An Alternate Reality: Fact, Fiction and Sharon Tate

Not long ago, some pompous ass insisted that I justify my disdain for real-life serial killers (and/or attested, murderous vermin of any sort) and yet was cool with the likes of Norman Bates and Leatherface. In my defense, I dealt the following: One of my novels concludes with a bank heist. I don’t condone bank heists, and yet I inserted one into my melodrama to brush it with real-life resonance. 

Norman Bates and Leatherface are based on real-life killer, Ed Gein, but that doesn’t mean I'm cool with Gein's dreadful deeds. I do, however, understand (accept) how Gein influenced the traits of a couple fictional characters, who if the truth be known, possess more differences than similarities to their inspiration. 

In a similar way, I despise Charles Manson and his “family” because they're the genuine, heinous deal. When I spot some out-of-the-loop kid sporting Manson's mangy scowl on a t-shirt, it enrages me. I see true evil exalted and not some conceptualized, emblematic entity who just so happens to be evil or criminally crazy: a character like the Joker, that is. Dig? 

Now this leads me to Quentin Tarantino's epic, “Once Upon a Time...in Hollywood”, a film I should have caught at the theater, but due to time constraints, experienced late in the going via disc. 

Tarantino's epic grazes upon gruesome, true-crime events, but in the writer/director's not-without-controversy account, significant details are altered. Sharon Tate (SPOILER) dodges her death through a justice-served climax. This artistic twist appeals to me. As such, the Manson aspects are easier to swallow. Manson and his Family aren't celebrated in Tarantino's tale; Tate is (in addition to several authentic and fabricated personalities). 

Why would my acceptance of any such embellishment be unacceptable? It comes down to dramatic license, right? That's why Tarantino rearranged the historic variables. The same no doubt can be said of Robert Bloch, Joseph Stefano, Alfred Hitchcock, Kim Henkle and Tobe Hooper, not to mention anyone who's ever essayed speculative scenarios on the Zodiac Killer and Jack the Ripper. (And that whole Dexter Morgan phenomenon is yet another fascinating spin, but that's another topic for another time.) 

I wish Sharon Tate hadn't died the horrible way she had. The same goes for the Manson Family's other victims, which include Tate's unborn child. I wish that the godforsaken Family hadn't gained  rebellious respect among certain callous quarters. A story that stomps on the fiends' blasphemous legacy pleases me, even if it presents examples of brutality to bracket its point, as do "Psycho" and "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre". 

Good is good; bad is bad. The same goes for the divide of real and fake. If some pompous ass can't separate the two (whether it be for the sake of a horror story or revisionist history), then perhaps he should stick it where the sun doesn't shine and let folks like me enjoy what we do for the sensible reasons we do. And for that suggestion, I offer no justification. 

Bates Returns for the Fifth and Final Stab!!!

It's been quite a psychotic ride for A&E's "Bates Motel": a parallel path to the acclaimed "Psycho" literary and film franchises. At times, it's been more of a mad soap opera than all-out horror. There's no doubt that the new-century Norman Bates, played to chilling effect by Freddie Highmore, certainly experienced more success with the ladies (well, at least of a potential sort) than his towering predecessor, portrayed by the legendary Anthony Perkins. I can't say that's necessarily a plus, but for better or worse, it's simply a bloody (pun intended) fact. 

It does appear that the teenage mush has at long last gone bye-bye, which for the sake of the show's lead character, only leaves more demented paths for him to travel. For example, as we begin Season 5, two years have passed, with the endearing but domineering Norma (Vera Farmiga) long defunct, yet lingering as an imaginary specter/Sister Hyde, as well as a preserved corpse. Her haunting presence should give Highmore lots to work with through the new season's inevitable, unsettling scenarios. With this in mind, the set-up could gain an even stronger Hitchcockian slant, along with the appropriate nods to Robert Bloch's novel and sequels. I, for one, would delight in such a blend. 

Also, Marion Crane will make her mythic entrance, this time played by pop-icon Rhianna. Will she arrive early or late in the season? Who can say, outside of those who've fashioned it? For certain, though, fans will be watching with great anticipation.  

I'm confident, too, that viewers will be biting their nails regarding the fates of steadfast Sheriff Romero (Nestor Carbonell); diligent Dylan Massett (Max Thieriot); woeful Caleb Calhoun (Kenny Johnson); faithful Chick Hogan (Ryan Hurst); and conscientious Emma DeCody (Olivia Cook). Where will the madness take them? Will they survive, flee, or...well, this is Norman's world, after all, and so...

Personally, I don't think Season 5 needs to end "Psycho'"s latest incarnation. Perkins made superb use of Norman for four terrific films. There's no reason why after a few years, Highmore couldn't return from, let's say, an institution, supposedly cured and start anew before slipping again. Perhaps we could even see his extended story unfold within a hospital, meeting people, killing them...escaping (maybe running off with his good buddy, Michael Myers, only then to be captured and analyzed by that compassionate crackerjack, Hannibal Lecter--ha,ha). Indeed, for those willing to broaden their minds, the sky's the hellish limit for our precious Hamlet of Horror, but for now, seeing the fruition of his early phases should more than fulfill. 

"Bates Motel: Season 5" commences Monday (Feb 20) at 10 pm.

HAPPY MOTHER'S DAY 2016!!!

A&E Presents a Damien/Norman Double Feature!!!

On March 7 (an already packed night in television programming), A&E will give horror fans a double-whammy treat, with a pairing of revisionist views on Norman Bates and Damien Thorn.

"Bates Motel" is now in its fourth season (as most surely know) and this hit retelling of Norman's early years (a concept presented first in "Psycho IV") has gained a following that few series can match, with Freddie Highmore embodying Anthony Perkins' most celebrated role and Vera Farmiga as his dear, domineering mother, Norma. (Nestor Carbonell is also engaging as the diligent Sheriff Romero.)

As a lifelong "Psycho" fan (which includes all the Perkins films, the ill-fated "Bates Motel '87" pilot, and Robert Bloch's superb, literary submissions), I find A&E's excursion a splendid, demented diversion. This season promises to push Norman deeper into his psychotic depths, and I'm most anxious to embrace the oncoming depravity.

On the "Omen-ous" side, Bradley ("Merlin") James enters as a thirty-year-old, war photographer version of Damien Thorn. This Damien has a fuzzy memory, having supposedly tossed his devilish urges to the side, but for how long can the Son of Satan stay stable, especially with his faithful guardian, Ann Rutledge (Barbara Hershey), encouraging the evil along? (Say, isn't Ann Rutledge the name of Abe Lincoln's first love? Ah, no matter; what's in a name?)

How this extension will measure up to the film franchise is anyone guess, but as an "Omen" fan, I'm intrigued to see what diabolical paths it may travel. (And hey, for sentiment's sake, Gregory Peck and Lee Remick will make flashback cameos. Can't beat that.)

There's no doubt A&E has a strong set-up here. Too bad the executives were unable to throw "Hannibal" into the mix, but I guess when it comes to horror team-ups, one can't have everything...well, at least not yet.