MovieChat Forums > Save the Tiger (1973) Discussion > Could someone, please, explain the endin...

Could someone, please, explain the ending?


I have this movie on DVD, because I am a HUGE Jack Lemmon fan. Even the movies of his that I hate, I've still purchased. I've always liked this movie, but I do not understand the ending. Is he having a nervous breakdown? I know that the factory is going to be burned down, because of financial reasons ... I understand that part. But, what is the significance of the tiger? Throughout the movie, he talks about baseball. Is he at the kids' game, because it reminds him of the innocence of that time of life? And, what's with the Myra storyline? What's the point? With all those questions, I guess I really don't understand ANY of the movie! LOL

reply

Since the tiger is on the verge of extinction I think we are supposed to draw a parallel between that and the idea that Lemmon's character is also on the verge of extinction, in the sense that he's at the end of his rope, all his dreams having died long ago. And yes, I think baseball reminds him of innocence and also simplicity and a time when there were heroes and ideals to look up to. The Myra storyline is just to contrast the carefree nature of youth with middle-age burnout. I think. That's how I see the film anyway.

reply

There is the suggestion that Harry gets caught and sent to jail - the way he admonishes the arsonist to keep his partner's name out of it should things go wrong and the way he tells the kids he thought they should see his great arm one time ie before he's put away.

Harry's given up completely and yet Myra - sweet, loving, young, positive-thinking - is a symbol of hope in an otherwise hopeless world of eroding values. It may be too late for Harry, but not for others - the tiger may yet be saved.

There may have been some recurring theme about Harry feeling responsible for his fellow man (the men he served with in the military and his employees) and a horrific sense of utter failure in both regards.





reply

Whenever Jack has moment, he talks to himself about baseball. During his time with Myra at the beach house, she says (paraphrased) "the tiger always returns to a place of beauty, that's how they catch him". Just before he goes to the baseball field, he glimpses at a picture of the face of a tiger. He's the tiger and he returns to sandlot game of kids playing baseball. He throws back the baseball with an exagerated windup and says "I just thought you should see it once". One of the kids says "hey mister, you can't play with us". So all he can do is just watch this thing of beauty, once important to his life.

reply

The Tiger going into extinction is a metaphor for Lemmon's character, who refers to himself as a "dying breed" (the scene with the crazy cab driver). His current situation with all of its stresses makes him regress more and more to bygone days, memories in which he begins to take refuge, even mumbling to himself about the old baseball greats and so on. He talks to his wife (who is in NY for a funeral) and begins to "reminisce" about the good old days, but his wife just gets upset and says: "that was only six years ago."

So his mode of regression, his pathological wistfulness, nostalgia, and yearning for things past are broaching his present, they are catching up to him; as much as his present keeps deconstructing into the past, he himself begins to empathize with dying beasts (the whale in the newspaper (beginning of movie, he mentions it again later in the movie) and the breed of tiger going extinct), as the world of his past is going extinct (WW2, his war-buddies, all the people that he mentions in the "names" game he plays with the hippie-girl (all those mentioned are the "extinct" people of what he considers to be the golden past)), so he feels the world that he once knew, the hopes and dreams he once had, the person that he once was, are all going extinct, fading into the oblivion of non-existence.

The movie is his battle with "impermanence," it's a Gestalt of how nothing stays the same, and how the ego, taking refuge in the idea of what once was and was familiar, begins to fall apart at the seams. He _is_ on the verge of a nervous breakdown, and the end of the movie (at the kid's baseball game) implies it: he can't even relate to children any more, as he overthrows the ball way beyond the fence; he thinks in his deluded mind that somehow he's being an impressive role model (of how a man played ball, once upon a time), but all he gets is rejection. "You can't play with us, mister." That's the bottom line of his exitstence as a man who has become stuck in the past. Thus he quietly walks behind the fence, and he is behind the fence, and the metaphor of the tiger is there, yet again, caged behind the fence; caged in the past, unable to enter the present.

reply

I agree with all the posts.

Now, I'm not stupid - I did understand the film - I just didn't really see the point in it. So, a guy's in financial difficulty and he decides to burn down one of his factories to claim insurance. Big deal. I guess in this day and age we are used to a slow beginning, which builds up to a dramatic climax and, because this didn't happen - the film just kind of trundled along all the way through - I found it boring. Having said that, I loved Jack's performance in it. I thought he was excellent. I'd never seen, or heard of, the film before, but like the original poster, I bought the film because I'm a huge Jack Lemmon fan. I doubt I'll watch it again.

Anyway, there you go, that's just my little take on it!

reply

This film is a bit of an acquired taste, as many people I know get a little dismayed when I mention Jack Lemmon is not a sterling human being in it, but I think his battle against dehumanization and obsolescence are what give the story that added oomph. Jack Lemmon is amazing in this role, as he was in nearly every role he ever took. I think you could sense a innate decency in Harry Stoner that may have been buried and blunted in his pursuit of success, but still exists. he is a man who has compromised himself to the point of illegality to achieve the American Dream, and wonders and worries if he can sustain this lifestyle. Few can play not necessarily likable characters with humainty like Jack lemmon, as evidenced by his portrayal of Shelley Levine in glengarry Glen Ross. He said in an interview that the dorector wanted Shelley to be as unsympathetic as possible, but Jack Lemmon still managed to imbue him with a decency that was not in the original screenplay

reply

In addition to the solid explanations, I would add post-traumatic stress/guilt that he survived the war while many of his comprades didn't, and that Lemmon had moved to LA from Brooklyn - just like his Dodgers and many World War II veterans. So Brooklyn, like baseball, represented his longed for youth, while LA represented a semi-false dream. Also, by 1973 Brooklyn had declined, and there was the post-Vietnam, Watergate-era cyncism when many booed public figures and called cops pigs.

reply

[deleted]

Great explanation, drowecaplan-1.

Also, the expression, "He's 'out in left field'" (meaning he's "odd" or "strange" - especially to the younger generation that can't relate to him) came to mind when watching the last scene as the ending credits began rolling.

reply

"The Tiger" is America. It's been sold to foreign, cheap labor by the filthy rich who control everything. What you see happening to Harry has now spread over the entire continent.

reply

[deleted]

These are great explanations. My wife and I watched this last night. While I found the ending a bit abrupt, I felt there wasn't a need to see the arson take place and wonder if Lemmon and Gilford go to jail.

In the end, the scene of Lemmon by the ballpark, was the realization that his "world" (and his life), were being passed by and forgotten by the youth living in the present.

reply

I really appreciate the thoughtful disccusion here!

To me, the fact that Harry is such an unsympathetic character makes him all the more poignant, because you can still glimpse the remnants of the basically decent man he might have been, and maybe once was. It's too easy to judge him harshly -- I've no doubt he started with small, seemingly insignificant compromises, always telling himself it was for a good cause .... until that became a way of life for him. I also think he has enough self-awareness to realize what he's done to his life, and just how much of his humanity & decency he's sacrificed over the years. He's not only sold his soul, he's sold it for a pittance.

Perhaps he also makes us uncomfortable because each of us has done things we regret, things we told ourself were necessary or unavoidable, but in truth were merely easier than doing the right thing. It's painful to recognize that in ourselves.

That final sequence watching the kids play baseball is deeply moving & sad. It's the end of so much -- an individual's life, a way of life overall, a generation & its times, the illusions of innocence & youth. You wonder just what Harry sees beyond that, if anything.

reply

[deleted]

Excellent post and thread. A footnote and counterpoint to Harry and his state of mind would be the arsonist. He's about the same age as Harry, same generation, but apparantly has none of the angst or despair that Harry is experiencing.

He's good at his work and proud of it. He sees himself as a skilled professional and a craftsman (a word that had great meaning to Harry earlier in his reference to the dressmaker), and he has ethics. He returned the deposit to Harry when he thought he couldn't do the job. It was important to him to produce a quality product for his customers, just like any good businessman.

Of course the irony is that he's a criminal, and his role in the film is to help destroy (with Harry's cooperation) what Harry has built. It's possible that he represents the destructive forces that are destroying the America that Harry knew and loved.


Stacy - "We got a job"
Uncle John - "What kind?"
Stacy - "The Forever Kind..."

reply

I love this film. It has so many rich ideas, metaphors, imageries, and characters. One of them would be the tiger. At first, we believe that Lemmon's character is the tiger that needs salvation. But by the end of the film, we realize that he wants Phil to be saved if his arson plot fails. Thus he tells the arsonist to leave Phil out of the plot. Phil is the "tiger" because he is that rare but nearly extinct species that still upholds noble and traditional values, who wants nothing to do with the arson plot, wants Lemmon to walk the right path, and laments the rotting state of society. On the other hand, Lemmon has become far too corrupted for salvation (even though he still has a lot of humanity left, like when he tries to give money to Myra and lends his support to Meyer). He knows it but is too trapped to walk away. Thus he feels a lot of remorse and does a lot of reminiscing back to better and more innocent times (like baseball).

reply

My take is a bit different. While the "Tiger" symbol is used in the movie, the metaphor is that Harry "has a tiger by the tail" in his self-destructive lifestyle and is afraid to let go.

The business is dying and with it would go his lifestyle, all the self-image of a successful businessman. If he let the business go he could get a job and just be another person living a better more normal life but he cannot let go of the tiger's tail. He burns the business for money to save his lifestyle, sacrificing the last of his integrity to "Save the Tiger".

reply

It may speak to the level of debate on IMDB, but I have been so very pleasantly surprised by this thread. Lots of considered discussion and opinion, not all in agreement (at all) but all conducted with civility and respect. Thanks, seriously...thank you.

Lots of great ideas, much to think about. I have an added thought. I thought the tiger and the petition represented the counter culture's focus on things other than business and commerce. Lemmon's character is willing to leave his morals in the blue movie theatre and commission an act of arson in order to keep those pay cheques rolling (and him and his partner out of jail). Yet, outside, there is a man collecting signatures to save the tiger. Could a petition save a species? I always thought that Harry was wondering "where is the petition to save Capri Casuals and to keep those 70 machinists, dozen salesmen and office staff off the dole?" Equally, earlier Harry bemoans the lack of attention from government, noting that if they sold missiles, they'd get a handout....but they only sell dresses. The whole movie speaks to me of that very 21C expression.....the 'squeezed middle'.



"Someone has been tampering with Hank's memories."

reply

I believe the ending is all about nostalgia. Harry is in that mode of life where he's being nostalgic about when he was playing baseball as a kid. The more Harry moves on into old age the more he longs for the innocence of his childhood and his stress free days on the playing field. After so much stress recently, his guilt about surviving the war, his desperation to save his business, his struggling marriage, he got a good dose of perspective from the hippie girl. After all that, at the end of the movie Harry is so elated to throw that ball again and right away the kid tells him he can't play with them. So what is Harry longing for? Does he want to play baseball again? does he want his business to thrive? does he want to have sex with the hippie girl on a regular basis? Does he want his marriage to get back on track? Yes, and no,,what Harry is longing for is his long, lost youth. That's why Save the Tiger is all about nostalgia, just like brushing up against someone on a train, or the way the movie theater smelled 30 years ago; you can never go back.

reply