User reviews

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.

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...

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

'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!

A movie starring Meryl Streep and Robert De Niro, made during a time that represented the peak of their careers can't be too bad. I confess that I hadn't heard much about 'Falling in Love' nor about its director Ulu Grosbard, and when this film came my way I became quite curious to find out what the reasons were. Watching the film made in 1984 answered my question. The movie is really not too bad. Streep and De Niro are beautiful, charismatic and intelligent, clearly enjoying working together and carrying the film, but the feeling at the end is one of a miss and a disappointment. "Falling in Love" seems much too trivial compared to the immense talent of the two actors who already had two Oscar awards each in their records in 1984.

One of the reasons for the disappointment is that, already in 1984, the formula of the film had been used far too often. The tradition of American productions of this kind has its source in the films about illicit relationships and broken families of the 40s and it appeared often in the 70s (example: 'Kramer vs. Kramer' - great blockbuster, also staring Meryl Streep), being updated for to place it in the modern American landscape, mostly urban (and often Manhattan). The heroes of films in this category are baby boomers, they usually belong to the middle class, they don't really have material worries, so that they can focus (on screens at least) on their own emotional problems. The idea of chance encounters and reunions (in the case of this film on the train) without which the story would not exist is not terribly original either. Frank and Margaret, the film's heroes, are married and reasonably happy when the option of true happiness and capital L Love comes their way. Can the relationship between them be maintained at the level of friendship? Or if that is not possible in that of a chaste bond? Do the heroes have the right to deny themselves happiness? And if not, who pays the price for their happiness? What happens to the families in danger of breaking up, to the kids and to the abandoned partners? 'Falling in Love' approaches these questions quite lightly, the expressive power and (outer and inner) beauty of the lead heroes dominate the screen and is provided as a solution to moral dilemmas. The heroes literally ask themselves several times 'what am I doing?' and keep doing what they're doing.

The characters surrounding the heroes are rather pale and inconsistent sketches. This seems to me to have been the main problem with the script, along with the lack of memorable lines. It is assumed that the two intelligent heroes could articulate their feelings in words, but this does not happen. Fortunately for the director, or maybe that was his idea, Meryl Streep and Robert De Niro make up for the fragility of the text with looks and body language that say everything that needs to be said. I can't fail to mention the presence of Harvey Keitel, an actor I like immensely, who has a delicious supporting role as Frank's male companion and counterpoint. In fact, the scenes in which the two protagonists hide and then explain their feelings to their respective confidant friends are among the most successful, seeming to be a kind of exemplification of psychologist John Gray's book 'Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus', which was to appear a few years later. Otherwise, too many coincidences, too many repeating scenes in the crowd, although the streets of Manhattan, China Town and Central Station look well filmed in the style of French New Wave films. Almost four decades after its making, 'Falling in Love' is not a film to be avoided or only suitable for Christmas programs, but the main reasons why it is worth seeing are still Meryl Streep and Robert De Niro. Which, of course, is no small thing.

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.

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.

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.

I really enjoyed this romance, as it reminded me of Brief Encounter many years ago

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.

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.

"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.

...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.

If you are into complete 100% realism, then you would have a bone to pick with this film. I mean true love... if you believe in love at first sight; you could probably believe that two strangers chance meeting could be the beginning of something beautiful. Or if hardened by cynicism, you'd probably say, nay it'd never happen it's just boredom in life's routine.

Meryl Streep, to me mainly, has done her part on this film. She is not only natural and luminous, but you even don't think that she's acting! She's lived this whole life through! The way she's hesitating whether she should stop the affair with a married man (De Niro) or just let it all be. The way she struggles herself and this new feeling that doesn't allow her to lead her normal life anymore is believable as well. You won't doubt a minute that she's feeling all this. As for De Niro even though he's an actor he always embodies such charisma and sex appeal, he's able to carry himself as such a regular simple man-all that there is to him is that he is in love with a married woman other than his wife.

Bottom line: If you appreciate great acting, and are a romantic at heart, you will not be disappointed with this film.

Overall rating: 7 out of 10.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.