--- title: "Heartburn" year: 1986 kind: "film" canonical: "https://film.one/film/heartburn" fi1m_id: "heartburn" imdb_id: "tt0091188" tmdb_id: 13818 wikidata_id: "Q625429" fi1m_score: 55 critics_score: 51 critics_reviews: 4 published: "2026-10-04T19:54:37.914050+00:00" updated: "2026-10-04T19:54:38.507061+00:00" region: "ZA" licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL." --- # Heartburn (1986) Directed by Mike Nichols · 1h 48m · Comedy, Drama, Romance ## Identity Heartburn - **Canonical:** https://film.one/film/heartburn - **Type:** Film - **Fi1m ID:** heartburn - **IMDb ID:** tt0091188 - **TMDB ID:** 13818 - **Wikidata ID:** Q625429 - **Same entity:** https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091188/, https://www.themoviedb.org/movie/13818, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q625429 **Fi1m score: 55** · Critics 51 (early) from 4 reviews *In a sentence:* Meryl Streep and Jack Nicholson share a marriage, though the screenplay seems reluctant to introduce them properly > Mike Nichols makes Rachel and Mark’s daily life convincing, but *Heartburn* gives us too little sense of why they need each other. Meryl Streep and Jack Nicholson supply pleasures the thin writing cannot sustain. ## Synopsis Rachel (Meryl Streep) and Mark (Jack Nicholson) are journalists whose marriage is at the centre of this comedy-drama. Their life together provides the setting, with sex, love and the question of when to quit shaping the story. Richard (Jeff Daniels), Vera (Maureen Stapleton) and Julie (Stockard Channing) are among the other characters. Adapted by Nora Ephron from her novel, the film follows the couple through their everyday life and the private difficulties of understanding what they want from one another. ## Review *Heartburn* is a disappointing marriage comedy, despite two actors who can make an underwritten exchange worth listening to. Mike Nichols directs Nora Ephron’s adaptation of her own novel, and the care taken over the couple’s everyday life is evident. What remains obscure is what Rachel and Mark need from each other, a substantial problem when their relationship is meant to hold our attention. The film has enough incidental pleasure to avoid becoming a chore, but too little insight to make its disappointments seem worth the time. Meryl Streep gives Rachel a credibility that the screenplay does not always earn, and we would put much of what works here down to her. The performance encourages us to stay interested even when the character’s wants remain indistinct. We were frustrated by how often that interest went unrewarded: the daily business of Rachel and Mark’s life feels convincing, yet their feelings about it remain difficult to read. Streep has to supply a good deal of what the script has failed to explain. Jack Nicholson gets more immediate pleasure out of Mark, a thin role with lines that suit his delivery. He can make an amusing moment feel sufficient while it lasts, and that is a useful skill in a film so dependent on the attraction of its leads. The limitation becomes apparent when we try to see beyond the enjoyable performance to the husband he is playing. Nicholson makes the material entertaining, but the writing gives him too little to explore. Néstor Almendros’s cinematography and Tony Walton’s production design are important to the film’s convincing sense of daily life. We accept the couple’s surroundings readily, and the attention given to that world makes the thin characterisation more noticeable. A marriage comedy needs this sort of ordinary detail, since people can reveal a great deal through the small business of living together. Here, though, the physical world is more fully realised than the people occupying it, and the attractive finish sometimes makes the drama feel over-careful. Sam O’Steen’s editing preserves the appeal of individual moments, although the film struggles to build much interest from one to the next. Carly Simon’s music supplies warmth, but it cannot settle the more basic question of how we should feel about these two people. The running time is 108 minutes, which ought to be ample room for the screenplay to give each of them greater definition. Instead, too many of the pleasant touches leave our understanding of the marriage where it was. A marriage comedy can leave us uncertain about who is right, so long as we understand what each person is asking for. Ephron’s writing gives us too little to work with, and the actors can only supply so much on their own. Nichols draws appealing work from the cast without making the couple’s problems especially involving. Consider it for the leads, and keep expectations of the writing low. *Fi1m score 55, published 4 October 2026.* ## Straight answers **Is Heartburn worth watching?** *Heartburn* offers pleasures for admirers of Meryl Streep and Jack Nicholson, but we find it disappointing as a marriage comedy and score it 55 out of 100. The leads make individual exchanges entertaining, while the convincing everyday surroundings cannot compensate for writing that leaves us unsure what Rachel and Mark need from each other. **How long is Heartburn, and what is it rated?** *Heartburn* runs 1h 48m. It is a comedy and drama film. **Where can I watch Heartburn in South Africa?** *Heartburn* is not on any streaming or rental service in South Africa at the moment. It is available in 27 other countries; change your country at the top of the page to see where. Availability is checked daily. **How violent or frightening is Heartburn, and is it suitable for children?** *Heartburn* carries a US R certificate, making it an adult viewing choice rather than one for children; no UK certificate is supplied. Its marriage story concerns sex, love and private relationship difficulties, but the available detail does not establish the extent of violence, frightening material or sexual explicitness, so we cannot offer more specific reassurance for sensitive viewers. **How does Heartburn compare to An Unmarried Woman?** *Heartburn* is the weaker choice beside [*An Unmarried Woman*](https://film.one/film/an-unmarried-woman), which we recommend for its humour and more honest, precise treatment of marriage and a woman reassessing her life. Streep and Nicholson provide incidental pleasures in *Heartburn*, but Jill Clayburgh’s character has more room to develop in the other film, even if a few scenes become lectures. **Is Heartburn based on a true story or a book?** *Heartburn* is adapted from Nora Ephron’s novel, with Ephron writing the screenplay herself. No prior reading is needed to follow the marriage at its centre, though we find the characters’ needs insufficiently explained. The supplied account establishes the book as its source, but does not establish a true-story basis or how faithfully the film follows the novel. **What should I watch after Heartburn?** After *Heartburn*, try [*An Unmarried Woman*](https://film.one/film/an-unmarried-woman) (1978, Fi1m 82): Another woman reassesses her life, with more room to become herself. Then [*The Squid and the Whale*](https://film.one/film/the-squid-and-the-whale) (2005, Fi1m 83): Family breakdown viewed through children, with sharp jokes and little comfort; and [*The Lunchbox*](https://film.one/film/the-lunchbox) (2013, Fi1m 75): Food and correspondence make an intimate drama of unmet emotional needs. ### Reviews we read (4) - **Time Out**, CPea (64/100, inferred): The page is identified as a film review, but its critical verdict is not visible. The available description only notes the adaptation of Nora Ephron’s book and the journalists played by Meryl Streep and Jack Nicholson. [Read](https://www.timeout.com/movies/heartburn) - **Radio Times**, Joanna Berry (3/5): Berry gives the film a mixed verdict, noting that Nicholson makes the most of a shallow role. She finds Streep somewhat at sea, while praising Nicholson’s lines and performance. [Read](https://www.radiotimes.com/movie-guide/b-nuhq69/heartburn/) - **Variety**, Variety Staff (50/100, inferred): The review finds the film beautifully made but ultimately disappointing. It praises the vivid texture of the couple’s daily life and the performances, while faulting the script for not revealing enough about what they feel or want. [Read](https://variety.com/1985/film/reviews/heartburn-1200426909/) - **Los Angeles Times**, Sheila Benson (30/100, inferred): Benson finds the film slick but ultimately hollow, lacking a clear point of view. She praises Streep’s performance and the actors’ memorable moments, while criticizing the screenplay’s thinness. [Read](https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1986-07-25-ca-205-story.html) ## Details - **Director:** Mike Nichols - **Director:** Mike Nichols - **Screenplay:** Nora Ephron - **Novel:** Nora Ephron - **Cinematography:** Néstor Almendros - **Editor:** Sam O'Steen - **Music:** Carly Simon - **Production design:** Tony Walton - **Costume design:** Ann Roth - **Producer:** Joel Tuber, Robert Greenhut, Mike Nichols - **Cast:** Meryl Streep as Rachel; Jack Nicholson as Mark; Jeff Daniels as Richard; Maureen Stapleton as Vera; Stockard Channing as Julie; Richard Masur as Arthur; Catherine O'Hara as Betty; Steven Hill as Rachel's Father - **Runtime:** 1h 48m - **First release (Finland):** 25 July 1986 - **Genres:** Comedy, Drama, Romance - **Budget:** $15 million - **Box office:** $53 million ## Where to watch in South Africa Not streaming, renting or buying in South Africa at the last check. Also available in: AT, AU, BE, BG, CA, CL, CZ, DE, DK, ES, FI, FR, GB, HR, HU, IE, IN, IT, LT, MX, NL, NO, NZ, RO, RS, SE, US. Add `?region=XX` to this URL for another country. ## If you liked this - *Scenes from a Marriage* (1973): For a closer, harsher examination of what spouses cannot tell each other. - *An Unmarried Woman* (1978), Fi1m 82: Another woman reassesses her life, with more room to become herself. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/an-unmarried-woman.md) - *The Squid and the Whale* (2005), Fi1m 83: Family breakdown viewed through children, with sharp jokes and little comfort. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-squid-and-the-whale.md) - *The Lunchbox* (2013), Fi1m 75: Food and correspondence make an intimate drama of unmet emotional needs. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-lunchbox.md) - *Enough Said* (2013): Adult attraction and small irritations get the patient attention they deserve. --- © Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Canonical: https://film.one/film/heartburn