It is Christmas Eve at Rizzoli’s bookstore in Manhattan. People are rushing. Packages are flying. In the middle of the chaos, two strangers—Frank Raftis and Molly Gilmore—accidentally swap shopping bags. It’s a classic "meet-cute," but it doesn't lead to a high-speed rom-com chase. Instead, it leads to a quiet, agonizing, and deeply human mess.
The falling in love 1984 movie isn't about the fireworks we usually see on the big screen. It’s about the commute. The Metro-North train. The mundane reality of being married to people who aren't necessarily bad, but just... there.
Honestly, if you watch it today, the pacing might feel strange. It’s slow. It breathes. You’ve got Meryl Streep and Robert De Niro at the absolute peak of their powers, yet they spend half the movie looking awkward and stuttering. That's the point. Real life doesn't have a scripted rhythm, and director Ulu Grosbard knew that. He captured that specific, itchy feeling of wanting someone you shouldn't have while sitting on a train in Westchester.
The De Niro and Streep Chemistry You Didn't Expect
Most people think of De Niro and they think Taxi Driver or Raging Bull. They think of Streep and they think of Sophie’s Choice. But here, they are just Frank and Molly. Frank is an architectural engineer. Molly is a freelance graphic artist. They are middle-class. They are comfortable.
They are also bored out of their minds.
What makes the falling in love 1984 movie work isn't some grand grandstanding performance. It's the small stuff. The way De Niro fidgets with his coat. The way Streep avoids eye contact when she’s lying to her husband, Brian (played by a very young, very solid David Strathairn).
The film was their third collaboration after The Deer Hunter, and you can tell they trust each other. There is a scene on the train where they are just talking about their families, and you can see the exact moment the "friendship" line is crossed. It isn't a kiss. It's a look.
A Script That Understands the "Great Cheat"
Michael Cristofer wrote the screenplay, and he didn't make it easy for the audience. Usually, in movies about affairs, the spouse is a villain. They’re mean, or they’re cheating too, or they’re just plain awful. That makes it easy for us to root for the leads.
👉 See also: Album Hopes and Fears: Why We Obsess Over Music That Doesn't Exist Yet
But in this film? Frank’s wife, Ann (Jane Kaczmarek), is lovely. She’s smart and she cares. Molly’s husband is decent, too. This makes the betrayal feel heavy. It makes the falling in love 1984 movie feel more like a documentary of a mistake than a fantasy.
You feel the guilt.
The movie spends a lot of time in transit. The train becomes a character of its own. It’s a liminal space—a place where they aren't "Husband" or "Wife," but just themselves. Anyone who has ever had a long commute knows that feeling. You're between lives. You’re reachable, but not really. It’s the perfect breeding ground for an emotional affair that turns physical.
The Supporting Players
We have to talk about Harvey Keitel. He plays Ed, Frank’s friend. He’s basically the "voice of reason" but in a very Keitel way—meaning he’s blunt and a little cynical. He’s the one who sees what’s happening before Frank even admits it to himself.
Then there’s Dianne Wiest. She plays Isabelle, Molly’s friend. Her role is smaller, but she brings that grounded, 80s-New-York energy that keeps the movie from becoming too melodramatic. These characters serve as anchors. They remind us that while Frank and Molly are in their little bubble, the rest of the world is still moving.
Why the Critics Were Split
When it came out in November 1984, the reviews were... mixed. Some critics thought it was too slight. They wanted more "oomph" from a Streep/De Niro pairing. Vincent Canby of The New York Times was actually quite kind to it, noting that it was a "small, very specific movie."
Others called it a remake of Brief Encounter. They aren't wrong. The DNA of the 1945 David Lean classic is all over this thing. But Brief Encounter is about repression and the British "stiff upper lip." The falling in love 1984 movie is about American restlessness. It's about the 80s desire for "more" even when you already have enough.
✨ Don't miss: The Name of This Band Is Talking Heads: Why This Live Album Still Beats the Studio Records
The Visuals: 1980s New York and Westchester
If you’re a fan of "vibes," this movie is a goldmine. The cinematography by Peter Suschitzky is understated but beautiful.
- The Rizzoli Bookstore: The old 5th Avenue location. It’s gone now, but the movie preserves it. The wood paneling, the stacks of books—it’s pure nostalgia.
- Grand Central Terminal: It’s used as a cathedral of longing. The way the light hits the dust in the main concourse makes their secret meetings feel almost holy.
- The Fashion: We’re talking overcoats. Huge, wool, 80s overcoats. The costuming helps tell the story; they are literally and figuratively bundled up, hiding their true selves from their families.
Technical Details and Production Facts
The film wasn't a massive box office hit. It earned about $11 million domestically. Compared to other 1984 hits like Ghostbusters or Beverly Hills Cop, it was a whisper. But it found a second life on cable and VHS because it’s the kind of movie you watch on a rainy Sunday afternoon when you’re feeling a little bit lonely.
- Director: Ulu Grosbard
- Release Date: November 21, 1984
- Runtime: 106 minutes
- Music: Dave Grusin (The score is very 80s jazz-fusion light, which actually fits the "commuter" aesthetic perfectly).
What We Get Wrong About This Movie
People often misremember this as a "romance." It’s actually a drama about the consequences of choice. The ending—which I won't spoil here if you haven't seen it—is often debated. Is it a happy ending? Is it a tragedy?
It depends on your own moral compass.
If you believe that "The One" justifies the wreckage of two families, you’ll love the finale. If you think Frank and Molly are being selfish, the ending will leave a bitter taste in your mouth. That ambiguity is why we’re still talking about it forty years later.
How to Experience the Movie Today
If you're going to dive into the falling in love 1984 movie, don't just put it on in the background. It’s too quiet for that. You’ll miss the shifts in Streep’s expression.
Watch it when you’re in a reflective mood.
🔗 Read more: Wrong Address: Why This Nigerian Drama Is Still Sparking Conversations
Pay attention to the background noise—the sound of the train tracks, the muffled city sounds, the silence in the kitchens of their respective homes. The sound design is incredibly intentional. It emphasizes the isolation each character feels within their own "perfect" lives.
Actionable Insights for Film Fans
If you want to truly appreciate what this film did for the genre, here is how you should approach your viewing:
Compare it to the classics
Watch Brief Encounter (1945) first. Then watch the falling in love 1984 movie. You will see how the concept of "the forbidden affair" shifted from a matter of social duty to a matter of personal fulfillment.
Track the "Color Theory"
Notice how Molly’s world is often draped in softer, more artistic tones, while Frank’s engineering world is more rigid and blue. When they come together, the colors start to bleed into one another.
Look for the "Non-Verbal" Scenes
There is a specific scene where Frank and Molly are on the phone, both in their separate homes with their spouses nearby. The tension isn't in what they say—it’s in the pauses. That’s masterclass acting.
Visit the Locations
If you’re in NYC, go to Grand Central. Stand near the Oyster Bar or walk through the main concourse. The film captures a version of New York that is cleaner than the 70s but less "Disneyfied" than today. It’s a specific window in time.
The film reminds us that love isn't always a grand adventure. Sometimes, it’s a terrifying interruption to a life you thought you were happy with. It’s messy, it’s unfair, and it’s deeply human. That is why this 1984 gem remains a staple for anyone who prefers their cinema with a side of complicated reality.