In a sentenceStreep and Eastwood flirt over flowers, and we are suddenly far too invested in two strangers
Francesca Johnson (Meryl Streep) and Robert Kincaid (Clint Eastwood) encounter a love that comes later in life. Their attraction raises questions about beginning a relationship when both people already have lives of their own, and about what they might be prepared to change. Eastwood also directs this romantic drama, with Richard LaGravenese adapting Robert James Waller’s novel. Annie Corley plays Caroline Johnson, Victor Slezak plays Michael Johnson and Jim Haynie plays Richard Johnson. The story centres on Francesca and Robert as their feelings become harder to ignore and the possibility of a different life comes into view.
Plays from YouTube when you press play; nothing loads from them until then.
Clint Eastwood’s patient romance gives Meryl Streep room to make desire funny, awkward and moving. We recommend it warmly, with a caveat about the stretches where restraint becomes a little too polite.
The Bridges of Madison County is a moving adult romance that becomes a little too polite for its own good. Clint Eastwood directs as though getting to know someone deserves our full attention, and Meryl Streep makes that confidence seem sensible. The attraction matters because neither performer treats it as a foregone conclusion. There is humour, embarrassment and room for a response to arrive a little late. Eastwood allows the courtship to take its time.
Streep’s Francesca Johnson is the reason to stay attentive. She makes desire look like something Francesca has to recognise in herself before she can quite admit it to anyone else. We see her assessing Robert, but also assessing the person she becomes around him. Eastwood, playing Robert Kincaid, is an attentive partner, and his restraint leaves space for Streep’s changes of mood. The pleasure is in watching two adults hesitate, test a remark and discover whether the other person will meet them halfway.
The flower prank is a useful measure of why the pairing works. We laughed, then felt unexpectedly tender towards them, because the silliness lets both people put down the effort of being impressive. Eastwood has the sense to let the joke count as part of the courtship. It makes the attraction easier to believe than a solemn account of what these two mean to each other could have done.
Jack N. Green’s cinematography gives the faces enough attention that the film’s handsome appearance never becomes its chief attraction. There is pleasure in looking at this romance, but Streep is doing too much for prettiness to be the point. Jeannine Oppewall’s production design belongs to the same carefully judged approach, never demanding that we admire the surroundings at the expense of the people. Both contributions work because they leave us free to notice the performances.
Editor Joel Cox allows the exchanges to find their own pace, including the small delays that make flirtation both funny and exposing. That patience is essential, though at 135 minutes we occasionally wanted a conversation to move on sooner. Lennie Niehaus’s music is sympathetic to the performances, but there are moments when its encouragement towards feeling seems unnecessary. Streep can make us understand that something matters without assistance. The film is most persuasive when the direction, cutting and music accept how much she is already giving them.
Richard LaGravenese’s screenplay, adapted from Robert James Waller’s novel, is largely content to let the relationship develop through conversation and behaviour. The sentiment is plain enough; the welcome surprise is the amount of ordinary humour allowed alongside it. When the writing becomes more reverent about the romance, we miss the looseness of the teasing. Eastwood is better at directing an uncertain exchange between two people than at asking us to stand back and appreciate how deeply they feel.
Anyone weary of romantic dramas that rush from introductions to declarations will find something to enjoy here. Eastwood lets desire be awkward without making age itself the joke, and Streep never seems content merely to be adored. Those qualities make the occasional over-careful stretch worth accepting. Give it an unhurried evening, and resist the temptation to fill its pauses with conversation.
Most critics agree that Eastwood has taken a poor novel and made a good film. The recurring surprise is that Waller’s over-ripe prose has been pared down to a restrained two-hander, and that the restraint is what makes it work. The praise clusters on the two central performances, Streep’s above all, and on the kitchen-table scenes where the affection is built out of small looks and pauses rather than speeches. Eastwood’s slow, plain direction is credited with keeping the sentiment in check.
Where they part is over how much of the book’s sentimental core survives. Variety thinks it remains a limitation, the Los Angeles Times finds the film genteel and slow, and The New Yorker settles for calling it half-good, with the leads fighting the material rather than served by it. The spread is narrow, though: no review is negative, and the later pieces, from Slant and Collider, are warmer about the minimalism than the notices of 1995.
Eastwood transforms the mawkish source material into a moving, elegiac love story with surprising decency and leanness; Streep delivers one of her best performances as the yearning farm wife.
Read the full review →Eastwood and Streep turn the story into a deeply moving love story focused on an idea of perfect personal happiness that must be renounced. The central performances, built from subtle moments of growing affection across a kitchen table, are singled out for praise.
Read the full review →The film is a handsomely crafted romantic tearjerker that affirms there is a sex life after the bloom is off the bod, making it the class weepy of the year for older audiences. Eastwood's slow-burn direction and the abundant chemistry between Streep and Eastwood are singled out for praise.
Read the full review →Immaculately performed and assembled with wit and sensitivity, this is one of the most satisfying weepies in years. Eastwood's clean, pared direction and the mostly no-frills script ensure the film avoids sentimentality.
Read the full review →Eastwood and LaGravenese craft a serviceable adaptation by emphasizing visual storytelling over the book's excesses; Streep gives an exceptional performance that anchors the romance, though the film is overly genteel and slow-paced at times.
Read the full review →The critic praises Eastwood’s minimalist, understated direction and the delicate performances by Eastwood and Streep that capture the characters’ trapped longing and doomed affair with subtlety and emotional depth. The review singles out the Blu-ray transfer’s aggressive digital noise reduction for complaint, noting it robs the film of some of its natural warmth and beauty.
Read the full review →
Brief EncounterAnother romance that takes everyday obligations as seriously as desire.
In the Mood for LoveFor glances, hesitation and the painful work of keeping up appearances.
Ali: Fear Eats the SoulAn older woman’s romance, with far less protection from other people’s judgement.
A Man and a Woman · not reviewed yetAdult attraction given time, helped by two leads worth watching closely.
45 YearsFor the unease that arrives when a settled relationship faces its history.
Free account
Two lists that know where things are streaming, collections you can share, your own score beside ours, and Discover that remembers what you have seen.
