The Puffy Chair

Plot

The film concerns the relationships between men, women, brothers, mothers, fathers and friends. The protagonist discovers on eBay a replica of a lounge chair that was used by his father long ago. The resulting road trip to pick up and deliver the chair as a birthday present for the father in Atlanta takes interesting twists.

Cast

Production

The film was made for $15,000, money borrowed from the Duplass's parents. All of the film's actors were paid $100 a day, with extensive improvisation used. It was shot on Panasonic AG-DVX100.

Release

The film had its world premiere at the Sundance Film Festival in January 2005. Shortly after, Netflix and Roadside Attractions acquired distribution rights to the film. The film went onto screen at South by Southwest on March 11, 2005. The film won the Audience Award at the festival. The film was released in a limited release on June 2, 2006.

Critical reception

The Puffy Chair received positive reviews from film critics. It holds a 76% "Fresh" rating on review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes, based on 51 reviews, with an average rating of 6.8/10. The critical consensus reads: First-timer Duplass offers a realistic and thoughtful romantic comedy. On Metacritic, the film holds a rating of 73 out of 100 based on 17 critics, indicating "Generally favorable reviews.

Scott Founders of Variety gave the film a positive review writing : "The delicate art of reupholstery, as it applies to furniture and human relationships, gives weight to the comic machinations of “The Puffy Chair,” the smart and painfully funny debut feature by filmmaker brothers Jay and Mark Duplass. Pic is an unusually human comedy of manners that, even when it falters, feels like a breath of fresh air pumped into an asphyxiating genre. Warm Sundance reception suggests dirt-cheap pic could develop a strong word-of-mouth following, particularly among college auds." Nick Schager of SlantMagazine.com gave the film 3.5/4 writing : "the film never quite strikes a comfortable or graceful balance between silliness and solemnity, so that when the informal story eventually transforms into a sobering portrait of a crumbling relationship, the effect—compounded by the often-unlikable self-involvement of its characters—is more off-putting than appealing."