It's an old man fucking a young girl, and if anything, he's a victim.How is the portrayal of the Manson family taking advantage of Spahn portrayed as 'justified' or 'good'?
And like yeah, it makes sense in the context of the story, and like, if that was the only case where awful behavior was made to make sense in the context of the story it's one thing, but I think this is not the only case you see that.
Like, we see a child actor get abused but that story makes it fine.
We see a dude in his 50s ogling an underage girl but that's fine, but the story makes it fine, he ended up carding her before fucking her.
We see panty shot in a movie, but it's great and empowering and the actress herself loved it!
A rich person is being a dick to people who have shitty cars driving in his street, but guess what? that literally saved the day!
There are more examples too.
And like, you think this really means nothing?
That movie really didn't strike me as "just don't think about it and have fun with the story" type of film.
I mean, if the movie is making the case that rich people should just be asshole to people who drive shitty cars in their streets because they might end up being serial killers than I have bigger disagreement with the film.No offense but I think these are really peculiar readings of the movie.
The Spahn Ranch situation is depicted fairly accurately - and sanitizing it serves no purpose... in fact it undermines the point of including the Tate-Manson subplot entirely.
Leo shouting at Tex et al is due to them having a noisy car dumping smoke outside his house in the wee hours, on a PRIVATE DRIVE. He was absolutely in the clear to go after them. In fact, more in the clear than he even knew at the time. He pegged them as pieces of crap up to no good and... they were, x10.
The girl wearing pads indicated to me this was something planned as a possibility for the scene.
Though again, I don't think that's what the film was going with.