IMDb Rating 7 10 27,628


Downloaded 49,894 times
April 5, 2019



Bill Camp as Warren Miller
Joel Edgerton as Victor Sykes
Marton Csokas as George
720p.BLU 1080p.BLU
1.03 GB
23.976 fps
123 min
P/S N/A / N/A
1.97 GB
23.976 fps
123 min
P/S N/A / N/A

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by JamesHitchcock 4 / 10 / 10

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

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

Reviewed by richard-1967 10 / 10 / 10

Beautiful understated love, a powerful film

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.

Reviewed by dham629 10 / 10 / 10

The power of love makes you love the Lovings

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.

Read more IMDb reviews


Be the first to leave a comment