TRAILER: Loving

Vanity Fair recaps:

Sick of the summer box-office doldrums? Focus Features is here to bolster your belief in important, non-franchise filmmaking with the first trailer for Loving, a powerful biopic about Richard and Mildred Loving—the interracial couple who changed the course of American history by fighting for their right to be married in the 1960s.

From filmmaker Jeff Nichols, Loving was one of the breakout premieres at the Cannes Film Festival. Joel Edgerton and Ruth Negga star as the titular couple, who married in Washington, D.C., only to be arrested for violating Virginia’s anti-miscegenation law shortly after.

  • hdtex
    • TuuxKabin

      Perfect song to be in the soundtrack of “Loving”. Thank you for the link.

    • KnownDonorDad

      This is great, thanks for sharing! Agree with TuuxKabin 100%.

      • hdtex

        I love this song, and this singer. A long time progressive of the best sort.

  • JT

    Justice Clarence Thomas was alone in his dissent.

    • Blake Mason

      Dissent on what?

      • JT

        Joke, right?

        • TuuxKabin

          ‘K . . . was wondering too, re-read it, and ‘knowing’ you figured as much.

          • medaka

            I read it as ultimate, pin-point snark.

          • TuuxKabin

            Still drowsy, but yeah. JT has that ability.

        • Blake Mason

          Forgive me I am lost… is this snark on his marriage to a white women…

          • JT

            All of the above.

  • Wynter Marie Starr

    “We ain’t hurtin’ nobody.”

    Even in that short clip the hatred of the times comes through as does the love between this couple. If two non related adults love each other and want to marry, keep your nose out of it as it doesn’t concern you, just your bigotry.

    • TuuxKabin

      You could write a column WMS. I’d follow it daily. Thanks again for getting between the lines and right on the topic at hand.

      • Wynter Marie Starr

        Thank you, Tuux. I’ve actually considered it as I have much to say, but I’m involved in a lawsuit right now and my lawyer won’t allow me to start a blog about any sort of injustice or civil rights matters.

        • TuuxKabin

          Follow the advice of your attorney, but keep us informed to your opinions and observations. Thank you.

  • thom

    i can’t wait! the film got rave reviews at cannes and is a early favorite for an Oscars
    if you get a chance, also watch “the loving story” an hbo documentary about the couple. beautiful

  • thom

    i think it’s fair to say without Richard and Mildred Loving we would not have marriage equality in this country

  • JuanGalicia

    *sobs* <3

  • yeruncle

    I have to say that I CAN NOT WAIT for this, Ruth Negga is a breakout star about to happen. Also the debt we owe them – and the allies they have been – makes this unmissable.

    • B Snow

      Sorry to get all fangirly, but the more I see of Ruth Negga, the more I like her. Especially when I heard her real accent in an interview. 🙂

  • Dan

    I’ve never really been a fan of Negga’s but now all I can think of when I see her is “Tulip!’

    • TuuxKabin

      As in Calvinism?

      • Adam King

        As in “Preacher”.

        • TuuxKabin

          I can’t find a reference to “Tulip”, was/is it a movie starring that actress? I should have searched further, but only came up with TULIP as five points in some Calvinistic credo.

          • Adam King

            Tulip is the character she plays in the AMC show “Preacher.”

          • TuuxKabin

            Having no tv, I’m deprived of some enjoyment, but feel okay about it. I’ll look for it on line/netflix or somewhere. Thanks.

          • Adam King

            They’re showing it on Amazon Prime, but you have to pay to subscribe to the show separately I think. ETA: I quit cable, but I have a Roku and can watch Netflix and such on that. No TV still leaves you with reality, which can be quite entertaining enough.

          • TuuxKabin

            Its been so long we haven’t had tv the reality without it has been quite entertaining as you mention. TV could take time away from JMG, and that’s not even conceivable. I find a lot of creativity and entertainment right here and a few other ‘outlets’. We signed up for PRIDE yesterday, the British magazine Joe posts in. So much to absorb, too little time and TV is like an unwanted guest in this household. Roku, eh? El husbian, el techno stud muffin will have to look into that for us. Thanks for the tip/lead.

    • lymis

      I’ve only seen her in Agents of SHIELD. Odd character, but she did a great job with what she had to work with.

      • B Snow

        She’s amazing in “Preacher”. I can’t even describe what she does. Just go watch it.

      • JCF

        Is/was she “Flowers”?

  • Michael Rush

    There is no gay marriage without these people

    ” The U.S. Supreme Court first applied this standard to marriage in Loving v. Virginia (1967), where it struck down a Virginia law banning interracial marriage. As Chief Justice Earl Warren wrote for the majority:

    The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men … ”

    Gays were simply recognized by the Supreme Court as entitled to this right , no change to the Constitution .

    • canoebum

      Exactly. I argued during the whole equality campaign that we already possessed the right to marry, the problem was it wasn’t being recognized by the government.

      • Michael Rush

        We kind of got recognized as actual human being , American citizens entitled to the rights American citizens are entitled to .

        • David Walker

          I wonder argue (because I’m a bastard that way) that rather than “to the rights American citizens are entitled to” it is A right. We can get married, then be thrown out of the B&B where we honeymoon, find our furniture on the sidewalk because the landlord just found out about us, and be fired Monday because we went to HR to change the marital status. It is A right…a fundamental right, to be sure, but one right nonetheless.

          • Michael Rush

            I feel the same way , but the Supreme Court did recognize that we are American Citizens entitled to the rights American Citizens are entitled to , then the laws have to catch up – however long that takes , unless Republicans can undo everything that’s been done .

    • WebSlinger

      I have seen the movie (I personally think every gay person should because while I knew the story I cried and cried) and YES I wholeheartedly agree that this decision being struck down was a litmus test for gays to have marriage equality in this country.

      Keeping in mind that I was born in 1968 and therefore this was not that long ago that this country which has the nerve to proclaim in its most sacred document that “all men are created equal and deserving of LIFE, LIBERTY and the PURSUIT of HAPPINESS” did not allow this couple (and countless others) to marry.

      We as a nation have much to be ashamed of as we attempt to spread “democracy” across the globe…

      http://i2.wp.com/amptoons.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/kevin-siers-cartoon.gif

      • Mary Burnham

        <<o. ✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤:::::::!gq290p:….,……

  • Mark

    I wonder how long it will take to eradicate all these hate laws put into place by the bigots of the time….even now.

  • SoCalGal20

    I’ll definitely be seeing this. The SCOTUS ruling in their case was so important. This looks like a great movie.

  • Marides48

    Does this mean that back then it was illegal for orange man to marry a white woman?
    Three times?
    “Make America Great Again?”

  • That_Looks_Delicious

    She is very good -as a completely different kind of chsracter- on Preacher. I’m sure she’ll be great in this too.

  • KnownDonorDad

    Wow, I didn’t recognize Joel Edgerton (recently saw him in Black Mass). Looks very well done, and the historical significance couldn’t be more timely post-Obergefell.

    • Edmund Allin

      Remarkable how a little peroxide changes you.

    • Edmund Allin

      Also noticed that it comes out around the time of the US election, does it not?

      • Bj Lincoln

        Sure does.

  • djcoastermark

    Looks like a very moving film. One I will be catching this fall.

  • Edmund Allin

    An extremely important case, and I hope a very good film, which I doubt I’ll be able to watch in one sitting at the cinema.

  • Jack

    I cannot put into words the feelings that this brings up. I’ve read their case any number of times. But this takes the horror they went through to an entirely different level.

  • Falconlights

    This looks great. My wife and I are definitely going to go see this.

  • D. J.

    I have seen it. It is wonderful.

  • Lakeview Bob

    The actors look remarkably like the real Mildred and Richard Loving.

    • JCF

      I was just thinking that!

  • Sean

    ..

    • coram nobis

      She understood. It’s interesting that the President, whose parents would have been arrested in Virginia for their marriage, pre-Loving, was slower to see the parallel.

  • Octavio

    This looks like a great film. Unfortunately, it will most likely make me angry and raise my blood pressure, thus ruining my whole week. So, I most likely won’t see it. Still, glad to know this film has been made.

    • coram nobis

      There’s also “The Free State of Jones,” now out. Among other things, its protagonist, Newton Knight, raised two families, one interracial, and his grandson would be prosecuted in 1948 for miscegenation.

      Smithsonian Magazine has a good backgrounder piece and a movie trailer.

      http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/true-story-free-state-jones-180958111/?no-ist

      … I ask him what he admires most about Knight. “When you grow up in the South, you hear all the time about your ‘heritage,’ like it’s the greatest thing there is,” he says. “When I hear that word, I think of grits and sweet tea, but mostly I think about slavery and racism, and it pains me. Newt Knight gives me something in my heritage, as a white Southerner, that I can feel proud about. We didn’t all go along with it.”

  • Sally

    Yeah, well…I’ll pass, thanks.

    But if you like that sort of thing, you go right ahead.

    To each, his/her own.

    • David Walker

      Why, thank you, Miz Sally. We sho do ‘preciate yo gracious permission to go shuffle along to the movie theAYter and climb the stairs to the queers only balCOny. Yo certainly be one helluva piece o’ work, Miz Sally. Yes, sir, ma’am. You almost librul.

      • Bj Lincoln

        Nice response.
        I’m a gussin Miss Sally don’t know how important this was to all our history and as a steppin stone to us queers gettin hitched legally. Maybe her history books don’t have nothin about coloreds or queers.

        • David Walker

          Hoam skulin’ kin dew that.

      • Sally

        Why, thank you kindly, Mr. David. You appear to be a gentleman of good breeding. I hope the Good Lord sees fit to allow you to be bred nightly. Of course, at your age, you’ll surely have to pay for the pleasure.

        • David Walker

          Ageist too? No, I don’t have to pay for it. Never did, never had to. You?

          • Sally

            (a) It’s rather hypocritical of you to throw out the allegation of “ageist” when your earlier comments clearly show you prejudice against those you presume to be Southern rural Whites of lower socioeconomic status.

            (b) It’s not ageist to make reference to the prevailing pecking order of sexual desirability amongst male homosexuals. I’m happy to hear you’ve got yourself a gerontophile or two who finds it enjoyable to peel off your Depends undergarment, spread your flabby, saggy cheeks and give you a semen enema. And bully for you if they provide that service for free!

          • David Walker

            Thank you, Miz Sally. I look forward to your future posts. Your fantasy world deserves to be further explored. You seem nice, bless your heart.

  • coram nobis

    Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967):

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/388/1

    … As for the various statements directly concerning the Fourteenth Amendment, we have said in connection with a related problem that, although these historical sources “cast some light” they are not sufficient to resolve the problem; [a]t best, they are inconclusive. The most avid proponents of the post-War Amendments undoubtedly intended them to remove all legal distinctions among “all persons born or naturalized in the United States.”

    … These statutes also deprive the Lovings of liberty without due process of law in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.

    Marriage is one of the “basic civil rights of man,” fundamental to our very existence and survival. … To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State’s citizens of liberty without due process of law.
    * * *
    These convictions must be reversed.

    It is so ordered.

    — WARREN, C.J., Opinion of the Court

  • jo gerardo

    Nick Kroll? “Obvie” Now I really have to see this movie!

  • JCF

    If I needed more proof there IS a God: their NAME! Can’t wait for this…

    [FYI: my favorite uncle and aunt—whose races reflect the same combination as the Lovings—married (legally in California) in 1965]

    • Sally

      Seems like the flimsiest of “proof” to me, but it’s your delusion, so you enjoy it, JCF!

      • JCF

        You seem nice.

  • Mary Burnham

    <<o. ✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤✤:::::::!gq290p:….,….