Why No Shampoos?


I watched this with an LA hair stylist friend. Her owner that got her in the biz loved this movie.
We stuck to the obvious, like her vision, like the way she cuts hair, brilliant, sharp, and clear: why are there no actual shampoos in the movie?

And I’d say the whole falseness of the movie and why it's really stupid: it's in regards its liberalism tone of being free. A JOKE. It's liberal as is much as benefits George but no true feeling (what liberalism is really about) for anyone outside of him. He even resents it, the shampoo, at some point, saying, I’m not a shampoo girl.

What’s his problem?

As an artist whenever my hands are getting cold, unfeeling, I call up a female friend, or when she’s had a tough long day, and say what about a nice shampoo? Always great, sensory, and alive; and great way to connect; truthfully and artistically, but yet still very human.

reply

Did you miss the ending of the movie? George, by being a "free liberal," blows it big time and pays the price for it. He lost everything in his pursuit of searching for pleasure all the time, at the expense of contributing to the betterment of society as a whole.

Methinks you need to watch Shampoo again. Maybe all the people who have collectively rated it a 6.2 on IMDb need to watch it again also!

reply

[deleted]