However, over time, as their relationship develops, Simon confesses to Linda his lack of commitment, as he worked so hard to gain college admission in the first place.

On leaving the hospital, Simon visits the dean's office, warning an administrative assistant to call off construction of the gymnasium or risk violence.

Eventually, city police and the National Guard with bayoneted rifles arrive and crush the university building takeover using tear gas.

As Linda is carried away, kicking and screaming, Simon attacks a group of police all by himself and segments of his happier times in college flash before the viewers' eyes as the film ends.

Clay Felker, editor of New York magazine, showed producer Irwin Winkler a column James Kunen had written and told him it was going to be a book (it would be published in 1969).

"[2] Winkler had seen The Indian Wants the Bronx and It's Called the Sugar Plum by Israel Horovitz and asked if he had an idea how to adapt the book.

"[11] Some of the film was shot in Stockton, California,[12][13][14] other parts in San Francisco (Gorilla Records[15][16] and Caffe Trieste on Grant Avenue, Alamo Square, High School of Commerce: San Francisco Unified School District Central Offices), and University of California, Berkeley and as indicated in the opening credits.

"Give Peace A Chance", performed by the cast; Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young contributed "Helpless", "Our House", "The Loner" and "Down By The River".

"[2] Vincent Canby of The New York Times wrote that the film "only lacks an occasional, superimposed written message ... to look like a giant, 103-minute commercial, not for peace, or student activism, or community responsibility, but for the director himself.

"[19] Gene Siskel of the Chicago Tribune gave the film two-and-a-half stars out of four and called it "a movie with its heart, if not always its intelligence, in the right place ...

The major problem with the film is that during the period before Simon James, a 20-year old student at Western Pacific university, is radicalized, neither his life style as a member of the college crew, nor the political movement on campus is very interesting.

Director Stuart Hagman [sic], in his first feature effort, substitutes overly enthusiastic camera techniques and popular music played against the San Francisco scenery for a more complete character definition.

"[20] Charles Champlin of the Los Angeles Times wrote, "I found 'The Strawberry Statement' inconsistent and uneven, all too glossy and yet suddenly all too real and populated with children I have no trouble recognizing as my own.

"[21] Gary Arnold of The Washington Post stated that the violent climax "would be absurd even if it were well staged, because Hagmann and Horowitz haven't earned their catharsis.

"[22] David Pirie of The Monthly Film Bulletin wrote, "The Strawberry Statement is certain to be attacked for its patchiness and for hollow commercial opportunism; but while students are being killed on university campuses in America, one can't help preferring its highly emotional, if faltering and uneven, tone to the slick reportage of a film like Medium Cool.

As a snapshot of its time, the film has collected many present-day fans, as David Sterritt writes for Turner Classic Movies:Leonard Quart expressed a more measured view in Cineaste, writing that while The Strawberry Statement is basically a "shallow, pop version of the Sixties", it still provides "a taste of the period's dreams and volatility."

That's a reasonable take on the film, which is more accurate than it may seem at first glance, depicting an uncertain time when many aspiring rebels were motivated as much by romance and excitement as by principles and ideologies.