MovieChat Forums > Shampoo (1975) Discussion > Help with the Ending

Help with the Ending


I admit I only watched this film because I'm a HUGH Carrie Fisher fan. But I found the end a bit confusing. What happened to Jill? What happened that made the salon so somber? Some help in clarifying this would greatly appreciated.

reply

Jill broke up with George, because she finally got fed up with his inability to function as a normal person. She hooks up with the Tony Bill character, an ad executive who gives her the modeling job in Egypt and gives her a ride home from the party.

In the salon, a U.S. Marine visits and brings news that the owner's son has been killed in an accident at a Marine base. The Vietnam War, like an unwelcome intruder, makes a brief appearance in this pampered environment. There is an earlier scene in which Lester drives his Rolls Royce through Beverly Hills, and he keeps changing radio stations. When there is a brief on-air news dispatch about Vietnam, Lester changes the dial to financial news.

reply

So the death burst the bubble of their fluff world, showing there is a real world outside their easy lives. That makes me like the movie more, it gives it a better ending point. And I'm glad Jill moved on, because even George said she was too good for him and he really wasn't going to try for her. Thanks very much for the clarification!

reply

It's been a while since I saw the film but I don't remember the owner's son being a victim of the Vietnam War. Didn't a fellow stylist tell George that he died in a car wreck, a random event that pushes George to suddenly rush off to propose to Julie Christie? That scene on top of the little hill overlooking Lester's house where George has an epiphany is priceless.

[email protected]

reply

Yeah, it was a car accident: I watched the film last night.

reply

It was a car accident that happened while he was driving back to the marine base; ie: he was a soldier. I believe Mary the shampoo lady mentions Oceanside.

reply

Just a respectful FYI: Marines aren't soldiers, they're Marines.

reply

It has been speculated, and I tend to agree, that the ending is a subtle sign of Jackie's demise. Lester has his mob ties and his public life to protect. I think that George realized that it was an ambush and not just the one who got away, thus the anguish and the uncomfortable 3rd person POV of the Rolls driving away.

reply

I've never heard that theory. It is interesting. However, there's one problem -- Lester is getting divorced, so he doesn't need to be furtive about his relationship with Jackie. My take is that she is content to be a pampered Beverly Hills wife. The tragedy is that she still loves George, but she loves Lester's money even more.

I think George's character was based, in part, on someone who was killed by the Manson family. The implication is that an era is ending -- Nixon has just been elected, and Manson will soon strike people who are very similar to the characters depicted in Shampoo.

reply

It is an interesting theory and I'm not sure I buy it either, however, to play devil's advocate for a second, the only way we actually hear about the divorce is from Jackie. And the only person, as far as we know, that she tells, is George. So, with Lester's mob connections, it is possible. Whatta ya think?

reply

Where is the Manson idea coming from? I took the end to mean that George had blown it with everyone...it was too late. Jackie knew she could depend on Lester being there and his money. She couldn't be sure that George would ever really change. Explain the car driving away scene again, please.

reply

The Manson connection is because when the screenplay was being written originally the character of George was loosely based on popular hairstylist Jay Sebring. Sebring was one of the victims of the Ciello drive murders, an event which many believe to have been event which brought the peace & love ethos of the 60's to its final end. I seem to recall reading that the script for Shampoo had been written before the murders - so any resemblance or reference to them is most likely a case of 20/20 hinsight, unless the director was extrordinarily prescient. Considering that the film was made so close to the time of the murders, I really doubt that it has any subtext relating to them. Even so, its interesting to watch it with that in mind.

reply

I've read the George character was based on Jon Peters - the swinging stylist who later married Barbara Streisand. Jay Sebring was devoted to only one person: Sharon Tate. But ultimately, there's more Warren Beatty than anyone in George's satyr persona.

reply

Beatty basically played himself in this movie.


"A real man would rather bow down to a strong woman than dominate a weak one"

reply

by - Balberith (Fri Apr 14 2006 22:31:16 ) Ignore this User | Report Abuse


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beatty basically played himself in this movie.


"A real man would rather bow down to a strong woman than dominate a weak one"


No, he did not. Beatty once said that the Lester character was probably closest to his own character, but that in the end, there's a bit of every actor in every part of this ensemble story. Each character has traits of each of the players, not necessarily of the actor who played that particular character. It is an easy misconception of lazy analysts who, based on Beatty's reputation with the ladies, choose the obvious, that George is based on Beatty. The Roundy character is farther from the actor who plays him, than most are willing to admit.

reply

[deleted]

by - Tura23 (Thu Feb 2 2006 14:53:30 ) Ignore this User | Report Abuse


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Manson connection is because when the screenplay was being written originally the character of George was loosely based on popular hairstylist Jay Sebring. Sebring was one of the victims of the Ciello drive murders, an event which many believe to have been event which brought the peace & love ethos of the 60's to its final end. I seem to recall reading that the script for Shampoo had been written before the murders - so any resemblance or reference to them is most likely a case of 20/20 hinsight, unless the director was extrordinarily prescient. Considering that the film was made so close to the time of the murders, I really doubt that it has any subtext relating to them. Even so, its interesting to watch it with that in mind.


You're right about the Sebring thing, but wrong about the time the movie was shot. Shampoo, although it had a 7 year incubation, was filmed in 1974 and released in 1975. I believe the Manson murders were in 1968 or 1969.

reply

[deleted]

I took the scene at the beginning where Hawn is so scared to be left alone and paranoid about what she hears as a hint to the Manson murders.

Great movie!

reply

The film is a culmination of all things which eventually lead to the end of the 60's, and the bloody end to the Summer of Love. The characters are in fact based on those who were killed by the Manson family ion Augaust of 1969. Warren Beatty and the film's screenwriter Robert Towne were both very good friends with Jay Sebring, the famous 'Hairdresser to the Stars', who was murdered along with Sharon Tate, Abigail Folger and Voytek Frekowski at Cielo Drive up in the Hollywood hills. Warren Beatty's character of George is clearly based on that of Jay Sebring and Julie Christie's and Goldie Hawn's are both composites of actress/model Sharon Tate. Very, very haunting to me is a scene early on in the film where Warren Beatty's character comes home to Goldie Hawn's and she is really scared and in a panic, and she is telling him about hearing gunshots coming from somewhere out in the Hollywood hills...the scene is just a hint or a premonition relating to the tragic murders that their characters will eventually become victims of...There are many more scenes relating to the characters being based on those of the victims of the Manson family murders but I find this the most chilling and memorable. Many of her friends have told that in the several months before her death Sharon Tate was having premonitions about her own death, including the time where she was at a friend's house and she was coming down the staircase, and there sitting at the bottom the stairs, she saw an apparition of herself with her throat slashed. Tate stated that the apparition just looked up at her, with eyes and mouth wide and both hands clutching the bloody throat, as if asking her for help. She spoke about this haunting and terrifying incident often during the weeks and days leading up to her death and in fact she had discussed it with friend and fellow actress Joanna Pettete on the very day of her death while having lunch on the lawn of her Cielo Drive home. However, I speak in forked-tongue!! But then if I told you that Chuck Manson was actually a patsy and a 'CIA Plant' and if I told you the real truth and all the groovy details behind the Laurel Canyon music scene and The Look-Out Mountain Project and how it was all a way to put an end to the Anti-War Movement, well, it would truly curdle your blood and you would not sleep well for a long, long time!

reply

I would be curious to know where you heard or read that bit about Sharon's mention of her premonition to Joanna Pettet on the very day of her murder. I was under the impression that Sharon discussed matters related to her pregnancy with Pettet and Barbara Lewis, who I think was also on hand for that lunch.

reply

Not that I should even acknowledge your question with an answer, but I will. I heard this from a mutual friend. And by the way, don't, and I mean DON'T ever question me about this again. Get it? Got it? Good.
'Nuff said.

reply

Yeah, I got it. I'll also be sure not to ask you about the behind-the-scenes of the dropping of the first atomic bomb, or Lee Harvey Oswald's CIA connections.

What a horses's a**!

reply

I gotta say this little descent into who said what is
HIGHLY amusing.

"Horse's Ass" does not even come CLOSE! You showed
untold restraint Knele and your use of sarcasm to deflect
such an unprovoked response--- sublime.

Still, I'm glad it played out this way. It gave
me one of those laughs where you keep scratching your head
the whole time.

As for the discussion at large---

While the script may have been written before the Manson murders, it was filmed 4 or 5 years afterwards. I don't see how anyone could watch that movie and not see how Hal Ashby infused many of the scenes with knowledge of the impending atrocity.
Someone said earlier that this film walks a tightrope between comedy and tragedy.
I think they are right. Hal Ashby acknowledges the Mason murders
in Shampoo without saying 1 word about them---
the sign of an amazing director.

reply

Great reply knele.



Morons . . . I've got morons on my team!

reply

WTF? :\

reply

WOW!

reply

Someone is sensitive

reply

Ah, and now you've displayed the credibility of your claims sooo well.

reply

[deleted]

Geez, someone woke up on the wrong side of the bed or maybe just forgot to take your meds?

Cheers

reply

That's the stupidest thing I have ever read! He was going to marry her, not kill her. Watch the movie again.

reply

Congratulations ... that's the single dumbest interpretation of a movie I've ever heard.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

This seems pretty extreme, given the following:

- How hung up Lester is on Jackie.
- That he forgives George after hearing, not only that he had sex with Jackie, but even Felicia! He also hints that he knows about his own daughter, since he asks George as he and his goons (as they're all leaving) if he should say hi to Lorna!
- If Lester rubbed out any woman who cheated on him, then why not Felicia too?
- He's a "pillar of the community" and would hardly want a murder investigation anywhere close to him.
- When he has his guy pack the car, he brings the hated Yorkies along. Would he do this if he was just going to off her?
- And besides, where is an over-the-hill, boring guy like him, no matter how rich, EVER going to get a woman as gorgeous and interesting as Jackie?

It's an intriguing notion but I think that her departure just symbolizes the crumbling of George's Free-Love lifestyle and the ascendancy of Capitalism, personified by Nixon's election.



Don't get me wrong...
It might be unbelievable,
But let's not say so long

reply

the ending was a reflection of how empty/vacuous/ego-based George and everyone else's lives were. wouldnt it be nice if we could live together in a world we belong.

reply

I had trouble with the ending but for a different reason. I would never have let Warren Beatty go. I'd have kept him in bed for the rest of my life. LOL

reply

Regarding an earlier comment, Jon Peters never married Barbra Streisand, they were involved for several years, but never married.

Sharon Tate did tell of her premonition to a reporter named Richard (Dick) Kleiner, he wrote about it in a magazine column and also in a book called "ESP and the Stars."

reply


Yes, that is correct about Jon and Babs never marrying, however, Peters became her Svengali in a way and she not only allowed it but nurtured the strange mentor ship from Peters. It was really Streisand who helped Peters ultimately become a successful producer whereeby there are still friends.
Jon was so much better looking (in my humble opinion) than Sebring but that's not what this is about...lol. I digress.... Sad about Sebring and the others...tragic!

Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer- "The Godfather, Part 2 (1974)

reply

Oh...I forgot to add that I so related to Jackie's character even though I agreed with Julie Christie's stand on feminism....yeah, I know, confusing...and confused I still am today but thinking about what a woman sacrifices truly when you marry money and not real love.....a very high price to pay indeed.
I completely understand why she chose Lester.....

Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer- "The Godfather, Part 2 (1974)

reply

Omg! I never read so many comments on Shampoo, and, some very fine, and out there, rubbish ones,too! Ah, the times of this fantastic,clever,classic movie about a certain LA, that still somehow believe it or not, exists, are everlasting! Great! It's deserved!
I think that only a few people got it straight! It is all about politics and money,no great mysteries!
George, not just made -penned, i mean, over Jay Sebring, but, also, Jon Peters and, a few others,including MM's last hairdresser,nevermind,it was Beatty's most perfect role!
The movie was a smash,in 1975 and all over the World!And Julie Christie was almost otherworldly! She is phenomenal in the black sequined,wildly back revealing dress, and, she could wear it with an unique class, i don't think today someone could easily find someone able of such grace,and, guts,at the same time!
Her portrait of Jackie was true to so many women i know.. I mean, i live here/there! She leaves George because of Lester's fortune and power, the money ,of course,and, she is absolutely not sought after Sharon Tate, whatsoever!
Christie who was a good friend with Sharon, would have never allowed it! Christie modeled her character over herself,a bit, too! She was spending long afternoons with the writer, Robert Towne, and Hal Ashby, the director! They were all very close! And,of course,she had been Beatty's lover since 1967! So, she knew all about the movie from the get go! By the time of the shooting their relationship started to gone bad! She left him, they then returned together, after, a while, for a few months, but,it was over! At least, they always remained best friends!
She did Heaven Can Wait with Beatty, and, she would have been Louise Bryant, in REDS as well, since she helped writing, but, turned it down! Ahh, only Julie Christie could afford such things!
Maybe some atmospheres were inspired by the Manson's characters,of course,everyone had been on a shock without memories of anything else that atrocious,not publicly anyways,and even MM had just killed herself or murdered a few years before, so it is normal all that would somehow come out,but,not Christie's character,ever was based on Sharon Tate! No way!
She was depicting, instead, the classic "new Beverly Hills wife", some singular trophy, destined to an even more cruel destiny than Felicia's in a way! She may be happy for a few months, yet distraught for the rest of her life! Yet, in a Society where money, even that gained with corruption at the highest levels,or stained, with blood and Wars,monnies rules, she chooses the money, being the only God real ruling, and, not a pathetic hairdresser, whom may even change his mind the following day, and leave her for any other babe!
Over that logic, she is the winner,and, she definitely comes out way more mature and driven, shrewd and tragic than George! Her behavior is already clear, from Christie's perfect performance: after, George leaves her while almost about to climax in one hell of a culminating scene,at the Party in Bel Air,she remains alone in the cold light, almost naked, petrified, but, almost painfully aware of the situation and realistic,at least, of her destiny! Memorable, genius shot! Now they'd go over a 20 minutes of self explanatory dialog and ruin it all!
Great script! Great director, casting,and style.
I knew them all! My mother (never an actress,no, she did it as a favor to friends) was one of the prettiest& most frantic Hair Salon's customers! However, you may see her,barely a few seconds in a couple of moments, she was on set, truly, for 4 months! They took time to shoot perfect films, then! And it shows! It could never been more perfect than it is!
And, still happy for mother, who, at least, for once in her lifetime,accepted to make fun of herself!
This movie was not filmed in 1968, just to clarify some people's post's confusion! It was taking place on Election Eve 1968!
It was shot between March and September 1974! Not every day of course! But, definitely, they must have filmed so much material,these days we would have a "special" 9 hours long second Uncut DVD/Blue Ray, containing a whole different movie, the OTHER SHAMPOO!That could be interesting,too,actually, to see all that material, that was certainly shot, and, never made it to the screen! lol
In any case, this was well worth it!
Cheers!

reply

I loved this movie when I first saw it in an Oakland CA theater -- must have been the fabulous Grand Lake now owned by East Bay mogul Allan Michaan. I saw and enjoyed it again tonight on a Blockbuster rental DVD. But I sure don't see George as "empty/vacuous/ego-based." Both Robert Towne and Warren Beatty were far too learned writers to have seen poor George in that light. I do believe they had in mind Voltaire's innocent optimist Candide, beset with the problems of cultivating his "garden."
I have another problem, with which I would appreciate help. I dimly recalled a different ending, in which Jack Warden's character took revenge by having George hypnotized so that every time he saw a beautiful woman he was beset by uncontrollable vomiting spasms. That must have been a different picture, but I do vividly recall that closing scene. I must have a Sicilian ancestor in some distant past because I do love tales of artistic vengeance, whether served hot or cold. RSVP.


I'm Mad as Hell and I'm Not Going to Take This Anymore.

reply

Jill finally gave up on waiting for George. She decided to start dating the film director who was interested in her and presumably got the Egypt job through him.

Lester finally gave Felicia a divorce and he made his relationship with Jackie official.

I think he did give George the money for his own salon. If only to keep him quiet and happy.

If the rumors that this film was about the people who were victims of the Manson family is correct then all of them ended up in terrible tragedy a few months later.

If not, they get on with their lives. George gets his shop, goes ino the 70's still a ladies man, becomes a big 70's party boy and eventually settles down as an old man.

reply

I doubt if Jon Peters was the inspiration for George. Peters was married four times and had children. George was too immature and self absorbed to make a committments like that; that is why Jill and Jackie left him and George wound up alone. I'd say Sebring or Gene Muscove were the inspiration for George.

reply

I think the general consensus is that George was based upon Sebring. But Sebring was still thought to be deeply in love with Sharon Tate. I don't think George was in love with Jill. She just hung around and George went along with it.

reply