Predrag 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.

Desertman84 Falling in Love can be described as an urban American Brief Encounter. Reteamed for the first time since The Deer Hunter, Robert De Niro and Meryl Streep star as a married couple. Thing of it is, they're not married to each other. Harvey Keitel,Jane Kaczmarek,George Martin,David Clennon and Dianne Wiest co-star to play key supporting roles.The movie is directed by Ulu Grosbard.Two married strangers meet randomly, become friends, and fall in love. They spend time together, riding the train into the city of New York, and begin meeting for coffee or lunch. They enjoy their time together and this enjoyment eventually blossoms into love. While Christmas shopping for their respective families, architect Frank Raftis and graphic artist Molly Gilmore "meet cute," their holiday packages becoming mixed up. What starts as a pleasant chance acquaintance blossoms into romance. Inevitably, however, both parties realize that what they're doing is wrong--a shade too late to save their marriages, as it turns out. The film ends with a bittersweet "one year later" coda.This is a delicately crafted and richly acted drama about a form of romantic love characterized by infatuation.Added to that,in a very different role, Robert De Niro is excellent as the leading man and Meryl Streep, as usual, gives a stellar performance.Aside from them, the fine supporting cast bring the story to life with flair and sensitivity.Overall,it is one well-acted movie.

giorgiosurbani 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.

roghache 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.