I've read reviews and articles from its day dismissing this moving as a waster of two major talents. Now, with the benefit of hindsight, all of those comments appear short sighted if not just inaccurate. True, the film is an "hommage" to David Lean's "Brief Encounter" and I don't think anybody can deny that. The word "hommage" may be arguable but the concept isn't it. Streep is a feast to the eyes and ears. She was then and she is now. She constructs something memorable out something quite ordinary. De Niro falls into place but it's hard to divorce him from his well established film persona. Is this Travis? So clean? I fell into their Brief Encounter situation head on and enjoyed it thoroughly. In particular the first 45 minutes when their lives are starting to connect but before the actual connection. My favorite part? Meryl for the first time waiting for him in the train, looking out of the window to catch a glimpse. The juxtaposition of her thoughts it's dizzying, wonderful and worth the entire film.
75 Reviews
There are things in life that are inevitable, and we are powerless to control them...
Nazi_Fighter_David30 July 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Love is more than an emotion... It's above all, the substance of our being, the gift of oneself...
We all want to fall in love We all want to be caught up out of our ordinary life Maybe because it is the only true adventure, maybe because that experience makes us feel completely alive... It may only last a moment, an hour, an afternoon, but that doesn't diminish its value, because we are left with memories that we treasure for the rest of our lives...
Here, Merryl Streep and DeNiro are the kind of people who are ready to take action on an opportunity Following a chance meeting in a bookshop, pre-Xmas, the two central characters find themselves inexplicably drawn to each other But both are married She has a husband, he has a wife and two lovely kids
Both are meant to be together but they are inexperienced, uptight And neither really knows what to do with his fear, shyness, hesitation, and confusion On this thread of plot hangs a nice romantic film where two super stars combined their talent to conquer a dry script
Director Ulu Grosbard makes sure there are plenty of subway stations, trains, hot dogs, coffee, driving rainstorm, two adjacent pay phones, walks through the streets, swelling music, and much more for the lovers to get romantic over His motion picture is strictly traditional, which makes his sensitive film something fresh and entertaining
We all want to fall in love We all want to be caught up out of our ordinary life Maybe because it is the only true adventure, maybe because that experience makes us feel completely alive... It may only last a moment, an hour, an afternoon, but that doesn't diminish its value, because we are left with memories that we treasure for the rest of our lives...
Here, Merryl Streep and DeNiro are the kind of people who are ready to take action on an opportunity Following a chance meeting in a bookshop, pre-Xmas, the two central characters find themselves inexplicably drawn to each other But both are married She has a husband, he has a wife and two lovely kids
Both are meant to be together but they are inexperienced, uptight And neither really knows what to do with his fear, shyness, hesitation, and confusion On this thread of plot hangs a nice romantic film where two super stars combined their talent to conquer a dry script
Director Ulu Grosbard makes sure there are plenty of subway stations, trains, hot dogs, coffee, driving rainstorm, two adjacent pay phones, walks through the streets, swelling music, and much more for the lovers to get romantic over His motion picture is strictly traditional, which makes his sensitive film something fresh and entertaining
Love sees no reason
prinks17 September 2006
The passion between the protagonists, De Niro and Streep is completely unbelievable. The nuances, the manner in which they fall in love is so completely real, they literally make one want to fall in love again! Streep's presence is natural, her attraction towards de Niro very gradual and in the end completely possessing. Both are brilliant. Dialogues could have had more depth, they lacked substance. Robert de Niro's honest confession to his wife, his helplessness with the feeling he feels towards Molly - it could happen to anyone! I had watched this film when I was only 16, and at double that age now, the emotion I feel is exactly the same! Watch it if you want to know what falling in love feels...
a simple movie made special by two fantastic actors
julesrules21 August 2002
The script and plot to this movie is simple, but oh so recognizable. Robert DeNiro and Meryl Streep: These two amazing actors - whose appearance on screen together is absolutely magical - make of this movie a very sweet and subdued production. The plot is simple: two people who don't intend to, get themselves in a situation, both not knowing what to do with: they're shy, not at ease and in love. See it. It will get romance out of your little toe. 8 out of 10
Streep, DeNiro and Little Moments Transcend Formula Romance
EUyeshima11 March 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I have a certain fondness for this movie, and twenty years later, it still gets to me. I first saw this movie in a theater during a bleak Chicago winter, and the coziness of this romantic fable warmed me at the right time. Meryl Streep and Robert DeNiro - probably at the height of their respective careers in 1984 as respected, Method-style actors and bankable stars - have certainly had more challenging roles to play than the two married suburbanites here, Molly and Frank, who develop a strong attachment to one another by way of train rides back and forth from Connecticut to Manhattan. In fact, this movie does not even have the emotional gravity of Noel Coward's "Brief Encounter", which screenwriter Michael Cristopher is apparently mimicking with a mid-eighties sensibility. There are even excellent actors in supporting roles - Harvey Keitel as Frank's best friend going through his own transition, Dianne Wiest as Molly's sex-obsessed best friend, Jane Kaczmarek as Frank's content but guarded wife, David Clennon as Molly's emotionally unavailable husband - but none are given much to do, other than to be left to their own unstated thoughts and observe what's going on with the main characters.
Yet the film has a certain pervasive charm and a subtle sense of intimacy that makes it seem more substantial than it has any right to be. There is a certain improvisational element to the two lead performances that contributes to this feeling and makes the characters easy to like despite upscale lifestyles that appear more appropriate in a Pottery Barn catalog. You do believe these two characters are hesitantly falling in love, and the scene where they try to make love for the first time has an aching honesty that deepens the story at the right moment. Leave it to Streep and DeNiro to make it all look so authentic in spite of some silly Hollywood story conventions, such as the "boy meets girl" meeting over a passel of Christmas packages at Rizzoli's or the one-year-later denouement that ends naturally on a crowded commuter train...as if there was real suspense in how the story would end. Even putting "The End" on the screen induces an aura of Hollywood artifice.
Regardless, the little moments are what provide the most pleasure here....the way Molly explains how she has made mu-shu pork with Aunt Jemima's pancake mix; how Frank practices his line for the "accidental" run-in with Molly; the montage of silly, Dallas/Dynasty-era outfits that Molly tries on to look good for Frank. These moments provide a nice counterbalance to the more predictable scenes of regret and guilt that are inevitable with this story. Ulu Grosbard directs the actors with a sure hand, though the pacing drags at times, especially toward the end when he suddenly tries to build some suspense with a speeding car in a downpour. Dave Grusin provides a nice, FM-lite score highlighted by "Mountain Dance", the syncopated theme that plays throughout the movie. This film is definitely recommended for those seeking Hollywood-style romance with two acting heavyweights who inject some nice realism into a slight story.
Yet the film has a certain pervasive charm and a subtle sense of intimacy that makes it seem more substantial than it has any right to be. There is a certain improvisational element to the two lead performances that contributes to this feeling and makes the characters easy to like despite upscale lifestyles that appear more appropriate in a Pottery Barn catalog. You do believe these two characters are hesitantly falling in love, and the scene where they try to make love for the first time has an aching honesty that deepens the story at the right moment. Leave it to Streep and DeNiro to make it all look so authentic in spite of some silly Hollywood story conventions, such as the "boy meets girl" meeting over a passel of Christmas packages at Rizzoli's or the one-year-later denouement that ends naturally on a crowded commuter train...as if there was real suspense in how the story would end. Even putting "The End" on the screen induces an aura of Hollywood artifice.
Regardless, the little moments are what provide the most pleasure here....the way Molly explains how she has made mu-shu pork with Aunt Jemima's pancake mix; how Frank practices his line for the "accidental" run-in with Molly; the montage of silly, Dallas/Dynasty-era outfits that Molly tries on to look good for Frank. These moments provide a nice counterbalance to the more predictable scenes of regret and guilt that are inevitable with this story. Ulu Grosbard directs the actors with a sure hand, though the pacing drags at times, especially toward the end when he suddenly tries to build some suspense with a speeding car in a downpour. Dave Grusin provides a nice, FM-lite score highlighted by "Mountain Dance", the syncopated theme that plays throughout the movie. This film is definitely recommended for those seeking Hollywood-style romance with two acting heavyweights who inject some nice realism into a slight story.
Watch It!
namashi_17 May 2011
'Falling In Love', directed by Ulu Grosbard, is a romantic-drama, that is mature & at times, heartfelt. I also enjoyed the Performances by it's star-cast!
'Falling In Love' tells the story of how Two married strangers meet randomly, become friends, and eventually fall in love.
Michael Cristofer's Screenplay is mature & uncomplicated. Sure, this love-story isn't without the obstacles, but I thought the film runs with a simple tone. Though the Screenplay dips in the middle, it's culmination comes across as subdued & polite. Ulu Grosbard's Direction is quite good. Cinematography & Editing are passable.
Performance-Wise: I truly believe that 'Falling In Love' is a superior product, also for it's strong performances it has in store. De Niro is superb, once again. He's so restrained & controlled in each and every sequence. It takes my breath away just by thinking, that this is the very same actor who pulled off terrorizing roles in 'Cape Fear' & 'The Godfather Part 2'. What a range and what a worthy performer! Meryl Steep on the other-hand, explores acting like no one manages too. To say, that, Streep is the finest actress of the modern-era, is such an under-statement.
On the whole, 'Falling In Love' is definitely worth a watch. It offers a punch!
'Falling In Love' tells the story of how Two married strangers meet randomly, become friends, and eventually fall in love.
Michael Cristofer's Screenplay is mature & uncomplicated. Sure, this love-story isn't without the obstacles, but I thought the film runs with a simple tone. Though the Screenplay dips in the middle, it's culmination comes across as subdued & polite. Ulu Grosbard's Direction is quite good. Cinematography & Editing are passable.
Performance-Wise: I truly believe that 'Falling In Love' is a superior product, also for it's strong performances it has in store. De Niro is superb, once again. He's so restrained & controlled in each and every sequence. It takes my breath away just by thinking, that this is the very same actor who pulled off terrorizing roles in 'Cape Fear' & 'The Godfather Part 2'. What a range and what a worthy performer! Meryl Steep on the other-hand, explores acting like no one manages too. To say, that, Streep is the finest actress of the modern-era, is such an under-statement.
On the whole, 'Falling In Love' is definitely worth a watch. It offers a punch!
To cheat or not to cheat. That is the question.
mark.waltz21 January 2023
Warning: Spoilers
Love will find a way. On the busy weekday morning Metro North or those busy Manhattan streets at Christmas time. Not a homeless person in sight, nor anyone walking down the crowded streets at a slow pace reading their phone. It's a New York City not seen in decades, filled with a bouncy piano background score by Dave Grusin and reuniting the stars of "The Deer Hunter", Meryl Streep without any accent and Robert DeNiro without a trace of temper. Toss in Dianne Wiest and Harvey Keitel as their friends encouraging them to go for it and Jane Kaczmarek and David Clennon as the trusting spouses, and the temptation becomes real, with awkward conversations that sound real, a few seeming a bit forced, and you've got a typical star studded romantic drama that didn't quite break box office records or get awards, but 40 years later is a pleasant distraction, the type of movie they don't make any more, especially the two stars who rarely do films where the word Oscar doesn't pop up next to their names as a suggested hint.
I really enjoyed the New York City location scenes as well as those of DeNiro and Streep on the Metro-North. The streets of Manhattan at Christmas, going from the Rockefeller Center Christmas tree to Macy's to off the beat and path bookstores is a not realistic hint of what they probably were as everybody is dealing with the crowds as if they love them, everybody in good moods, especially Streep as she orders a hot dog from a street vendor. I doubt people were as open to talking to strangers on the street or on a train as Streep and De Niro do in this, but seeing it through the eyes as a parallel time New York City is fascinating. How can you dismiss a film with this mood and all of these niceties? The film is quite dated in many ways, but in reflecting on how movies of the '80s were, it certainly is a world that I would have loved to have seen, one filled with hope even if the thoughts of having an extramarital affair when the spouses are loyal does seem morally ambiguous. The subtle performances by the leads who are now legendary truly make for a unique light drama, something that probably today would be pushed onto cable TV with lesser stars with half the charisma.
I really enjoyed the New York City location scenes as well as those of DeNiro and Streep on the Metro-North. The streets of Manhattan at Christmas, going from the Rockefeller Center Christmas tree to Macy's to off the beat and path bookstores is a not realistic hint of what they probably were as everybody is dealing with the crowds as if they love them, everybody in good moods, especially Streep as she orders a hot dog from a street vendor. I doubt people were as open to talking to strangers on the street or on a train as Streep and De Niro do in this, but seeing it through the eyes as a parallel time New York City is fascinating. How can you dismiss a film with this mood and all of these niceties? The film is quite dated in many ways, but in reflecting on how movies of the '80s were, it certainly is a world that I would have loved to have seen, one filled with hope even if the thoughts of having an extramarital affair when the spouses are loyal does seem morally ambiguous. The subtle performances by the leads who are now legendary truly make for a unique light drama, something that probably today would be pushed onto cable TV with lesser stars with half the charisma.
When Outside Marriage Affair or Adultery as Love
AntiFakeReviews11 March 2020
This is one of the reasons why more and more American marriages break up, causing the social infrastructure completely cracked beyond repair. When man and woman decided to get married, usually because they love each other so much, the regular dating become so inconveniently to them, they want more from each other, they want to eat together more, they want to sleep and make love every night, they don't want to go back to their own homes or bedrooms alone no more, so they decide to get married.
But how long this romantic fire would have enough fuel to keep burning not distinguished? When the crazy passion to each other die down, when you have kid(s) they cried and crapped every night, when you have more endless chores at home to do, the mortgage, the loans, the more and more credit cards debts...The love and the promise that until death that could only separate them apart would just simply fade away. The relation becomes a suffocating bondage, going back home becomes such a bore...Then your eyes and mind are wandering off, looking for new exciting scenes, a handsome dude, a pretty face in the crowd, not only distracting your mind but attracting your soul. If the encountering goes well, the new energized chemistry formula is right, the extinguished fire in your heart, between your legs would be re-ignited and out of control. Morality? Faithfulness? Loyalty? Responsibility? Family value? Everything would be out of the window and could not be care less when an affair just fall upon you like a Newton's Apple, a windfall, you just can hardly wait to take a bite.
Yes, why not, ladies and gentlemen, as long as you don't have kids yet, just do it, get a quick divorce, get your new love while you still can, don't let your newly found love get away, get re-married, repeating the "till death do we depart" white lie to your newly acquired property until the next or the next, next repeating, same old, same old crap.
There are so many movies like this one and, you just love to watch them again and again, because an outside marriage affair is not as dirty or immoral as the word "adultery" by those right wing conservative churchgoers' tagged. Go for it, as long as you don't have kids.
But how long this romantic fire would have enough fuel to keep burning not distinguished? When the crazy passion to each other die down, when you have kid(s) they cried and crapped every night, when you have more endless chores at home to do, the mortgage, the loans, the more and more credit cards debts...The love and the promise that until death that could only separate them apart would just simply fade away. The relation becomes a suffocating bondage, going back home becomes such a bore...Then your eyes and mind are wandering off, looking for new exciting scenes, a handsome dude, a pretty face in the crowd, not only distracting your mind but attracting your soul. If the encountering goes well, the new energized chemistry formula is right, the extinguished fire in your heart, between your legs would be re-ignited and out of control. Morality? Faithfulness? Loyalty? Responsibility? Family value? Everything would be out of the window and could not be care less when an affair just fall upon you like a Newton's Apple, a windfall, you just can hardly wait to take a bite.
Yes, why not, ladies and gentlemen, as long as you don't have kids yet, just do it, get a quick divorce, get your new love while you still can, don't let your newly found love get away, get re-married, repeating the "till death do we depart" white lie to your newly acquired property until the next or the next, next repeating, same old, same old crap.
There are so many movies like this one and, you just love to watch them again and again, because an outside marriage affair is not as dirty or immoral as the word "adultery" by those right wing conservative churchgoers' tagged. Go for it, as long as you don't have kids.
I Must Disagree with Leonard Maltin....This is a Nice Little Gem
mmitsos-124 December 2004
I'll write more when I have more time. For now, after having read Mr. Maltin's brief critique of this film ("dull script"), I must say that I couldn't disagree more. This is a superb, quiet little gem. It's very realistic, and I bet it fared much better in Europe than here in the States. It's a portrait of two married people who happen to run into each other one day while Christmas shopping, and then again a few months later on the train. As they take the same route most days every week, they begin to strike up a friendship that eventually deepens. Watching both DeNiro's and Streep's expressions alone, in long moments of no dialog, are worth the price of the rental, or the time to watch it on cable. And, the film is a bit suspenseful because you think that there might be a chance that the ending might go the other way; but, I don't want to give too much away. However, it is a Hollywood picture. So, enough said.
At any rate, I just love films that take place in New York but that aren't completely violent (with the exception of anything Scorsese directs) or show some of its worst parts. This is a pleasant, quiet, sweet, rather serious, and sometimes sad film that paints a very realistic portrait of marriage and infidelity. It's worth watching for these two acting Goliaths alone.
At any rate, I just love films that take place in New York but that aren't completely violent (with the exception of anything Scorsese directs) or show some of its worst parts. This is a pleasant, quiet, sweet, rather serious, and sometimes sad film that paints a very realistic portrait of marriage and infidelity. It's worth watching for these two acting Goliaths alone.
10 times nothing...
Rolf Vermolen4 April 2000
...but thanks to Robert DeNiro and Meryl Streep the movie is watchable. The story is nothing more then a cheap romance story housewifes read those things all the time. But even with those two screen-stars i had to put my television on another channel after about half an hour.
Unrealistic and annoying
pilot100924 May 2021
Two very one dimensional people decide that they really are in love and abandon their existing lives to eventually get together, presumably destroying their existing spouses lives in the process and we are meant to be sympathetic and say 'ahh what a lovely movie'. I wanted to ask, if you were married before presumably you thought you were in love then so how can you be sure that you are now and that in a year or two you won't find another who is 'the one'.
Actually did not think it was that well acted - i'm not saying that De Niro and Streep are not fine actors, they are but not in this film.
Actually did not think it was that well acted - i'm not saying that De Niro and Streep are not fine actors, they are but not in this film.
A true little gem for those of us who aren't afraid of a simple story well told
Khim17 February 2005
This is my favourite DeNiro movie and one of Meryl Streep's many great roles (but don't miss The Hours, The Bridges of Madison County and Out of Africa!). Meryl Streep can, better than most, carry a slow movie built almost entirely on moods and quiet thinking.
Still, Falling in Love could never have been what it is without all the excellent supporting actors. The way it paints the image of two very different marriages slowly falling apart without the participants really understanding what is happening is compelling, and the movie, while not exactly complex or deep, doesn't ever take the easy way out. Instead it relies completely on the talents of all the actors, to tell a realistic story of what can and does happen in real life.
The music is also excellent and at times it stands for a significant part of the movie's language.
But don't bother if you're prejudiced against romantic drama.
Still, Falling in Love could never have been what it is without all the excellent supporting actors. The way it paints the image of two very different marriages slowly falling apart without the participants really understanding what is happening is compelling, and the movie, while not exactly complex or deep, doesn't ever take the easy way out. Instead it relies completely on the talents of all the actors, to tell a realistic story of what can and does happen in real life.
The music is also excellent and at times it stands for a significant part of the movie's language.
But don't bother if you're prejudiced against romantic drama.
Captivting and harmless
udippel13 July 2021
Warning: Spoilers
Though not optimally made, this movie is captivating.
It 'only' shows the love affair of two people, alas married, who have no intention to stray. It simply is their inherent desire of just being together that brings them into the state of affairs.
Great play and / or maquillage on the side of especially Meryl Streep that convincingly and immediately shows her internal state(s): feeling good, feeling bad, feeling happy, etc.
The audience can follow as observer, how these two come together, ever closer.
A nice trick to show the true love of the two is by not getting them together for sex during the plot. Alongside the wife of Frank, who immediately states "It is worse!" when Frank tells her, that he didn't even sleep with Molly. She seems to feel what is going on.
Harmless. The audience is not presented with big drama, no sex, no cruelty. Which renders this movie better. Harmless, because the audience knows almost exactly what goes on. Except of a few things, like the discussions between Brian and Molly about the relationship.
'Harmlessness' doesn't have to be a bad attribut; especially in a generation like the current one, where cinema and movies seem to run the better, the more they contain violence, blood, beating, raping.
A remarkably intense and recommendable movie. Please, overlook the less than perfect direction, cinematography and story board. Cross the overdrawn first 25 minutes. Good idea, but just too long.
Enjoy the rest, instead!
It 'only' shows the love affair of two people, alas married, who have no intention to stray. It simply is their inherent desire of just being together that brings them into the state of affairs.
Great play and / or maquillage on the side of especially Meryl Streep that convincingly and immediately shows her internal state(s): feeling good, feeling bad, feeling happy, etc.
The audience can follow as observer, how these two come together, ever closer.
A nice trick to show the true love of the two is by not getting them together for sex during the plot. Alongside the wife of Frank, who immediately states "It is worse!" when Frank tells her, that he didn't even sleep with Molly. She seems to feel what is going on.
Harmless. The audience is not presented with big drama, no sex, no cruelty. Which renders this movie better. Harmless, because the audience knows almost exactly what goes on. Except of a few things, like the discussions between Brian and Molly about the relationship.
'Harmlessness' doesn't have to be a bad attribut; especially in a generation like the current one, where cinema and movies seem to run the better, the more they contain violence, blood, beating, raping.
A remarkably intense and recommendable movie. Please, overlook the less than perfect direction, cinematography and story board. Cross the overdrawn first 25 minutes. Good idea, but just too long.
Enjoy the rest, instead!
For romantics only; love is alive.
michaelRokeefe10 August 2000
I do not get tired of watching this movie. I really like the story and relationship development. A chance meeting in a book store and commuter train sparks a mutual romantic interest. Both people seem to be trapped in unhappy marriages and this chance meeting soon becomes planned meetings and a full blown romantic relationship.
All the components of a love affair are here. The bittersweet finale is very dramatic and so goes romance. Robert De Niro and Meryl Streep are excellent as the smitten couple. The whole story is pretty ordinary, but these two actors make the characters transcend the screen.
All the components of a love affair are here. The bittersweet finale is very dramatic and so goes romance. Robert De Niro and Meryl Streep are excellent as the smitten couple. The whole story is pretty ordinary, but these two actors make the characters transcend the screen.
The one that always stick on my mind
msbeek8 April 2003
One of my favorite movies of all time. I first saw this movie on Laser Disc when I was in high school and had been watching it for many times since. I love this movie. Mostly because of Mr. De Niro and Mrs. Streep. The chemistry between them was exploding the moment their character met for the first time. I like how the story flows. I love how they didn't play the sex card in this movie. They are just really FALLING IN LOVE. (One of the reason why I love this movie so much). I love Frank's expression when he looks at Molly and vice versa. De Niro and Meryl Streep really prove that they really are indeed great actors. The score by Dave Grusin (Mountain Dance) completed this movie. I recommend this movie for the romantic at heart and like to enjoy great chemistry from actors. This movie will not disappoint you.
Good actors, clichéd script
frankde-jong5 July 2021
"Falling in love" can (and should in my opinion) be seen as a modernization of "Brief encounter" (1945, David Lean). The metro has been substituted for the train and the extramarital relation between Frank Raftis (Robert de Niro) and Molly Gilmore (Meryl Streep) is a little bit less subdued and more explicit than the one between Alec Harvey (Trevor Howard) and Laura Jesson (Cecilia Johnson) in "Brief encounter".
Did it succeed? I think not, and the fact that a metro station is less photogenic than a train station (the scenes in which Alec and Laura are running through shady station tunnels to catch the last train after a date are mutch more beautiful than the corresponding metro scenes in "Falling in love") is but a minor reason.
The first major reason in the happy ending. This gives "Falling in love" the flavour of "When Harry met Sally" (1989, Rob Reiner) without the humor.
The second major reason are the defects in the script. These defects are noteworthy because Pulitzer prize winner Michael Cristofer was responsible for this script. The defects are in my eyes most prominent in the first and last meeting of Frank and Molly at booktore Rizzoli. The first meeting is very 1940's romcom cliché. The last meeting is exactly 1 year later (same time, same place), again at the Christmas shopping season. From previous conversations we know that both Frank and Molly are divorced in the last year. Although this definitely eliminates an obstacle for resuming their extramarital relationship, they both refuse to mention this fact in their small talk. In so doing the end becomes more romantic bur far less believable.
In summary, "Falling in love" is a film with good actors and a bad script, far less convincing than the relationship between de Niro and Streep in "The Deer hunter" (1978, Michael Cimino).
One last point is the city of New York. In most films from the '70s and early '80s, New York is a city in decay ("The French connection", 1971, William Friedkin or "Manhattan", 1979, Woody Allen). In "Falling in love" however, New York seems to be a pleasant place full of nice restaurants, stores and coffee corners.
Did it succeed? I think not, and the fact that a metro station is less photogenic than a train station (the scenes in which Alec and Laura are running through shady station tunnels to catch the last train after a date are mutch more beautiful than the corresponding metro scenes in "Falling in love") is but a minor reason.
The first major reason in the happy ending. This gives "Falling in love" the flavour of "When Harry met Sally" (1989, Rob Reiner) without the humor.
The second major reason are the defects in the script. These defects are noteworthy because Pulitzer prize winner Michael Cristofer was responsible for this script. The defects are in my eyes most prominent in the first and last meeting of Frank and Molly at booktore Rizzoli. The first meeting is very 1940's romcom cliché. The last meeting is exactly 1 year later (same time, same place), again at the Christmas shopping season. From previous conversations we know that both Frank and Molly are divorced in the last year. Although this definitely eliminates an obstacle for resuming their extramarital relationship, they both refuse to mention this fact in their small talk. In so doing the end becomes more romantic bur far less believable.
In summary, "Falling in love" is a film with good actors and a bad script, far less convincing than the relationship between de Niro and Streep in "The Deer hunter" (1978, Michael Cimino).
One last point is the city of New York. In most films from the '70s and early '80s, New York is a city in decay ("The French connection", 1971, William Friedkin or "Manhattan", 1979, Woody Allen). In "Falling in love" however, New York seems to be a pleasant place full of nice restaurants, stores and coffee corners.
Flawed but has sentimental value
D.H.29 October 1998
This is a perfect example of how two great actors can triumph over almost anything. Despite an ineloquent script, somnabulate direction, and a dated film score this movie works entirely due to powerhouse acting from Streep and DeNiro (Though Weist, Clennon and Keitel are fabulous actors they have almost nothing to do here).
Also, if, like me, you are a sucker for scenes of New York you may be slightly heartened by shots of Grand Central Station, Rizzoli's on Fifth Ave., and even salivate over New York hot dogs.
Also, if, like me, you are a sucker for scenes of New York you may be slightly heartened by shots of Grand Central Station, Rizzoli's on Fifth Ave., and even salivate over New York hot dogs.
A love Story
jwills-53 March 2013
Warning: Spoilers
It has two of the best actors of the last times in their early careers. The script of the drama is fairly simple and since the beginning of the film its end can be predicted without error. Due to the many coincidences that occur throughout the film. I liked the atmosphere of Christmas in NYC, the hectic city life and the usual executive living in the suburbs, keeping a daily routine of travel and adherence to a schedule. For this reason there are many chances to have an opportunity like the one this couple had to develop a love affair Ms. Streep, as always, an excellent actress playing the role of the perfect beautiful medium class wife. For Mr. De Niro, unlike other roles, I do not think he had to work too hard in his role. Entertaining film.
not your typical love story,
disdressed1224 April 2009
Warning: Spoilers
and i mean that in a good way.for one thing,the story isn't contrived like so many others of the genre.also it's not overly sentimental or sappy.you really believe these two people could fall in love.also the way they fell in love was realistic.Robert De Niro and Meryl Streep really do come across as genuine,playing two lonely people who meet through fate.but there's only one small hitch:they're both married.the movie is not fast paced,so if that's what you're expecting,you'll be disappointed.instead,it's an honest,unconventional love story that takes some time for the relationship to develop between the two central characters.Dianne Wiest has a small role,and is almost unrecognizable.it's nice to see Harvey Kietel in an everyman kind of role,as well as Jane Kaczmarek(Malcolm in the Middle).but it's really Streep and DE Niro who make the movie what it is.if their portrayals were not authentic or honest,the film would not work.for me,Falling in Love is a 7/10
Underrated 80's romance
jamie-rowlands129 November 2020
I came across this film by accident one night. I'd never heard of it but it starred Meryl Streep and Robert De Niro, so I stuck it on. A more modern take on Brief Encounter, this film sings because of the chemistry between its leads and it quickly became clear to me that it'd be a film I'd revisit.
Sometimes you've just got to go with a film for what it is - Falling in Love won't change your life and it doesn't push any cinematic boundaries, but it's a classic love story that brought together two of the best actors of its time. It's now one of my (not so) guilty pleasures.
Sometimes you've just got to go with a film for what it is - Falling in Love won't change your life and it doesn't push any cinematic boundaries, but it's a classic love story that brought together two of the best actors of its time. It's now one of my (not so) guilty pleasures.
Falling in Love
jboothmillard14 August 2006
Warning: Spoilers
This is a really sentimental film about how a first brief meeting, and then another few can start a bigger relationship. Starring Robert De Niro as Frank Raftis, he bumps into Meryl Streep as Molly Gilmore in a book store, and they get their wrapped books mixed up. A few months they meet each other again at the train station, and they become friends. They see each other a few more times after that, and then eventually they realise it is love, but they are both married! It is amazing how only a few meetings turns into obsession, it is obviously when bad things happen to them both, and their marriages, that you wonder if they should be together. Also starring Harvey Keitel as Ed Lasky and Edward Scissorhands' Dianne Wiest as Isabelle. Good!
The sin here is boredom, not adultery
roghache22 March 2006
Warning: Spoilers
This pathetic cinematic attempt stole a few ideas from the 1945 black and white classic Brief Encounter, but believe me, this is no Brief Encounter. The only similarities are the trains and the unconsummated affair between two people married to others.
The story revolves around two married, fairly affluent suburbanites, Frank and Molly, who meet in a New York bookshop while Christmas shopping, and later encounter each other on a commuter train, first by accident, then (as their mutual attraction grows) by design. Frank has two small boys, and Molly has lost a baby girl a year or two earlier. They then proceed very ploddingly and boringly to fall in love.
The movie does get off to a promising start, with the festive, bustling New York Christmas atmosphere. I had great expectations, considering these two stars. Neither Robert DeNiro nor Meryl Streep should have stooped to the level of this dull drivel, though they probably did the best they could with what they have here...a plodding plot, unsympathetic characters, and the poorest dialogue in cinematic history.
The screenplay has not a single original phrase and could have been written by a middle school student. There is a fair bit of mindless profanity of the 'O, my G--' type, always easy to write. I note that at least one famous critic lamented the poor script, so I am not alone. Poor Molly literally can't get through an entire sentence without stumbling and stammering. I had enough of this verbal bumbling about after 15 minutes, and after two hours was practically frothing at the mouth. If the point is that forbidden attraction is making Molly tongue tied like a schoolgirl, that might work for the first couple of encounters but not indefinitely.
The pair seem juvenile and absurd when trying to physically groom to attract the other. When Frank asks his friend whether he's good looking, I could hardly keep from laughing. Molly fares little better while trying on a number of outfits to determine which will prove most attractive for her new man. Also, they both come off as immature teenagers chit chatting to their best friends about their new love interests. This fails miserably as an endearing indication that they feel young and fresh, falling in love like a couple of school kids.
My sympathies lie with the harmless and hapless spouses. These marriages may not be that exciting but don't seem troubled, making sympathy unlikely for these would be adulterers. Molly's husband, Brian, is a quiet physician, occasionally off in his own world dealing with the distressing patient losses he must face in his career. However, he's very kind and supportive of his wife when she has her hysterical tizzy fit at her father's grave side, caused by anguish over the affair rather than grief for her dad. Who can blame him when he lies on the phone to Frank in the hopes of discouraging the lover? Frank's wife, Ann, is a pretty and apparently loving brunette, a wholesome gardening type and devoted mother. I felt like slapping Frank virtually throughout the movie. Happily, Ann DOES slap him across the face when she realizes his love for another!
No, Frank & Molly do not have sex but the affair is just too dreary for it to make any difference. The pair do make it to the bed, but Molly puts the brakes on. Now if FRANK had put the brakes on, that might have been a bit more original.
These two characters are neither interesting nor sympathetic. Affairs are only of interest when guilt is present, some sense of inner conflict to add interest to the character. Sadly, there is little guilt here other than a smidgen in Molly. Frank indicates no regard at all for either his wife or his two charming young sons.
Worst of all, we have the uninspiring message that it's just dandy to break up two homes (one with children) as a result of being attracted to someone else. The pair get together in the end, the spouses conveniently gotten out of the picture in predictable, uninteresting ways. Ann goes home to her mother, and Molly apparently leaves Brian (or vice versa). Really, difficult as it is to believe with these two talented actors, this movie has little to recommend it. It's not a case of adultery but sheer unadulterated boredom.Instead of this disgusting drivel, treat yourself to Brief Encounter, the genuine article and a true classic.
The story revolves around two married, fairly affluent suburbanites, Frank and Molly, who meet in a New York bookshop while Christmas shopping, and later encounter each other on a commuter train, first by accident, then (as their mutual attraction grows) by design. Frank has two small boys, and Molly has lost a baby girl a year or two earlier. They then proceed very ploddingly and boringly to fall in love.
The movie does get off to a promising start, with the festive, bustling New York Christmas atmosphere. I had great expectations, considering these two stars. Neither Robert DeNiro nor Meryl Streep should have stooped to the level of this dull drivel, though they probably did the best they could with what they have here...a plodding plot, unsympathetic characters, and the poorest dialogue in cinematic history.
The screenplay has not a single original phrase and could have been written by a middle school student. There is a fair bit of mindless profanity of the 'O, my G--' type, always easy to write. I note that at least one famous critic lamented the poor script, so I am not alone. Poor Molly literally can't get through an entire sentence without stumbling and stammering. I had enough of this verbal bumbling about after 15 minutes, and after two hours was practically frothing at the mouth. If the point is that forbidden attraction is making Molly tongue tied like a schoolgirl, that might work for the first couple of encounters but not indefinitely.
The pair seem juvenile and absurd when trying to physically groom to attract the other. When Frank asks his friend whether he's good looking, I could hardly keep from laughing. Molly fares little better while trying on a number of outfits to determine which will prove most attractive for her new man. Also, they both come off as immature teenagers chit chatting to their best friends about their new love interests. This fails miserably as an endearing indication that they feel young and fresh, falling in love like a couple of school kids.
My sympathies lie with the harmless and hapless spouses. These marriages may not be that exciting but don't seem troubled, making sympathy unlikely for these would be adulterers. Molly's husband, Brian, is a quiet physician, occasionally off in his own world dealing with the distressing patient losses he must face in his career. However, he's very kind and supportive of his wife when she has her hysterical tizzy fit at her father's grave side, caused by anguish over the affair rather than grief for her dad. Who can blame him when he lies on the phone to Frank in the hopes of discouraging the lover? Frank's wife, Ann, is a pretty and apparently loving brunette, a wholesome gardening type and devoted mother. I felt like slapping Frank virtually throughout the movie. Happily, Ann DOES slap him across the face when she realizes his love for another!
No, Frank & Molly do not have sex but the affair is just too dreary for it to make any difference. The pair do make it to the bed, but Molly puts the brakes on. Now if FRANK had put the brakes on, that might have been a bit more original.
These two characters are neither interesting nor sympathetic. Affairs are only of interest when guilt is present, some sense of inner conflict to add interest to the character. Sadly, there is little guilt here other than a smidgen in Molly. Frank indicates no regard at all for either his wife or his two charming young sons.
Worst of all, we have the uninspiring message that it's just dandy to break up two homes (one with children) as a result of being attracted to someone else. The pair get together in the end, the spouses conveniently gotten out of the picture in predictable, uninteresting ways. Ann goes home to her mother, and Molly apparently leaves Brian (or vice versa). Really, difficult as it is to believe with these two talented actors, this movie has little to recommend it. It's not a case of adultery but sheer unadulterated boredom.Instead of this disgusting drivel, treat yourself to Brief Encounter, the genuine article and a true classic.
Simply the best
viktor-86 March 2002
Saw this movie for the first time, about 18 years ago. I must have been 14, 15 years old. I remember leaving the theater and telling this friend of mine, how in a way the movie was still 'with me'. The atmosphere, the feeling of it... We wanted to get back in and see the movie again right away!
For years, the score used as DeNiro runs to find Streep in time (subway station-final scene), kept playing through my head every time I ran to catch the subway train myself. So after almost 20 years, putting in the DVD and watching these scenes while listening to the music was an experience, just as the movie is by itself: pure magic.
For years, the score used as DeNiro runs to find Streep in time (subway station-final scene), kept playing through my head every time I ran to catch the subway train myself. So after almost 20 years, putting in the DVD and watching these scenes while listening to the music was an experience, just as the movie is by itself: pure magic.
A cut above the rest
david_r_cox26 January 2021
Where's Thelma Ritter When You Need Her?
RodReels-23 September 2001
Can't believe all the positive comments about this movie. It is a dreary exercise in having nothing to say. It's like a romantic comedy without any romance or any comedy. De Niro and Streep make it watchable, but how much better would it have been if they had actual characters to portray? As it stands, they play two boring people who meet and leave their loving spouses presumably because they are bored and/or boring and end up with each other so that they make one boring couple by the end of this boring movie. If only some great character actor could have been added to the mix -- Thelma Ritter, Rosie O'Donnell, Peggy Cass, anybody -- Just give us someone to alleviate the tedium.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
