11 hijackers next time -- slashing pilot's throats with box cutters, torturing flight attendants, crashing with everyone aboard.

Or perhaps a movie in which active shooters are killed before they can shoot...

reply

So hypocritical of those criticizing the ending for being "violent towards women" when they've no objection to the violence done to the men. Sexists.

reply

Yep the accusations of glorifying violence against women are absurd.

Even if the viewer knows nothing about the Manson murders the facts as presented in the film remain. 3 dirty hippies dressed in black break in brandishing knives and a firearm. The male says he’s there to do the devils work and the guy they are telling this to is tripping not just on an acid hit but a cigarette dipped in acid. There you go.

Besides, it’s just a movie. Lol

Your ideas for his 10th film are great. 👍

reply