buddylove447 Sorry, but I want to have a rant here. A number of top critics have used almost identical sentences in their reviews of this film, namely - " It shows how far America has come in its views of race and equality - and how far is left to go" This is of course complete rubbish, but sounds good. This film does show how far we have come, but how can the film show how far (as most will agree) we still have to go ? What disappointed me here was that a key civil rights case and the bigger picture are almost ignored for a love story that focuses on the couple themselves as the story. Hence, for example, the fact that Mildred Loving claimed on a number of occasions to be of Indian heritage and denied her black heritage, and that her marriage certificate identifies her as Indian is not mentioned in the film, and so the reasons behind this have been forgotten about. Instead of focusing on the bigger picture the film has to resort to creating drama when possibly there was none.......ie it is imagined that Richard Loving is pursued or followed by a car which he thinks contains unidentified persons wishing to do him harm (cue dramatic music, car chase etc)......all very exciting, for a minute (but hardly Bullitt)..... but is it true -----well there is a much evidence for that as there is him finding a brick in his car, again this creates tension and a sense of persecution. Ten minutes of the film is given over to showing Life photographer Grey Villet in their home - is that really key to this story ? Nope, but it creates a cameo role for Shannon and shows yet more scenes of the Lovings in love, as if the film needed more of them. If Nichols wanted to create a love story, and feels that is more important than the bigger picture then I would have liked to know how they met, what the attitudes of both Richard's and Mildred's families were to their romance, what barriers they encountered, but instead this is a film about an important civil rights issue masquerading as a romance. I found it disappointing and a bit dull. Performances are very good, especially from Ruth Negga.

kindtxgal 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.

evanston_dad There was surely a more compelling film to be made from the factual events upon which "Loving" is based. The soft-spoken couple at the center of the film were the spark that ignited a controversy that would eventually result in a Supreme Court ruling allowing legal interracial marriage. But the film we're given almost goes out of its way to avoid any dramatic conflict, making the fight this couple waged in the name of equality seem no more remarkable than a daily trip to the grocery store.Ruth Negga (Oscar nominated) and Joel Egerton give decent performances as largely inarticulate people who find themselves the center of something much bigger than them. If the actual events played out as they do in this film, fine. I'm not asking the filmmakers to invent facts or scenarios just to make their movie more interesting. But we could have been shown how big a deal this court case was, even if the couple at the center of it weren't physically present to witness much of it. We're told how much publicity the case got around the nation, but we don't see it in the movie. We're told what a big deal it was, but we're not shown it. The makers of "Loving" decided to make a movie about this topic, so they could have done something to bring dramatic interest to it.In these racially charged times, a story like this should have triggered all sorts of emotions in the viewer: outrage, sympathy, pride, fear, frustration, sadness, joy. Instead it left me feeling almost nothing, mostly because it seems like it can barely muster the energy to tell its own story.Grade: C+

hughman55 It's difficult to know where to begin with a film like this. It took nearly 60 years for someone to do this so I guess I would say that at least they took the time to get it right. It is an absolute work of art. And that deserves a lot of attention. But it's also, and primarily, a story about real people and the facts surrounding their lives. Specifically, their marriage. Marriage and raising children is difficult enough; just imagine what it would be like if someone like, say a policeman, stormed 300 years worth of systemic racism, segregation, and slavery, through it. Where this film succeeds so well is that it stays away from that larger picture, and that societal cauldron, and keeps the film focused on the two people at its center. They weren't worldly people. They weren't book smart. And their understanding of the world around them was simple enough to account only for the feelings they had for one another and not the artificial laws that would come to govern them for most of their marriage. I guess I would say that, ultimately, this film brings us into what felt like the real lives of Richard and Mildred Loving. The documentary on which this film is based, "The Loving Story" by Nancy Buriski, is a solid depiction of the actual characters. And Joel Edgerton and Ruth Negga are outstanding as the Lovings. Director/screenwriter, Jeff Nichols, keeps the story within the confines of the personal with barely a page of written dialogue for the lead actors. The quietness of their relationship says more than they, or anyone else, could say about them. And there is just enough from the peripheral characters for the viewer to feel the crushing fist of institutionalized racism as they did. I loved this film. The story is compelling and needed to be told from the perspective of its main characters and that was done very well here. The marriage of Richard and Mildred Loving was at the epicenter of one of the most consequential Supreme Court rulings of the 20th Century. A ruling that was unanimous during a time, unlike today, when that was actually possible. The strength of this film is in the touching scenes between the Lovings. Scenes of simplicity like putting your children to bed and then going off to your bedroom at the end of a long day. Richard's daily life was punctuated with monotonous hours as a brick layer where things are predictable and the lines are straight. That was something that he could understand and was comfortable with. Ruth's was one of children and home. That, and one another, was all they wanted. And all they needed. In 1967 the Supreme Court ruled that they should be left to the peace and comfort of a private life. And 60 years later someone made a terrific movie about them. Which is a lot better than not ever making it at all.