You Need Only a Moment with Loving‘s Ruth Negga and Joel Edgerton to Get the Tears Rolling


“I think they just couldn’t believe…they weren’t just allowed to just be married and live where they wanted to live — two really simple desires.”

That’s Ruth Negga speaking about Mildred and Richard Loving who brought about a landmark civil rights decision reversing the ban against interracial marriage (Loving v. Virginia), and the subjects of Jeff Nichols’ next film.


(The real Richard and Mildred Loving)

Loving’s Cannes premiere received a standing ovation, kicked off this year’s Oscar buzz, and made Ruth cry throughout. I can’t even imagine having enough tissue to get through it all; just moments of clips featuring Negga and a completely transformed Joel Edgerton, and I was already a mess. The timely story of the couple who “changed the constitution” reminds how incomprehensible our past, and warns of the split path we walk in our country right now.

“And I think there was a certain deeper respect than any other experience I’ve ever had, to bring someone to life because of how deeply I felt about the story, and how big an open heart this movie has.” (Edgerton)

Here’s the first clip; do keep your Kleenex handy.

And a Cannes press interview:

Deadline also has a great clip with Nichols discussing the Lovings, and how he came about casting the actors.

Catch Ruth Negga in AMC’s Preacher this Sunday; Loving hits theaters November 4th.

Cindy Davis

Cindy Davis

Cindy Davis has been writing about the entertainment industry for ​over eight years, and is the ​Editor-in-Chief at Oohlo, where she muses over television, movies, and pop culture. Previous Senior News Editor at Pajiba, and published at BUST.

You may also like...

  • emmalita

    This looks fantastic.

  • NateMan

    I rarely watch dramas these days, but I can’t wait for this.

  • Berry

    Well this will break your heart for sure.

  • ChainedVase

    I’m not crying you’re crying shut up I’m crying.

  • Freetheklingons

    Serious question: How do we define ‘interracial?’

    • emmalita

      I don’t understand your question. What are you looking for? A discussion about race as a social construct with no basis in biology, or the way it was defined legally under Jim Crow laws?

      • Freetheklingons

        I don’t really know. I guess I’m wondering if we consider interracial to just mean black/white? Or …Y’know, I am not even sure. If you/we see a hispanic man and an asian woman walking hand in hand down the street, are they an interracial couple? Of course they are, biologically. But in our vernacular. The populist definition. It seems to me we just use that term when one of the couple is black. AHispanic woman/white man? Do we consider that interracial? Not looking for any rancorous vibe at all. Too great a day for that (any day, for that matter).

        • emmalita

          In that spirit, I say without rancor, there is no biological basis for differentiating between humans based on skin color. So I wouldn’t call any couple of humans walking down the street interracial. Under Jim Crow laws, and for people concerned about “white purity” a white person with a person of color would be of great concern.

          • Freetheklingons

            OK. Now, under your paraphrase of the Jim Crow law, what is a person of color?

            Full disclosure: My husband is Peruvian. He was born here in United States. On his birth certificate (in the 1960s) it says: Race — Caucasian. We always get a chuckle out of that. Also, my mom (kind of a racist, but that’s a long story) calls us an interracial couple (I’m white…that’s such a weird thing to type. Such a strange concept). She means no rancor (this time) but we think it’s…odd. My kids identify as hispanic, which I also think is vaguely funky, as they are just as much Irish as Peruvian, yes? Just an odd concept all around, I agree, that we divvy people up based on such seemingly arbitrary things.

          • emmalita

            And this is why it’s bullshit. It’s so arbitrary.

            I’m not enough of an expert on Jim Crow laws to give you an answer I would feel comfortable with, and I think it probably changed some depending on the people involved.