Loving (2016) User Reviews (147)

Hidden Vigour: Negga excels in another glimpse into America's racist past

[bob-the-movie-man · 8/10 · 5 April 2017]

A few weeks ago when I reviewed "Hidden Figures" I pointed out the how absurd the racist behaviour at NASA in the 60's must have appeared to a young boy in the audience at my screening.  In many ways, "Loving" – a film that has had a lot less publicity and is a less obvious 'crowd-pleaser' – makes a useful companion piece to that film. 

It tells the true story (yes, yet ANOTHER 'true story'!) of Richard and Mildred Loving who travelled from their home town of Central Point Virginia to Washington DC where – as a mixed race couple – they could legally get married. 

However, on returning to their home state and living together as man and wife, they fell foul of the State's repulsive antimiscegenation statute which banned inter-racial marriages. The Lovings were found guilty and sentenced to a year in jail, which was suspended on the requirement that – unbelievable but true – the couple leave Virginia and not return (together) for 25 years. The film documents the fight of the couple – largely led by the feisty Mildred (Ruth Negga) – to fight the injustice, taking the case ultimately to the US Supreme Court for an historic ruling.

This was an Oscar-nominated performance by Ruth Negga and, man, is it deserved. It's a performance of such quiet understated power that it is a joy to watch. But also strong is that of Joel Egerton ("Midnight Special", "The Great Gatsby") as Richard who here adopts a largely sulky and subservient manner that contrasts beautifully with Negga's perky optimism.

I also loved the performance of Marton Csokas (Celeborn from "The Lord of the Rings"), chillingly unreasonable as the bigoted Sheriff Brooks and Michael Shannon ("Nocturnal Animals", "Midnight Special") as the Time photographer Grey Villet, capturing a classic picture that is shown (in standard 'true story' fashion) at the end of the film (and below).

Written and directed by Jeff Nichols, whose "Midnight Special" last year made my top 10 of the year, this is a thoughtful and educational piece that should particularly appeal to older viewers keen to see a drama of historical importance beautifully told.

(For the graphical version of this review please visit bob-the-movie- man.com. Thanks.)

The story of Richard and Mildred's incredible love as it conquers racism of the south in the 1950's

[Laurynwatters · 8/10 · 11 September 2016]

Loving Review

Jeff Nicolas newest film centres around the true story of Richard and Mildred Richard, the couple that fought the supreme court to legalize interracial marriage. On the surface this story seems interesting but over done but the way Jeff Nicolas tells this story makes it incredibly unique. Instead of focusing on the big story about Civil Rights Nicolas focuses on the very personal story of Richard and Mildred. By bringing the story down to a very personal scale Nicolas told the story in a far more impacting and effective way. This movie isn't about a revolution or a grand battle this is truly a movie about two people being in love. The movie doesn't try to rant or preach it just tries to tell a human story. Ruth Negga shone in this movie. She gave an honest, and emotional performance that really made Mildred seem like a person instead of just a character. Acting against her or more accurately with her is Joel Egerton. The character of Richard is fall less emotional so therefor Joel has less opportunities to show off, instead Joel utilized the quiet moments with his character to give a strong performance. Together the pair creates a believable, balanced relationship that shows us they're in love instead of just telling us. The accents at first are distracting and can be hard to understand but as the movie continues the audience becomes more immersed in the world and it feels natural. The major issue with the movie is its repetition. Due to the nature of the story the movie hits similar points multiple times, by condensing the events the movie could have been more efficient.The movies greatest strength is it's characters. The characters never feel like roles in a movie, instead they feel like actual people. The movie shows us small yet very personal moments between the characters that really make them come to life. From simple glances to quiet laughs you really believe that these are humans with thoughts, feelings and emotion. Tis makes the audience care much more about their story and therefore become more invested in the movie. The soundtrack much like the movie is quiet yet effective. It gives the film a very distinct optimism to it. The camera work is gorgeous. It's ability to focus on details then go to sweeping landscape shots is very impressive.

Let them be

[ferguson-6 · 7/10 · 9 November 2016]

Greetings again from the darkness. Imagine you are sound asleep in bed with your significant other. It's the middle of the night. Suddenly, the sheriff and his deputies crash through your bedroom door with pistols drawn and flashlights blinding you. You are both taken into custody. For most of us, this would be a terrible nightmare. For Mildred and Richard Loving, it was their reality in June of 1958. Their crime was not drug-dealing, child pornography, or treason. Their crime was marriage. Interracial marriage.

Writer/director Jeff Nichols (Mud, Take Shelter) proves again he has a distinct feel and sensitivity for the southern way. There is nothing showy about his style, and in fact, his storytelling is at its most effective in the small, intimate moments … he goes quiet where other filmmakers would go big. Rather than an overwrought political statement, Nichols keeps the focus on two people just trying to live their life together.

Joel Edgerton plays Richard Loving, a bricklayer and man of few words. Ruth Negga plays Mildred, a quietly wise and observant woman. Both are outstanding in delivering understated and sincere performances (expect Oscar chatter for Ms. Negga). These are country folks caught up in Virginia's Racial Integrity Act of 1924, though as Richard says, "we aren't bothering anyone". The counterpoint comes from the local Sheriff (an intimidating Martin Csokas) who claims to be enforcing "God's Law".

Nichols never strays far from the 2011 documentary The Loving Story from Nancy Buirski, who is a producer on this film. When the ACLU-assigned young (and green) lawyer Bernard Cohen (played with a dose of goofiness by Nick Kroll) gets involved, we see how the case hinges on public perception and changing social mores. Michael Shannon appears as the Life Magazine photographer who shot the iconic images of the couple at home … a spread that presented the Lovings not as an interracial couple, but rather as simply a normal married couple raising their kids.

In 1967, the Supreme Court decision in Loving v. Virginia, unanimously held Virginia's "Racial Integrity Act of 1924" as unconstitutional, putting an end to all miscegenation laws (interracial marriage was still illegal in 15 states at the time). In keeping with the film's direct approach, the Supreme Court case lacks any of the usual courtroom theatrics and is capped with a quietly received phone call to Mildred.

Beautiful camera work from cinematographer Adam Stone complements the spot on setting, costumes and cars which capture the look and feel of the era (over a 10 year period). Nichols forsakes the crowd-rallying moments or even the police brutality of today's headlines, but that doesn't mean there is any shortage of paranoia or constant concern. We feel the strain through these genuine people as though we are there with them. The simplicity of Richard and Mildred belies the complexity of the issue, and is summed up through the words of Mildred, "He took care of me."

Solid

[Red_Identity · 21 November 2016]

I'm very conflicted on how I feel about this. On one hand, I very much appreciated just how restrained and quiet this film turned out to be. It could have easily turned into a completely sentimental, over-saturated melodrama in the vein of The Help and it didn't. However, I also feel like it could have been more effective than it was. It also very much felt like Nichols was kind of on stand-by. I'm not sure if it was the mix of the period drama subject matter with someone like him as a director that made it feel a lot quieter than most films of this type, but I wanted to feel more than I did, I wanted more passion out of it. It's still a solid film and I'll see how it fares in my mind with time, but for now I say it was somewhat of a disappointment. I do think quieter films like this fare better with me the more I think about it, so I'm hopeful I'll like it a little more later on. Both Edgerton and Negga were really lovely, but I really don't see them getting nominated for an Oscar. I just think if a film is like this, the AMPAS will want something "bigger", both by the film and its actors and I just think in general everything here is way too subdued for them. It was great seeing Negga in a role so unlike her other one in Preacher and I can't wait to see more of her.

Missing the historical part

[V Taylor · 6/10 · 21 December 2016]

This could have been a much more interesting film if: 1- we got more backstory on how they met and if they considered the dangers and difficulties of being an inter-racial couple 2- there were fewer long"meaningful" pauses. I started to get impatient as another five minutesof silent stares went by. 3 - the events were compressed so that muchmore time was given to both the state and federal court proceedings 4- much more of the actual Supreme Court case was shown. The Lovings didn't want to attend the court proceedings, but *I* did! I wanted to hear the arguments on both sides and comments of the judges. I wanted to get a glimpse into the thinking of the time. Surely all of this is available.

Nice scenery, good score, and for those of us who remember the '60s, lots of shirtwaist dresses and plaid shirts. The two main characters are excellent actors, especially the female lead. But overall, it's very very slow going with almost no passionate arguments about the heart of the matter: why miscegenation laws were on the books at all. Can't really recommended it whole-heartedly.

Love the Lovings not the pace.

[Quietb-1 · 6/10 · 30 November 2016]

It's the family name and the description of their relationship. This is the story of an interracial marriage in Virginia in the fifties. Not a good time or good state.

Good performances but that "award moment" just wasn't there. The movie suffers from the written and directed syndrome as it is too long and moves at a snails pace. There are plenty of scenes of the leads staring in one direction or another. There are plenty of brick laying lack of action. Various bricks are set at about the same height. There are sewing scenes and real life things that do nothing for the pace of a movie. The old cars are cool, although a certain four door sixty seven Chevy seems to be everywhere.

It's a story that should be told. It is part of history. Although it appears to have been shot on film, the cinematography is forgettable. There's a good music score. It is a small movie that doesn't need to be seen in a theater. There is the possibility of dozing off if you're too comfortable watching from the sofa.

One of the best films of the year, not what you'd expect

[heisenberg12 · 7/10 · 5 December 2016]

If we're in Oscar season and talking about Oscars, while La La Land, Moonlight, and Manchester by the Sea have been garnering all the attention, it's surprising that a little known film Loving hasn't been as exposed with critical acclaim. It seems to be the type of film critics and awards voters would love. This is a near perfect movie based on the material and a very low budget.

You may make the mistake I first did and think by the title "Loving" and about an interracial couple it is some sappy, romantic love story. It's actually the main character's last name (Richard Loving) and the movie is a really well told, acted, and directed docudrama about the origin and evolution of a historic court case that changed the laws of marriage. The story never becomes sappy and overly romantic. In fact, Joel Edgarton's performance combined with good directing by Nichols turns this into a gritty, working man's battle with the law.

Based on true events, Loving is actually the story of what eventually went on to be the Supreme Court case that legalized interracial marriage.

This is one of those outstanding movies I'd score highly, but likely would never watch again or buy on DVD, but that's not to take away from how good of a movie it was.

8/10.

The power of love makes you love the Lovings

[dham629 · 10/10 · 19 October 2016]

I had the chance to see this film at the Austin Film Festival, followed by a QA with the writer/director Jeff Nichols. Having already been familiar with this story from the made for television movie in 1996 starring Timothy Hutton and Lela Rochon as Richard and Mildred Loving. Many would ask why now or why remake this film? Well many people are simply unaware of this couple's story and their groundbreaking supreme court case, because it's certainly not mentioned or taught in public schools. So was the case for the writer/director, as mentioned he was not aware of their story. He carefully followed the documentary and archived records about them, while imagining what their conversations and dialogue would have been like between them. I found the landscape of the cinematography beautiful and breathtaking. The acting chemistry between Ruth Negga and Joel Edgarton was so tender and sincere, as you witness their love and vulnerabilities on screen, it makes you love the Lovings. Ruth Negga really shines as the quiet young woman who becomes the matriarch and leader of her family after watching the march on Washington DC, she decides to write a letter to then Attorney General Robert Kennedy. You see the transformation of two introverted people during the civil rights era become activists for change in their own way that is very powerful in this film. Historically many of the biracial descendants of this country's slave owning founding fathers never benefited from the wealth and privilege of the white ancestors. That is part of what what made their case was so monumental, in that it reversed segregationist slave laws that considered biracial children mongrel bastards and prohibited the rights of marriage and inheritance of interracial couples.

Simply Didn't Rise Up to the Greatness It Could Have

[kindtxgal · 7/10 · 8 November 2017]

Scene after scene leaves me as the viewer feeling helplessly wanting....every time. The movie as a whole lacks cohesiveness and most of all PASSION for such a monumental decision by the US Supreme Court. So much more energy could have been added to the characterizations from the couple themselves to the children or their families, the attorneys on either side, the law enforcement folks...dang, the nation as a whole.

Missing are crowds of protesters on either side of the issue, and there are multiple false starts without any completion whatsoever.

Example: There's the "buildup" of neighbor resistance to the Loving's marriage, specifically in Virginia when they go to live in VIrginia .... finalizing in that scene with a truck ominously following him home one night ... build up, build up ... and the final "dramatic" point is the installation of a telephone by a white installer ...

That said, there's logistical points that are failed to be explained ... If a white man realizes that there is a white and black woman co- habituating AGAIN in Virginia .. how is it the law never returns to jail both Richard and "Bean"? Ever. Yet they are still under the thumb of the 25 year suspension...

A bar scene with Richard and some black friends and family dramatically focuses on the question of Richard "just divorcing her", but then fizzles into never never land ....

The scene with the reporter and cameraman in their living room, surely to have brought attention to their living situation .. .yet NOBODY in Virginia is depicted of knowing much less DOING anything to enforce the sentence ...

Attorney scene in front of the Supreme Court ... again ... no passionate opening or closing arguments ... just .... nothing really.

There's simply NO climax, no passion, no connection....

Overall, a disappointing movie. I left the film WANTING MORE from almost every single scene, and most certainly some conclusions to the attempted build ups of probable drama.

A big ol' pile of mush which is so sad because this ruling by our Supremem Court is the cornerstone upon which current marriages are gauged.

Beautiful understated love, a powerful film

[richard-1967 · 10/10 · 31 October 2016]

This is the best film I've seen so far this year. Even though the story is widely known - complete with a recent first-rate documentary - this film delivers a tale of understated, quiet, but powerful love. In the process, the Lovings' eventual Supreme Court triumph seems almost incidental. Yet when Mrs. Loving looks out her front porch after hearing the final decision, you can almost touch her sense of pride in knowing that she, her husband, and her kids are a family in the eyes of the law for the first time.

No Oliver Stone drum-banging here. By resisting the temptation to overdramatize the screenplay and allowing his two lead performers (both excellent) to have moments of quiet and simplicity, director Jeff Nichols has increased, not lessened, the story's power. For here was a husband and wife in love who just wanted to be left alone to live their lives. This bricklayer and this homemaker, one the provider, one the keeper of the home fires, are simple people but exceptionally genuine. Nothing in this movie is gussied up for the audience. And that makes this film all the more compelling.

Assisted by lush cinematography and songs that are less familiar (and thus more interesting) than most films set in this period, and aided by being filmed largely in the town where it all happened, Loving has a genuineness and unadorned truth that is rare to find in films today. I loved it.

Not loving it!

[meeza · 6/10 · 20 March 2017]

Writer-Director Jeff Nichols' film "Loving" is a lovely true story about Richard & Mildred Loving; an interracial married couple in Virginia in the late 50's who were ostracized and condemned by Virginia legislation for their interracial matrimony. A Virginia Judge judicially ordered them to leave the state for 25 years,if not they would be imprisoned for one year. Their case was presidential, because with the assistance of a couple of young civil rights lawyers, they were able to take the case to the Supreme Court; which ruled that all interracial marriages would be legalized nationwide. An important movie, but there was not just enough cinematic loving in "Loving" for me to love it. Nichols, who is usually brilliant, develops a lackadaisical and dreary approach in directing & scribing the film; which in turn, creates a very boring tone to an important subject. Joel Edgerton and Ruth Negga star as Richard & Mildred; their performances were mediocre at best; I just did not believe they were in love with each other within their work; needed to see more loving in The Lovings. Michael Shannon does bring some life to the movie as a Life Magazine photojournalist; but his brief performance was too short lived. Nick Kroll was kruelly miscast as Bernie Cohen, one of the lawyers who assisted the Lovings to bring the case to the Supreme Court. Maybe, some of you will love "Loving"; unfortunately, it does not have my supreme support. ** Needs Improvement

Loved it!

[restlesstymes · 8/10 · 1 November 2016]

'Loving' was outstanding. I know I review a lot of films that star a person people I love, but this film was one of the best ones I saw this year (Moonlight. GO SEE IT). I hesitated even writing that, thinking it couldn't be true, but it was. I was emotionally vested, riveted and compelled by it. Jeff Nichols' did a beautiful job directing this film in its fantastic simplicity, allowing Ruth Negga and Joel Edgerton to deliver stellar performances as Mildred & Richard Loving. Joel Edgerton specifically stood out to me as I was a fan of his since King Arthur with Clive Owen (love Clive to death, but it was bad) and I absolutely love seeing him on film. He was remarkable as Richard Loving, communicating so much with his eyes and body language, I think it was a role that challenged him and I appreciate the impeccable job he did. Equally talented, Ruth Negga was also outstanding as Mildred Loving. She communicated so much just through her eyes! She is a very talented young woman who will have one outstanding career ahead of her. Marton Csokas and Michael Shannon make short but memorable appearances, honesty though both men are superbly talented so it's a real treat to have them pop up in smaller roles. Fun fact: Jeff Nichols directed Michael Shannon in another film I really liked, "Take Shelter".

This film is about two people in love, an understated but very deep love which altered the very course of American history. 'Loving' begins in the late 1950s, right when racial tension was at its highest, just as the Civil Rights Movement was gaining momentum. Compounded by this and social pressures from within their community, the Lovings were forced to live in fear and even meet under cover of night. No one should have to live like this, ever. Nichols did a wonderful job of illustrating just how much this impacted their lives. How this couple, who only wanted to have a family and be together in peace, lived in a persistent state of paranoia fearing violence or worse just because they loved each other. It really is beyond all comprehension, that a black woman and a white male would be violating law simply being married. That tune sounds very familiar doesn't it, when likened to present day? All those lovely gay couples who can't hold hands just because they are scared that you are unable to mind your own damn business. Such a shame.

'Loving' is also about hope. The beautiful glory of hope and love. Even despite everything, all the adversity and hardship there is always hope. That was one thing I really took away from the film. When asked how she is able to keep fighting, Mildred Loving, played by the wonderful Ruth Negga, says: Well, you loose the small battles to win the big war." This film is also about freedom, liberty and rights. This is the land of the free after all, but only free if you're not black, or gay, or anything not considered the status quo. The Lovings fought for years tooth and nail for the right to be able to love each other and raise a family the poignant part of this film to me is the ridiculous fact that they had to endure years of crap for something they should've had all along.

Overall the film was just wonderful, I was moved and felt it in a very real way. The story is palpable from many perspectives which I think was a pretty challenging feat for Nichols accomplish, but he did so with efficacy. The narrative is clear: Love is love, live and let live. I say go see it, fall in love and carry it with you.

Important story of interracial couple's fight for justice proves fascinating but adversaries have little presence in second half

[Turfseer · 6/10 · 26 January 2017]

Loving tells the little known story of the Supreme Court case, Loving vs. Virginia, in which an interracial couple was arrested in the State of Virginia for violation of their anti-miscegenation laws in 1958. Joel Edgerton, an Australian actor, plays Richard Loving, a laid-back construction worker who falls for a local black woman, Mildred Jeter, played by Ruth Negga, an actress of Ethiopian and Irish ancestry.

The first half of the movie is fascinating as it chronicles the couple's marriage in Washington, D.C. and subsequent arrest by Virginia authorities in Caroline County. A local lawyer makes a deal with the judge who banishes them from the state for 25 years; the judge tells them that if they return, they'll be arrested. Later they do return since Richard's mother is a midwife and Ruth feels comfortable having his mother deliver her newly arriving baby. The couple catches a break when they're hauled before the same racist judge who lets them go with a warning after their lawyer maintains he incorrectly advised them that they could return for the birth of the child without penalty.

What's interesting about Richard is that despite being Caucasian he's depicted as having been friends with black people all his life. It's brought out that his father used to work for the richest black man in that particular part of Virginia. Despite his noted lack of prejudice, Richard possessed an extremely taciturn personality, and Edgerton does his best illuminating a part that doesn't lend itself to great dramatic flair. Ruth's personality is also quite low-key, but as the couple finds themselves in the news after the ACLU took on their case, Ruth becomes slightly more assertive than her husband, especially in voicing her hopes for a successful resolution of the court proceedings.

After their first arrest, the couple is forced to move to Washington, D.C. Their aforementioned return to Virginia due to Ruth's pregnancy, is an exciting dramatic point, as they once again are forced to confront the Virginia criminal justice system, a worthy antagonist in the film.

But in the second half, the narrative begins to slow down considerably. There is a scene where Richard may or may not be chased by a mystery vehicle on a deserted road and later finds a brick, wrapped in a Life Magazine article about the couple, on the front seat of his car, which functions as a warning and a threat. But the bulk of the machinations involve the legal maneuvering that leads to the final showdown in the highest court of the land.

While we do meet the two lawyers who argue the case before the Virginia Courts and later the Supreme Court, we never see any of the Virginia legal antagonists involved. And the arguments before the Supreme Court justices are virtually non-existent. Instead, there's a scene involving a Life Magazine photographer who comes to the Lovings' house and takes pictures in order to publicize their case.

Director/Screenwriter Jeff Nichols was probably trying to show the "quiet dignity" of the Lovings throughout and I will say he succeeded. But their quiet dignity is a little too quiet, ultimately making the narrative dramatically inert. The other problem is that Nichols is unable to capture any sense of the couple, warts and all—they are such low-key, nice people, that one wonders if they had any idiosyncrasies, except maybe Richard's interest in drag-racing (depicted at the beginning of the film).

Nichols has done a great service in bringing us an important story that's part of American history. It's a beautiful looking film as well, but beautiful Hallmark Greeting cards also need more nuanced characters, and strong adversaries, to propel the drama forward effectively.

Important Story, But the Film Itself Falls Flat

[themovieparadise · 5/10 · 25 November 2016]

Unfortunately, I think the movie itself just doesn't work and isn't overly interesting. I can appreciate a slow movie, as long as it builds to something worthwhile. With Loving, it's slow and there's no overarching momentum. There's no fluidity. It just inches along through a collection of scenes. And these scenes end up being incredibly repetitive. Not only do we see the characters doing a lot of the same things they were doing before, but a lot of information is repeated over and over. Scenes happen that give us no new information, or repeat what we learned from an earlier scene. It's not just that some scenes needed to be cut, the entire film needed to be restructured. As it stands right now, there's no connective tissue making this a cohesive film. It's just scene after scene. And yes, there is an endgame, but it's glossed over and trivialized in the scheme of the entirety of the movie. There was just nothing captivating about this movie, nothing really reeling me in...

Great Performances Help Drama-Less Story

[Michael_Elliott · 19 February 2017]

Loving (2016)

*** (out of 4)

Richard Loving (Joel Edgerton) marries his pregnant girlfriend Mildred (Ruth Negga) but soon afterwards they are both arrested. Richard, a white man, and Mildred, a black woman, are forced to plead guilty to avoid prison time but they also must leave the state of Virgina. Soon the ACLU hears their case and tries to get it to the Supreme Court.

LOVING is another winner from writer-director Jeff Nichols who is certainly one of the most interesting filmmakers out there. It seems a lot of movies based around race were released in 2016 and many of them were based on true stories, which includes this one. If you're already familiar with the story then it's doubtful anything here will blow you away but at the same time if you're unaware of the court's decision and you're not familiar with these old laws then you're more than likely to really be caught up in the picture.

For the most part this is an extremely well-made movie but I must say that there were a few problems that I had with it. For starters, the film is very low-key, which is an interesting way to tell the story and I thought the director perfectly captured the "country life" by filming the picture this way. The problem is that there's really no drama to be had throughout the film as nothing is really played up for the sake of building up any tension or drama. I'm not sure why Nichols went this direction but I really thought it gave the film an almost made-for-television feel. I'd also argue that the lack of any drama leading up to the Supreme Court showdown also took away any emotional impact.

With that out of the way, the main reason to watch the film are for its two lead actors. Both Negga and Edgerton did a fantastic job with their roles and the best thing is certainly their chemistry together. I really loved how the two actors worked off one another and they really did make you feel as if you were watching a real couple struggle with this issue. I thought both of them had to do a lot of acting without using too many words, which is a difficult thing to do yet they both pulled it off. The supporting cast of characters were all extremely good as well.

As I said, I thought the film lacked a lot of drama or emotion but there's still no doubt that the story itself was a very interesting one and the performances were certainly great.

Great love story about American history that still rings current.

[subxerogravity · 7/10 · 6 November 2016]

There was a movie that came out about 20 years ago called Mr and Mrs Loving which also dealt with the Loving story, whose interracial marriage was seen as unlawful in Virginia and the two fought to set that right, changing The Constitution.

Thought Mr and Mrs Loving was more romantic as I remember it. Loving is more fit for the present we live in, as it tells the story in a more realistic aspect. At the same time it seems to gather more of the story.

It's an interesting movie to watch as I live in an era when its not a big deal (at least legally) for two people of a different race to get married. In retrospect, this law change is not even 50 years old. That seems not so long ago when you know people who can recall a time when we could not mix the colors in holy matrimony. In that content, Loving a very emotional reminder.

Well, I guess 50 years from now seeing two men of different races getting married won't seem like a big thing either and it's movies like Loving that help us remember the struggle. We should all see this and always remember, that when we vote on other people's civil liberties, that there was a point when someone was voting on yours.

I was drawn to Joel Edgerton's transformation into Richard Loving. It's something different than what I'm use to seeing him do.

Overall, I did enjoy the movie. The Loving have a beautiful love story worth telling over and over again.

Incredible performances all around but very bland filmmaking.

[trublu215 · 6/10 · 4 November 2016]

Loving is the type of film you sit down to watch and after about 25 minutes, you know it will most certainly be an Oscar nominee. That isn't because it is anything particularly riveting or ground breaking, it just feels like the typical Oscar bait film. Much like 2014's The Imitation Game, this is a film that hits every check mark down an Oscar ballot. It has incredible central performances from Ruth Nega and Joel Edgerton, a timely story and a cast of who's who type thespians along with a rising director in Jeff Nichols. While all these reasons certainly sound like more than enough to see Loving, the film is lacking a key component...heart. The film trucks through it's fifteen-minutes-too-long runtime, filling it with well acted scenes that rarely ever hit the marks it should.

Telling the true story of Richard and Mildred Loving, an interracial couple in Virginia, and their fight against laws prohibiting them from being together. First off, the true life events have laid more than enough ground work for Nichols to work with yet he turns, what would have been a great yet heartbreaking love story, into a melodramatic courtroom drama that loses all the elements of a truly well done story. There is truth in the performances, in the filmmaking, in the writing but when on the screen, it feels nothing short of a glorification. There is glory in triumphing over asinine laws that the government has bestowed upon the American people especially when it is done in film. However, Loving uses it's power against itself. It becomes sappy and hits your typical biopic beats by the end of the film.

Like I said, Loving features amazing performances from the cast, especially from Edgerton and Nega but the film conforms to the very beats of a typical Hollywood biopic instead of doing its own thing. Jeff Nichols is already known for some fantastic work such as Mud and Midnight Special but this film, while it will be his most successful, is his weakest work to date.

Sweet but nothing special.

[sunchick116-872-583383 · 6/10 · 21 August 2017]

If anyone's ever curious why films based on real life events have to be dramatized, this film right here is why. It was a sweet film, with quiet understated performances, but not a compelling film to watch. The performances certainly didn't stand out from either Egerton or Negga. Her Oscar nod baffles me, besides the fact that she was in a politically correct film. I can't even think of a ten line movie review, this film was so underwhelming. Of course your heart goes out to the loving's and what they had to go through, but there had to have been a more compelling way to tell the story. It was very hard to keep my attention. My advice is read up on the case and skip the movie. You'll lose less of your life that way.

LOVED IT

[MadamWarden · 8/10 · 31 August 2020]

A poignant, low key and beautifully made movie on a subject that is very very relevant today in the divided USA. Edgerton and Negga give masterful performances. Nichols keeps the pace and tone in excellent balance.

Highly recommended to Trump supporters.

Strong Performances Hold Up this Oscar Hopefull

[Ben_Cap · 6/10 · 14 December 2016]

Earlier in the year, before the likes of Swiss Army Man and Moonlight had come out, I had Jeff Nichols's Midnight Special as my top movie of the year(so far). Mr Nichols has chosen his projects very carefully and taken his time to make each one, so when I saw that he had another movie coming out in 2016 I was surprised, and then even more surprised when I learned that it would tell the story of the landmark supreme court case Loving V. Virginia I almost fell off my seat. Not that it does not seem like something that Nichols would do but it does stand out a bit from his other movies. Is Jeff Nichols ready to become a household name? Does the story live up to the Oscar hype? Read on to find out.

The movie is shot beautifully, as is every other Jeff Nichols movie. He is one of the last firm holdouts to still shoot on film not named Paul Thomas Anderson or Quentin Tarantino. The countryside of Virginia has never looked better to me, even surrounded by the extreme bigotry that was going on. Nichols puts some of his strongest scenes right in front of some amazing views and even if the story is kind of bogged down, at least the view is nice.

The performances from both lead actors here are tremendous. Ruth Negga has a sadness of understanding in her eyes through the whole movie. She knows what is happening to her is wrong but also knows that she can't do much to change it. Even when she starts getting help she almost pushes it away because unfortunately she understands the world she is living in. Joel Edgerton is quickly becoming not just one of my favorite actors working today but he is becoming my most respected. This guy just has something watchable about him, and no matter what role he inhabits he always comes strong. After is starring/directing role in last years not too well known "the gift" I started taking notice of Edgerton and he has not disappointed me since. He breathes life into Richard Loving in an almost against type role for Edgerton, but at this point this guy can do anything so I don't know if he even has a type anymore.

Jeff Nichols has written all of the scripts of movies he has worked on. I can appreciate his writing without falling in love with it and Loving is probably his most dull script. His movies have a simplicity to them, that can get a bit more complex depending on the movie, but usually he keeps things fairly easy to understand and follow. Loving just has nowhere to go, its not a poorly written movie, but there is nothing exciting here. This leads into my issue with the movie, which is that it is pretty boring.

Going in I did not know much about the events of the movie, and more horrifyingly how recently they occurred. I did not want the movie to paint with a wide brush or to show any group/race of people as being any better than any other, I think its kind of the point of the whole thing, But unfortunately this movie could have used some extra conflict. The story of the Lovings is an incredible one, again maybe mostly because the world they lived in is only about 40-50 years ago, not 100 like I thought, but it is not exciting enough for a feature length movie. Not much happens other than a few moments of extreme prejudiced and some infuriating court rulings.

I don't want to be misunderstood, what the Lovings did is truly incredible and a story of love and acceptance that we could all use right now, but movies, while a platform to tell these types of stories, have to be entertaining and no amount of pacing can change that about Loving. The direction in this movie is some of the best Jeff Nichols has ever done and you could say that both leads give the performances of their careers until this point, but two hours is two hours. I appreciate Nichols for not fabricating things to make the movie more exciting because this is an important piece of history and punching it up would absolutely tarnish the original goal of the Lovings. When Loving comes to your town in the wake of awards season which I'm sure it will be nominated in a few categories, give it a shot, but don't say I did not warn you.

Subtle and Stunning

[lisacarlson50 · 10/10 · 18 March 2017]

Based on the 1967 civil rights US Supreme Court case which held the banning of interracial marriage was unconstitutional in Virginia. This movie should be required viewing in all high schools. It reveals how terribly we violated the rights of our greatest resource, our fellow human beings and allowing them to be with who they want to be with. Joel Edgerton and especially Ruth Negga will take your breath away with their subtle, beautiful performances. Their quiet determination to be together as Richard and Mildred Loving is achingly romantic and essentially human. This movie should have won best picture as it reflects what makes the human heart so rare and beautiful; it is love. It never grows weary and sustains the greatest of disparaging behaviors.

So much potential...

[jordanbishop-75369 · 6/10 · 27 July 2021]

Such an interesting and historic story which just fell flat. Dialogue was underwhelming and though the director may have been going for low key and humble it just fell flat for me.

Well-acted, compelling movie

[Red-125 · 9/10 · 26 November 2016]

Loving (2016) was written and directed by Jeff Nichols. It's based on the true story of Mildred and Richard Loving, who were ordinary people caught up in an extraordinary situation.

The Lovings were married in Washington, DC, although they lived in rural Virginia. No one would have noticed or cared, except for the fact that Richard was Caucasian and Mildred was Black. At the time, a mixed marriage was a felony in the state of Virginia. The plot is based on what happened next in their lives.

Joel Edgerton portrays Richard. He's a bricklayer, and, apparently, a very good one. He always has work. Ruth Negga plays Mildred. Mildred is a homebody, who does her job very well, and turns out to be the more canny of the two.

The movie wouldn't work if it weren't for the skills of the two lead actors. Edgerton doesn't say much, but he makes you believe that he truly loves his wife.

Negga is a true star. She's very beautiful, but director Nichols portrays her as a quiet, dignified woman who happens to be beautiful. She is so good in this role that I predict that she'll be nominated for an Oscar.

As other reviewers have pointed out, the movie is a little longer than it needs to be. However, the film keeps your attention throughout. We saw it in a theater, but it will work well on the small screen.

For a movie about such an important topic, it feels pretty empty when it comes to emtion.

[mahmus · 6/10 · 21 September 2020]

It's slow, quiet and oddly distant. I think that's kind of the point. It protrays the Lovings as a very unassuming couple. They didn't care about all the lawer side of the supreme court case, they just wanted the veredict to let them stay together, because they loved each other.

That's the film's biggest strength and weakness. The relationship between these two is very sweet and you can tell they love each other. However, I was left a bit dissappointed when it came to the importance of landmark case.

The film focuses more on the Lovings as a regular couple that just so happens to be interracial, which is great. But by focusing mostly on this, it deprives the audience from witnessing just how important the case as a whole was, since most of it happens off-screen. Making the film a courtroom drama would have been the wrong move, but more courtroom scenes would have been welcome.

Still though, their relationship is lovely and Ruth Negga and Joel Edgerton give great and very understated performances, so the final product is defintely worth watching. I just wished it could have had a bigger emotional impact. I love subtle, understated movies, but sometimes it's just nice to feel things, you know?

I will say this however; I certainly did not expect Michael Shannon to show up. Then again, this IS a Jeff Nichols movie, so I probably should have.

They tried so hard to make it worthy that they forgot to make it interesting

[JamesHitchcock · 4/10 · 16 March 2017]

In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries most American states enacted anti-miscegenation laws prohibiting interracial marriage; only a handful, mostly in the north-east, never introduced any legislation of this sort. During the early and mid-twentieth century attitudes began to change, and the northern and western states began to repeal these laws, especially after California's anti-miscegenation statute was struck down as unconstitutional by that state's Supreme Court in 1948. There was, however, one part of the country where attitudes did not change. By 1967 there was a stark geographical divide. In every single one of the former slave states of the Deep South, except Maryland, interracial marriage was still illegal. In every other part of the country it was lawful.

"Loving" tells the true story of Richard Mildred Loving, a couple from Caroline County, Virginia. Because Richard was white and Mildred black, they were forced to travel to Washington DC to get married, but in 1958 Virginia refused to recognise interracial marriages performed in other states; indeed, state law made it a criminal offence for Virginia residents to travel out of the state to enter into such a marriage. Richard and Mildred were arrested and charged with breaking this law; they were sentenced to a year in jail, but the judge agreed to suspend the sentence if they would leave Virginia and not return for 25 years. The Lovings moved to Washington, but did not like living in the city, and grew nostalgic for a return to the Virginia countryside. With the aid of the ACLU they petitioned the Virginia courts for a review of their case and, when this was denied, took the matter all the way to the US Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court's decision in Loving v. Virginia, which took place in 1967, finally invalidated America's surviving anti-miscegenation laws and is regarded as a major milestone in the civil rights struggle. This could have been an inspiring film about an inspiring story, so it is a pity that the film as actually made is so dull. Part of the reason, I think, is paradoxically that the film-makers were so keen to stick to the historical truth. Although the sixties were a period of racial tensions across America, particularly in the South, these tensions do not appear to have affected Caroline County to any great extent, and the Lovings appear to have experienced very little hostility or bitterness from their neighbours.

Richard and Mildred are portrayed throughout as deeply in love with one another. As played by Joel Edgerton, Richard comes across as a stolid, good-natured man who rarely displays much emotion other than affection for his wife. Mildred, as played by Ruth Negga, at first seems rather passive, but later emerges as a stronger character; she, for example, seems more determined than her husband to pursue their legal action. Any differences between them, however, do not seem to have led to serious tensions in their marriage, and they are never shown arguing with one another.

Now I am not arguing that the film-makers should have invented conflicts where none existed in reality for the sake of a good story; too many films supposedly based on historical fact have done that sort of thing for me to be happy with it. The film, however, seems altogether devoid of any sources of tension, and it certainly would have been possible for the film-makers to have found some. Given that the film tells the story of a court case, I am surprised that no attempt was made to turn it into a courtroom drama and that we see so little of the actual court proceedings. We never even hear the arguments which the State of Virginia put forward in order to justify their position, the counter-arguments put forward by the Lovings' lawyers or the reasons why the Supreme Court found in their favour.

Not only does the film lack tension, it is also overlong and moves too slowly. Yes, it tells a worthy, uplifting feelgood story about the triumph of reason over prejudice. It's just a pity that they tried so hard to make it worthy that they forgot to make it interesting. 4/10