Hulu’s ‘My Grandfather Charles Manson’ is a baffling documentary mess

“My Grandfather Charles Manson” was intended to be a moving portrait of a young woman who finds out she is biologically related to one of the worst people who ever lived. 

Unfortunately, the documentary is useless, though at times fairly hilarious.

In fact, with a little tweaking, it could have been as funny as a mockumentary by Christopher Guest, such as “Waiting for Guffman” or “Best in Show.” That maybe reason enough to look it up on Hulu. Yes, it’s terrible — there’s no getting past that — but it’s terrible in a unique sort of way.

The film begins with co-director Sophia Maddox narrating over footage of herself as a child playing with her father, Daniel Arguelles. Immediately, we notice two things about him: He looks like a really nice guy, and he looks just like Charles Manson, only bigger and healthier.

We’re told that Arguelles never knew his biological father and spent his entire adult life searching for his father’s identity. Well, eventually, he discovers his father was Charles Manson, the cult leader who directed his followers to carry out a series of notorious murders in Los Angeles in 1969, including the killing of pregnant actor Sharon Tate. After waiting a month or two, he tells his daughter.

Maddox’s reaction is unusual. She uses the revelation to feel terribly sorry for herself. Yet instead of extending a measure of that sympathy toward her father — who, after all, isn’t just one-quarter Manson, but half — she begins ascribing whatever paternal flaws Arguelles might have to his family lineage. 

Then she starts making a documentary about herself.

Early in the process, she develops the contrary view that ol’ Gramps wasn’t such a bad fellow after all. She interviews a Manson friend, Nicholas Schreck, who says that the notorious cult leader wasn’t responsible for any murders. When Maddox’s father, who happens to be present at the interview, dismisses Schreck’s claims, she gets upset.

Talking into the camera, in tears, she later says, “I was hoping my dad could listen to Nick. … The more I learn, the more I realize I don’t really have family. I couldn’t depend on my father today. I’m very f—ing alone.”

At first, I thought that perhaps the film intended to present Maddox’s growing sympathy for Manson — and growing antipathy toward her dad — as a manifestation of pathology, a temporary negative response to the unwelcome genetic news. But, no, “My Grandfather Charles Manson” is kind of on Charlie’s side.

At one point, Maddox visits Stephanie Schram, a Manson Family member who managed to escape. Schram tells stories of Manson conducting a “murder school,” training the women in how to stab people. She also says that Manson had told everyone that if they left the Family they’d be killed.

Maddox responds by telling Schram that “it’s not all black and white.” Later, speaking into the camera, she completely dismisses Schram’s version of events, saying Schram was overly influenced by “anti-Charles Manson books.”

Maddox’s ability to make other people’s traumas into something about herself is impressive. After a former cult member, Dianne Lake, tells of being anally raped by Manson, Maddox says, “When I hear that, they break my heart, because that’s not the dad that I know; it’s not what my dad and I stand for.”

“But he’s not your dad,” Lake astutely points out. But Maddox continues, connecting her own father’s emotional volatility with Manson’s personality and violent behavior. Her reflex is to appropriate Lake’s horrific story and present herself as a victim on a similar scale. 

“We didn’t deserve that,” Maddox tells Lake.

This variety of clueless self-absorption gradually goes from unintentionally funny to disturbing. “My Grandfather Charles Manson” has no insight to offer into the Manson story. If it has any value at all, it’s as an oddity, demonstrating the endless human capacity for self-pity over genuine empathy.

Mick LaSalle is the film critic emeritus of the Chronicle. Email: askmicklasalle@gmail.com