Flannel Pajamas

2006
5.9| 2h4m| en| More Info
Released: 17 November 2006 Released
Producted By: Gigantic Pictures
Country:
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

A study of a relationship that starts quickly, burns bright, and then gets rocky, not from any one thing, but from an accumulation of civilization and its discontents. Stuart is glib and generous, Nicole is shy and forthright. Is love enough to see them through?

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

Gigantic Pictures

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime. Watch Now

Trailers & Images

Reviews

Redwarmin This movie is the proof that the world is becoming a sick and dumb place
Spidersecu Don't Believe the Hype
Cooktopi The acting in this movie is really good.
Bob This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.
inventiveminds I had rented Flannel Pajamas and the wife and I were watching it. We enjoyed the film a lot. Now, I'm a pretty sharp tack for detail and during one scene in this movie there is an exchange of a phone number it was a "212" phone number and it wasn't the typical "555-1234" kind of phone number. No, it was a very realistic phone number. So I backed up the DVD and got a pen and paper. I wrote the number down and grabbed my phone on my nightstand. I dialed the phone number and a man answered. I was in shock and I said "hi is this Jeff"? Guy on the phone- "yeah, who is this"-, Me- "I'm watching your movie and your phone number was in the scene" Jeff Lipsky- "click".Well, not so friendly guy I must admit. I'd be willing to forgive him for not pointing out that I cracked his 'easter egg'.. Hey no problem.. maybe he was expecting someone else?? Anyway as I was hoping.. I'd gladly forgive Jeff if he would give me a fitting role in his next film.. Hey Jeff call me at 914 310 3093 LOL- That's my 'real' phone number!!! Gerard
jblum315 I hated this movie right from the beginning. I had no sense of why these two people would be attracted to each other - I thought they were both physically unattractive and totally self-centered. I could not believe that any independent young woman would accept $15,000 from a man that she hardly knows - and then I see that aha! she's not so independent; she rejoices in getting fired; because she's found a sucker who will take care of her. Never mind that they never seem to agree about anything. This marriage was doomed before it even happened. Actually I think the best line in the movie was when she tells her friend that the bridegroom never said "I do." That pretty much sums it up. They should have both said "I don't." The sexual groping (of which there was a bit too much) was unconvincing. I felt really sorry for both of them, but I didn't like them or anyone else in the movie except for his father who seemed like a decent guy who was maybe in the wrong movie.
David Ferguson Greetings again from the darkness. Having seen the trailer a few times, I had pretty much decided this was not one I would see. Then I saw Roger Ebert raving about it and since he is a movie critic god, it was obvious I needed to see it.Now I am not going to write the great Mr. Ebert and ask for my money back, but I must admit I am somewhat baffled by his comments. While there are moments of brilliant intimacy, for the most part this movie is just about the arc of 90% of the relationships today. I wish that were more of a compliment, but instead I compare this to "Before Sunset", the obnoxious remake to Richard Linklater's 1994 gem "Before Sunrise". In other words, it is 2 plus hours of listening to two fairly unlikeable people TALK incessantly about themselves and their relationship. This is definitely no "My Dinner With Andre".Of course, writer/director Jeff Lipskey tosses is many more characters ... probably too many ... to show the complexities within this or any other relationship. Julianne Nicholson and Justin Kirk are the couple and while Ms. Nicholson exudes a camouflaged charm, Mr. Kirk is little more than a smarmy, unable to communicate about anything important dude who is just like most guys. We pretty much dislike him from the opening scene in the café when his self-centeredness is obvious to all but Ms. Nicholson.I know little of Mr. Lipsky, but I am not sure if his objective was to visualize the issues of most relationships, point out the lack of judgment exhibited by most women when choosing a partner or some other deep philosophical issue. All I know is that the ending was obvious from the inane opening sequence, although there were some very poignant moments in between.The best part of the film may be the closing credit song "Thursday" by Asobi Soksu. As for Roger Ebert, my opinion of him is not damaged one bit, as what makes watching movies so wonderful is the slight chance that one may hit you where it counts. "Flannel Pajamas" did this for him, but not for me.
jillianrose87 I am a HUGE Stephanie March and a fan of Julianne Nicholson as well, so when i first heard about this movie almost 18 months ago i was excited to say the least. Last week while i was visiting family in NY, we stopped by this little indie theater to see what was playing. and there it was--the poster i'd been waiting to see! even more remarkably, the theater on Long Island was the only theater in the country that was showing flannel pajamas (it had only been released a week earlier)...and I just happened to be there. needless to say i was psyched; little did i know.stephanie march was absolutely beautiful (as always), for the five minutes she was on the screen. the other 179 minutes of the movie, however, was a slow torture. nothing happened! My hyper-active aunt took a nap, and my cousin played games on her cell phone. the movie could have easily been an hour shorter without losing anything.bottom line: this movie was poorly scripted, extremely drawn out and had next to no plot.