I'm disappointed in Netflix. on February 14, I expected a whole list of suggested romances to stream. The closest I found was the stand-alone highlight, apparently more for Black History Month than for Valentine's Day. Anyway, it was already on my personal list, and I figured it had the best chance of an ending that's happy or at least victorious for the central couple.
After all, the title refers not just to the plain English word but to the first party in Loving v. Virginia. It begins with Mildred Jeter (Oscar nominee Ruth Negga) telling boyfriend Richard Loving (Joel Edgerton) that she's expecting. They soon have an official wedding in the District of Columbia, but living like an interracial married couple in Caroline County in 1958 gets them arrested. The only way to stay out of jail is to not be in the state at the same time. They move to D.C., but Mildred for one hates living there. She writes to Bobby Kennedy, who gets ACLU attorney Bernard S. Cohen (Nick Kroll) to represent them at no charge. Bernie hopes to take the matter all the way to the Supreme Court, but Richard is not nearly as comfortable as Mildred with the attention they're gaining.
Sources tell me that this is about as accurate as bios get; the few errors, such as anachronistic brands, are inconsequential to the story. That said, I didn't find it all that educational. We see almost none of the famous trial and not much more of the prior trials. There is little discussion of the legal particulars, and Cohen and consultant Phil Hirschkop (Jon Bass) can only speculate on how opponents will try to justify anti-miscegenation laws. There isn't even a whole lot of drama in the form of extralegal confrontations or threats, mainly just paranoia on Richard's part. The most I learned was about the surprising severity of the legal consequences and the rotten, seemingly irregular way the cops came for the Lovings the first time (we never do learn who ratted on them). Plus a reminder that the ACLU could take credit for a good turn back in the day.
I'd also kinda hoped to learn how Mildred and Richard got together in the first place, but this isn't that kind of romance. It's heartwarming not in the setup so much as in the affirmation of endurance. At no point in the story do they not love each other, nor is it evident that their love decreases at all. When Richard hears a tipsy declaration that his life would be way easier if he just left Mildred, he is clearly perturbed but never seriously considers it to our knowledge.
I'll note that there isn't a big socioeconomic gap between Mildred and Richard; she does farmwork before becoming a homemaker, and he's a bricklayer. It figures, then, that Richard doesn't impress me intellectually. Mildred might be smarter, but I needed a while to understand why she acts like the only places they could possibly live are her prior home or the inner city. Why not look into a countryside where you won't get in trouble? I suppose either she wants to stay close to extended family, or they can't afford to move anywhere else.
With such a basic telling, the 123 minutes feel pretty long. Some moments could easily have been shaved down without sacrificing drama. I could see why IMDb gives it a solid 7.0, rather less than other sites. There just isn't much substance here, and while the actors do a fine job, they don't bring a lot of star power.
I am willing to offer a more generous interpretation: Director Jeff Nichols wanted it this way. Court proceedings would bog things down for his purposes. We're not supposed to find the Lovings larger than life or even all that "developed." He wants as many people as possible to relate to them. Any of us could have had a taboo relationship under certain circumstances, and if our love is genuine, it would suck to be denied the right to share our lives wherever we may reside.
A cynical viewer would reject the description of this feature as "apolitical," extrapolating from its timing an implied endorsement of same-sex marriage or other acts that are still controversial today. Me, I take Loving at face value, which is almost certainly intended at this level of simplicity.
No comments:
Post a Comment