Loving

In 2016, Jeff Nichols’ Loving, staring Ruth Negga and Joel Edgerton, brought the quiet, intimate story of Richard and Mildred Loving to the big screen – but just how closely does the film reflect the real case that changed American history? In this episode, we compare Loving (2016) to the true events of Loving v. Virginia, the landmark 1967 Supreme Court decision that struck down laws banning interracial marriage. We explore who Richard and Mildred Loving were, what life was like for them in 1950s Virginia, and how their private desire to live as a married couple turned into a constitutional battle. From the film’s restrained storytelling and emotional tone to the legal realities, timelines, and historical context left on the margin, we break down what the movie gets right, what it simplifies, and why the real story remains just as powerful, if not more so, than its Hollywood portrayal. 

Primary Sources:

• Loving v. Virginia, 388 US 1 (1967)
• The Loving Story (2012)
• Brimner, Larry. Finding a Way Home: Mildred and Richard Loving and the Fight for Marriage Equality. Calkins Creek (2020).

Instagram: @CriminalAdaptations

Email us: criminaladaptations@gmail.com

TikTok: @criminaladaptations

X: x.com/CriminalAdapt

Theme: DARKNESS (feat. EdKara) by Ghost148

Chapters

• 0:00 A Somber Opening And Housekeeping
• 1:04 Reiner Tragedy Acknowledged
• 2:54 Introducing Loving And Why It Matters
• 4:25 Director And Cast Background
• 10:50 How The Film Came Together
• 15:10 Casting Choices And Preparation
• 21:35 Sheriff Brooks And Systemic Villainy
• 25:07 Nick Kroll As Bernie Cohen
• 28:50 Michael Shannon And Life Magazine
• 33:05 Film Summary: The Lovings’ Ordeal
• 48:25 Legal Strategy And Media Spotlight
• 55:20 Supreme Court Stakes And Message
• 1:03:55 What The Film Leaves Out
• 1:07:45 The True Story: From Arrest To Appeal
• 1:24:15 Inside Virginia’s Racist Laws
• 1:36:25 Building The Case To The High Court
• 1:47:15 Oral Arguments And The Decision

Transcript

Ashley: 0:13

Welcome to Criminal Adaptations, the show where we take a look at some of your favorite movies and the true crime stories that inspired them. I'm Ashley. I'm a clinical psychologist and forensic evaluator in the state of Oregon.

Remi: 0:27

And I'm Remy. I spent over a decade working in the film and television industry in Los Angeles, California.

Ashley: 0:34

And welcome everyone to our second episode of 2026. I'm stoked. I'm looking forward to this year. Remy, how about you? How are you doing?

Remi: 0:46

I am doing a-okay, enjoying the new year so far, but there is something that we would like to touch on before we get into today's episode. Ashley, do you wanna take it from here?

Ashley: 0:58

Yes. Tragically, we learned a couple weeks ago, we pre-record our episodes, so it's actually still 2025 right now, but we learned two weeks ago that Rob Reiner and his wife, Michelle, were found murdered in their home. And their son, actually, Nick Reiner, has been arrested for the crime.

Remi: 1:20

It is a terrible, terrible tragedy. We just covered one of Rob Reiner's films, A Few Good Men, just a few weeks ago. And we were both very shocked to hear this. And as Ashley said, we do record some of our episodes in advance, especially during the holiday season, because it gets very busy. But we did feel like it was important to address this and say that we will be covering this on a future episode, but are going to be holding off until all of the information comes out.

Ashley: 1:51

Yeah, we probably won't wait until the conclusion of a trial because that could take many, many years. But before we do cover this, we want to at least wait until there's some legal documents that have been released, an affidavit that usually has facts and evidence that has been discovered. Right now, nothing really has been released by the police department other than their son is in custody. I have heard recently that he actually plans on pleading insanity. Apparently, he had some medication changes. So it will be a very interesting trial to say the very least. Today we are covering the 2016 film Loving, directed by Jeff Nichols and starring Ruth Nega and Joel Edgerton. I know at the end of last episode we had said we wish we would have timed things better, so this would have come out on Valentine's Day, but today is Martin Luther King Day, so it is actually a very, very fitting case to be discussing today.

Remi: 3:14

Had you ever heard of Loving before we decided to do this episode, Ashley?

Ashley: 3:19

Of course I have heard of Loving. It's a Supreme Court case. It is the case that made interracial marriage legal. So yes, I had heard of it. Mostly what I learned from this episode was how the process played out from when the lovings were arrested to the ruling by the Supreme Court. Had you heard about it before?

Remi: 3:40

I had not actually. I am not really up to date on a lot of Supreme Court rulings, and this is something that I should have been aware of, but was very ignorant of. I did see this film when it came out. I think I streamed it somewhere, but I was only kind of half paying attention, and that's giving this a disservice. This is a historic event, and I do think it is something that people need to be more aware of.

Ashley: 4:07

I had also heard of the movie, but never saw it. It was kind of on my to-watch list for a while, and then it just kind of came and went, and I just never got around to it.

Remi: 4:18

Had you seen any of Jeff Nichols' movies before?

Ashley: 4:22

I had never even heard of this director before.

Remi: 4:25

I bet you have seen a couple of his films. He made a Matthew McConaughey movie called Mud. He also made a weird kind of sci-fi movie called Midnight Special. But the film that he made that I really love is called Take Shelter, starring Michael Shannon. And I think I showed you this film. It is about a husband and family man who begins getting premonitions that a catastrophic storm is coming and looks crazy to everyone around him, and he starts to look crazier and crazier.

Ashley: 4:59

I do remember that movie, and I really liked it. I think I have seen Mud. I'm pretty sure I saw it but wasn't paying attention. And I'm pretty sure that's a true crime case. I think it's on our list to cover in the future. And his midnight special with like a bunch of kids.

Remi: 5:13

It's with one kid and Michael Shannon, and the kid, I think, is spoiler alert, if you don't want to hear that, skip ahead 15 seconds. He is some sort of extraterrestrial of some sort. I don't know. It was very strange. It was neat, it was creative, but I really prefer Take Shelter out of all of his other films.

Ashley: 5:34

Well, what about Joel Edgerton? In my opinion, this guy is astonishingly underrated as an actor.

Remi: 5:42

I totally agree. He's one of those actors that you almost forget about until he shows up in something, and then you're like, wow, this guy is really, really good. He was in Warrior with Tom Hardy. He was in The Gift, which he wrote and directed, starring him and Jason Bateman. And of course, Zero Dark 30.

Ashley: 6:01

I did not know he wrote and directed The Gift. That movie's probably one that not a lot of people like, but I think it's entertaining.

Remi: 6:12

It is a messed-up film, but I do applaud him for making it. It is unique, it is creative, and he did a really good job of capturing atmosphere and mood with that one. He also plays Baz in the Animal Kingdom movie, which we will be covering someday. And he's currently starring in Train Dreams on Netflix, which we have planned on seeing, but haven't quite gotten around to it yet. We have heard it is quite a downer of a film, and uh we've had some stuff going on in our personal lives that have had us gravitating towards more comfort viewings.

Ashley: 6:47

What about Ruth Nega? I don't think I know much, if anything, about her.

Remi: 6:52

I only know her from the television show Preacher, where she played Tulip O'Hare. That is based on a graphic novel. It is about a preacher who has the word of God, and anything he tells someone to do, they have to do it. And Tulip is his girlfriend, and they meet a vampire and they go on a wacky road trip, and it is a really fun premise and a great graphic novel and really entertaining show. However, the acting that she's doing in this film is on a totally other level. She is very, very subdued, but portrays a remarkable amount with very, very few words in this film.

Ashley: 7:31

Well, let's get into the pre-production of Loving.

Nick Krull: 7:34

All this talk is civil rights. We need to get you some civil rights.

Remi: 7:40

Loving is a 2016 American film written and directed by Jeff Nichols, inspired by the documentary The Loving Story by Nancy Bersky. The film stars Ruth Nega and Joel Edgerton as Mildred and Richard Loving, and co-stars Bill Camp, Nick Kroll, John Bass, Christopher Mann, and Michael Shannon.

Ashley: 8:01

Two thoughts on this casting. Well, three, actually. Hi, Bill Camp. Welcome to your third episode of Criminal Adaptations. Number two, Michael Shannon is clearly Jeff Nichols' guy. And three, Nick Kroll? Question mark?

Remi: 8:18

We will get into his casting in just a little bit, but he does a very good job in this film. This is the only serious performance I've ever seen him do, and I think he really does a great job. While filming Main Street in Durham, North Carolina, on April 6, 2009, Colin Firth came across the story of Richard and Mildred Loving. Do you know who Colin Firth is, Ashley?

Ashley: 8:41

I do know who Colin Firth is. He is a rom com icon.

Remi: 8:48

I know him from movies that start with King, the King's Men, King's Speech, those types of things. But he was also in Bridget Jones's diary, which might be where you know him from, Ashley.

Ashley: 8:59

Among other things.

Remi: 9:01

Around that same time, Firth was introduced to filmmaker Nancy Berske, who had recently read Mildred Loving's obituary in the New York Times, and was already in the early stages of developing a documentary about the couple. As the two began talking, it quickly became clear that they shared a common interest in the Loving story. When Bersky learned more about Firth's interest in American politics and social history, their conversations expanded beyond the documentary and into the idea of a narrative feature film. From there, they started brainstorming how the story could be structured and began early work on shaping it into a screenplay. On January 25th, 2011, Firth told Bersky that he was launching a new production company called Raindog Films alongside Jed Doherty. He shared the idea of making a narrative version of the Loving story with Doherty, who later said Firth was drawn to the simplicity of the Loving's lives and the outsized impact this very ordinary couple had on so many lives. In an interview with Entertainment Weekly, Firth also spoke about how surprised he was by how many people had never heard of Richard and Mildred Loving. He explained that bringing the idea to Doherty was what ultimately pushed them into becoming producers on the project. After a successful Kickstarter campaign, Bersky's documentary, The Loving Story, premiered at the Full Frame Documentary Film Festival on April 29th, 2011. The film later aired on HBO on February 14th, 2012, where it received widespread critical acclaim. You saw this movie, didn't you, Ashley?

Ashley: 10:45

I did watch it. It actually is still streaming on HBO, so if you're interested, head on over and watch it. The coolest part about it is that she uses a lot of unaired video footage that had been recorded by a previous documentarian but was abandoned in this documentary. So it was a lot of things that no one had ever seen interviews and just conversations with both Richard and Mildred as they're living their day-to-day lives, before the Supreme Court actually heard the case, but in anticipation for the hearing and ruling. So it's enlightening in that way. There is a lot of video footage of them, which is cool because this happened so long ago in the 60s, late 60s.

Remi: 11:35

In June 2012, after watching Take Shelter, producers Colin Firth and Jed Doherty and Nancy Bersky approached director Jeff Nichols, believing he was the right person to write and direct the project. Nichols was already familiar with the Loving story, and he quickly formed a strong emotional and narrative connection to Richard and Mildred Loving. He later said that watching the documentary gave him a clear sense of the film he wanted to make, one that stayed closely with the Loving's point of view throughout. At first, Jeff Nichols was hesitant to take on the project, since he had never been commissioned to write a screenplay before, which made him reluctant to commit to being a writer and director. He eventually agreed to write the script, treating it as a very deliberate blueprint for the film he wanted to make. After agreeing to take on the film, Nichols began the research process of Loving by meeting with Peggy Loving, the only surviving child of Richard and Mildred Loving. He also visited the real-life locations connected to their story and immersed himself in available source material. This included extended interviews, archival footage, and photographs provided by Nancy Bersky, all of which helped shape the film's restrained, intimate, and historically grounded approach.

Ashley: 12:56

I imagine a lot of that material that he reviewed was in the documentary. I also suspect that there's probably stuff that she just couldn't fit in.

Remi: 13:06

Oh, there is. We'll get into that in just a little bit. Nichols has said that personal influences, including reflections on his own marriage, helped shape how he portrayed the bond between Richard and Mildred. He explained that the story is not just about surviving extraordinary hardship, but about staying committed through the ordinary, everyday parts of life. On May 16, 2013, Screen International reported that Colin Firth's Raindog Films, alongside Silver Real and Nancy Bersky's Augusta films, were developing a feature film about Richard and Mildred Loving, inspired by Bersky's documentary The Loving Story. On May 8, 2015, Deadline Hollywood reported that Jeff Nichols was officially attached to the project as both writer and director. The report also confirmed that Joel Edgerton and Ruth Nega would star as Richard and Mildred Loving. On September 22nd, 2015, Variety reported that Michael Shannon had been cast as Gray Vallette. That same report also announced that Nick Kroll had joined the cast as Bernard Cohen, along with Bill Camp as Frank Beasley, Martin Cossacks as Sheriff Brooks, and John Bass as Phil Hershkop.

Ashley: 14:23

That is a second attorney. Both Phil Hershkop and Bernard Cohen were co-counsel.

Remi: 14:30

As mentioned previously, Joel Edgerton portrays Richard Loving, a character he has described as a quiet hero. He later spoke about the challenges of the role, particularly mastering the Virginian accent while maintaining Richard's quiet and reserved nature. He also noted that conveying so much emotion with so few words was one of the hardest parts of playing Richard.

Joel Edgerton: 14:54

Yeah, it is freeing. I mean, this the silence is the dialogue as well. And I mean, when you really look at the statistics too, isn't it that the average sort of family or couple spend less than seven minutes a day actually conversing with each other? So to kind of fill the movie with exposition and artificial dialogue, I think, would take away from the one great subject of this movie that underpins everything, is is that everything was in touch with the truth.

Ashley: 15:21

Wow, I don't think I knew that Joel Edgerton was Australian.

Remi: 15:26

I think I had heard it somewhere along the line, but I always forget because he basically plays an American perfectly in every single film I've seen him in. But yeah, he has a really, really heavy Australian accent that he completely gets rid of in this film, even though he probably has a total of maybe 20 words of dialogue. Probably less than that, actually. To physically embody Richard, Edgerton bleached his hair, adopted a receding hairline, and wore prosthetic teeth. He also took inspiration from the thin blue line, which Jeff Nichols recommended to help him find the rhythm of Richard's accent.

Ashley: 16:06

One thing I have noticed about this is how similar Ruth Nega and Joel Edgerton look to Mildred and Richard Loving. The director did a phenomenal job and the makeup department.

Remi: 16:21

As further part of his preparation, Edgerton also learned bricklaying, which helped him better understand Richard's posture and physicality. He also spoke warmly about meeting Richard and Mildred Loving's daughter, Peggy Loving. Edgerton recalled hoping for her acceptance and blessing, and spoke about one particular moment on set that stayed with him when she referred to him as Daddy, which he described as deeply meaningful.

Ashley: 16:49

Oh, that is sweet.

Remi: 16:51

In 2013, while preparing Midnight Special, casting director Francine Mazler suggested Ruth Nega for the part of Mildred, to director Jeff Nichols and producer Sarah Green. Nega became the very first actor Nichols auditioned for the part. He later admitted that when he first met her, he was worried that she might be too petite, but those concerns quickly vanished the moment she began performing. Nichols said Nega had the voice, posture, and facial expressions of Mildred down so perfectly that it wasn't until he spoke with her afterwards that he realized she had an Irish accent. So both lead actors in this film have accents in real life, and I would have never guessed. As soon as Nega left the room, Nichols turned to Green and Mazler and questioned whether there was even a point of seeing anyone else. Nega said she was drawn to the project because she had never seen the loving story told in this way. She described the screenplay as beautiful and felt strongly that their story deserved to be told, shared, honored, and celebrated.

Ruth Negga: 18:22

And it was a really lovely challenge to absorb all their physicalities and to recreate them.

Remi: 18:29

Nega also spoke about her personal connection to the role, rooted in her own experience as a mixed-race person. As part of the preparation process, Nichols invited Nega and Edgerton to Virginia for two weeks so that they could visit key locations tied to the lovings' lives and immerse themselves in the environment before filming began. Martin Cosics, who played the wise elf Celeborn in the Lord of the Rings films, portrays racist sheriff Garnet R. Brooks in a role that proved to be one of the more challenging to cast.

Ashley: 19:06

I did not recognize this actor's name, but just the word wise elf, I know exactly who you're talking about.

Remi: 19:13

Yeah, he is pretty unforgettable in the Lord of the Rings films. Director Jeff Nichols has said that he did not see Brooks as a traditional villain or a direct nemesis to the Lovings. Instead, Nichols viewed him as part of a larger system rather than a single antagonist driving the conflict. Joel Edgerton was actually the one who suggested Cossacks for the role, and after meeting with him, Nichols was struck by his interpretation of the character. Cussacks saw Brooks as someone who believed he was acting as a responsible authority figure, dealing with what he viewed as wayward behavior. From Brooks's perspective, he was simply enforcing what he believed God and the law had already established. To prepare for the role, Cussex immersed himself in historical. Research, reviewing public records, and speaking directly with members of Brooks's family to better understand the man behind his public reputation.

Ashley: 20:15

Man, everyone really did their research for this.

Remi: 20:19

It really shows this movie is probably one of the most grounded, realistic films we have ever covered on our podcast. During post-production, Colin Firth mentioned that Brooks' daughter, Betty, had offered to lend her father's old sheriff's uniform for use in the film. The costume ultimately could not be used, however, because it did not fit Cossacks.

Ashley: 20:44

Well, maybe that'll be my objection of the week that the actual uniform wasn't used. I kid, I kid.

Remi: 20:51

Back in 2014, director Jeff Nichols was watching Nick Kroll on television when he realized that Kroll bore a striking resemblance to the real Bernie Cohen.

Ashley: 21:02

Do you think he was watching the League or the Kroll show? It had to have been one of those.

Remi: 21:07

I'm gonna go with The League. I think he was watching that, and he kinda plays more of a normal person in that series than he does in a lot of other stuff. I can't imagine Nichols seeing him on The Kroll show and thinking, yeah, this guy is the perfect actor for my serious dramatic film.

Nick Krull: 21:26

My mom says if I do good, I can get my ears double pierced, but at Home Depot because the girl at Claire said my lobes were too tough for their fucking machine.

Remi: 21:38

After noticing the resemblance, Nichols looked up more of Kroll's work and began to seriously consider him for the role. The connection deepened when Nichols learned that Kroll's father, Jules Kroll, had attended Georgetown Law just as Bernie Cohen had. Nichols later said that when Kroll came to Austin to talk about the part, the casting choice just immediately felt right. Kroll was already familiar with both the loving story and Nichols's previous films. He had seen Take Shelter and Mud and admired how different the two were while still clearly reflecting Nichols' distinctive style.

Ashley: 22:17

That's another thought I have had throughout this whole pre-production part is how wildly different all of this guy's movies are.

Remi: 22:28

They really are. This one is a historical film. He has a sci-fi film. Take shelter is more psychological, and he just came out with that bike riders movie with Tom Hardy and Austin Butler. I love it when directors have a wide variety of films on their repertoire.

Ashley: 22:49

We should look into that. I remember seeing the trailer for it and just being kind of meh, but I think it did actually get good reviews.

Remi: 22:57

I was not interested in it until doing the research for this episode, actually, when I found out he directed it. I've seen all of his films but that one, and yeah, we definitely have to check it out.

Ashley: 23:08

I'm pretty sure it's on Peacock, so maybe we'll watch that tonight.

Remi: 23:12

Being considered for loving was exciting for Kroll, not just because of the subject matter, but because of the filmmaker behind it. Kroll later said that it was an honor to help tell Richard and Mildred Loving's story, which he called both beautiful and deeply important. Michael Shannon plays Grey Vallette, a freelance photographer commissioned by Life magazine to document Richard and Mildred Loving. Jeff Nichols sent Shannon the script without initially saying which role he had in mind, though Nichols later said he never pictured Shannon playing Richard Loving. Instead, once Nichols saw photographs of the real Grey Vallette, he was struck by how closely Vallette resembled Shannon. Nichols was also influenced by seeing Shannon in the one-man play, Mistakes Were Made, where Shannon showed a warmth and gregariousness that audiences did not often associate with him, which matched Vallette's ability to quickly put people at ease.

Ashley: 24:14

Did you ever see, I might have showed it to you because it's my favorite video ever. The one, I think it might have been on Funnier Die, but it's Michael Shannon reading this email that a head of a sorority sent to the rest of the sorority, and it is just completely unhinged.

Remi: 24:33

I have seen that. Michael Shannon is a brilliant comedic actor because he has such an intense, severe look to him, and he always plays it so straight. He's like this generation's Christopher Walken in my eyes.

Ashley: 24:49

We have to play a clip of it right now. It's so funny.

Michael Shannon: 24:53

This week is about fostering relationships in the Greek community. And that's not fucking possible if you're gonna stand around and talk to each other and not arm matchup. Newsflash, you stupid fucking cocks! Frats don't like boring sororities. Oh wait, double fucking newsflash! Sigmao is not gonna want to hang out with us if we fucking suck! Which, by the way, in case you're an idiot and need it spelled out for you, we fucking suck so far.

Remi: 25:19

Loving also marked the fifth collaboration between Nichols and Shannon, who went on to make their sixth film together, titled The Bike Riders, which came out in 2023. Now, Ashley, are you ready to get into the film adaptation of Loving v Virginia? Loving.

Ashley: 25:39

Yes, I am so excited for an uplifting true crime story for a change.

Remi: 25:56

The movie opens one night in rural Virginia in 1958, with Mildred Loving, played by Ruth Nega, sitting next to Richard Loving, played by Joel Edgerton, visibly nervous as she tells him that she's pregnant. Richard pauses, then smiles, and quietly responds, Good, that's real good. Richard is a man of few words, as we will come to learn. Sometime later, Richard and Mildred are out at a local drag race together, where the crowd is a mix of black and white families all standing around together, drinking beer, cheering, and having a good afternoon. One of the cars racing belongs to Richard, and it's being driven by their friend Virgil, played by Will Dalton, with Richard's best friend Raymond, played by Alano Miller, also there helping out. This isn't the group's first race together either. In fact, we later learn that the group has raced together numerous times and have won so often that Richard has lost count of all their victories.

Ashley: 27:03

They actually all co-owned the car together.

Remi: 27:07

Oh, okay. It wasn't really spelled out in the film, but that does make a lot of sense, because Richard and Raymond are also frequently shown working on the car together in tandem whenever they aren't racing. That night, the same group gathers at a lively house party together where a moonshine is passed around, live bluegrass music is being played, and everyone is dancing shoulder to shoulder. Richard and Mildred are right in the middle of it, laughing and completely at ease with those around them. The next day, the film shows Richard at work as a bricklayer, and he is damn good at it, working at near lightning speed with surgical precision, faster than any other men on the job. The moment he's finished, Richard takes off early to go meet Mildred, who is now several months pregnant, and brings her to a quiet, open field just down the road from where she grew up.

Loving scene: 28:03

I won't put the kitchen back right back here.

Ruth Negga: 28:06

Richard, stop this. I don't know what you're saying.

Loving scene: 28:14

I bought it. This whole acre.

Ashley: 29:05

This is where our bedroom will be, this is where all kids will sleep. And it's always just so cute and endearing.

Remi: 29:12

Agreed. I love any scene where it's a couple just planning and fantasizing about their future together. Mildred is stunned at first, then visibly overwhelmed with joy, realizing that this quiet, practical moment is Richard's way of committing to a life with her.

Ashley: 29:32

It's not practical. He took her to the field and was describing how they were going to build a home together. It's so romantic.

Remi: 29:39

I guess practical is in like simple, he was brought her to a field. You know, it's not too elaborate. Richard's a very down-to-earth type of guy. He's not going to do anything too fantastical. It's simple and it is very touching. Soon after, Mildred and Richard drive from Virginia to Washington, D.C. and get married, with Mildred's father, Theo Oliver, played by Christopher Mann, accompanying them to act as their witness. The reason they traveled to Washington to be lawfully wedded is because Richard thinks it will be easier with less red tape than trying to get hitched in Virginia.

Ashley: 30:18

Where it was illegal to do so.

Remi: 30:20

Back home, Richard proudly frames their marriage certificate and hangs it on the wall above their bed. The newlyweds soon settle into a routine where Richard spends his days laying brick and his nights sketching plans for their new house, while Mildred readies things for the baby with help from her family. The loving's familial sense of security doesn't last long, however, because late one night Richard and Mildred are jolted awake when their bedroom door is kicked open by Sheriff Brooks, played by Martin Cossacks, followed by his deputies who fill the room, blinding the couple with their flashlights.

Joel Edgerton: 31:07

What you doing in bed with Abu.

Loving scene: 31:15

That's no good here.

Ashley: 31:19

So this happened when they were married for like hardly over one month.

Remi: 31:25

Yeah, the film doesn't really show the passage of time very bluntly. So it is hard to gauge when these certain events happened.

Ashley: 31:35

And there really is no way to show this sort of passage of time without incorporating it somehow in the dialogue, which just really isn't needed. Just look it up.

Remi: 31:46

And I will point out that at the beginning I did mention the year that this was taking place. That is from the script. That is not mentioned in the film. So literally, the starting point of this film is not even mentioned.

Ashley: 32:01

Do you think that was done intentionally to convey that this is a love story that transcends time? Or do you think it was just because it's clear when the court date happens and people can just surmise that it was around that time?

Remi: 32:17

It is not clear when the court date happens. The only thing that you really learn is that the Supreme Court hearing happens about 10 years after their initial conviction. But beyond that, the film really does not show any dates or years before any of its scenes, which a lot of films like this do, for like a shorthand to show the passage of time. But this film doesn't. It only focuses on Richard and Mildred. All the rest of it is just background noise, really. Within moments, Richard is pulled out of bed and Mildred is dragged from the room in her nightgown. Before either of them can make sense of what's happening, Sheriff Brooks and his deputies force the lovings out of their home and take them to Caroline County jail. There they are separated, with Richard being put into a shared cell while Mildred is kept alone in a smaller, filthier one.

Ashley: 33:16

That's because the jail only had one cell for women.

Remi: 33:20

The next morning, Richard is told he's made bail, but Mildred hasn't. Despite refusing to leave without his wife, he is forced out anyway and told there's nothing he can do until the judge returns on Monday. The next day, Richard goes back to the courthouse to make another attempt at having Mildred released, but is told yet again that he must wait until Monday. He is then called into Sheriff Brooks' office, where Brooks bluntly informs him that the judge will not release Mildred into Richard's custody, and that one of her people will have to come and get her after the weekend. Brooks then warns Richard that if he keeps pushing the issue or tries to bail Mildred out himself come Monday, he will be arrested again. Richard spends the entire weekend distraught, knowing that Mildred is still in jail and he is powerless to do anything about it. Once Monday finally arrives, Mildred's father posts her bail, and she is finally released from her harrowing ordeal. When she gets home, she learns that Richard has been forced to move out, with the sheriff making it clear that if Richard is found living there again, he will be arrested.

Ashley: 34:37

This is so awful. Not only are they just a young married couple in the honeymoon phase, she is pregnant.

Remi: 34:45

And this is like the most harmless couple in the world. The film doesn't really address who told on them that they had gotten married or go into that at all, but it is just one of those things that modern-day audiences will look at and be like, why would anyone care that this harmless couple was living a peaceful life together, not bothering anyone? That night, after dark, Richard comes back through the woods to see Mildred, who is understandably still shaken by everything that has happened, and apprehensive about what may still be to come. Richard reassures his wife that he has hired the best lawyer in the county to handle their situation, and promises that he will take care of it. Soon after, they meet with their attorney, Frank Beasley, played by the one and only Bill Camp, who explains that he's spoken with the judge and managed to work out a deal. We'll walk over there in a minute.

Loving scene: 35:47

But I met with a judge this morning and I worked out a deal I think is pretty fair. Judge Brazil's a friend. But he is not a fan of your particular situation. If you all plead guilty, the judge is willing to suspend any prison time. Now, in exchange for suspending the jail time, you and your wife unless you decide to dissolve the marriage, will be forced to leave the state. That's exactly what it sounds like. You two are not allowed to be in the state at the same time and certainly aren't allowed to be here together. How long? How long will that last? Twenty-five years. That can't be right. Look, you got a year in state penitentiary, which I remind you could have been up to five years at a maximum. You got a year in prison on one hand and leaving the state on the other. That's an easy choice.

Ashley: 36:51

What a horrendous deal and predicament that these two are in.

Remi: 36:56

Totally agree. This is something that I could never imagine going through, and looking at it through modern eyes seems so unnecessary and so ridiculous. These people were not doing anything at all. And the only reason they are being punished is racism, flat out.

Ashley: 37:19

I also want to again point out here that this is the third time Bill Camp has popped up in one of our episodes. Prior to this, he was in Molly's game and Sound of Freedom. And I did a quick peruse through his filmography. He is going to be in 10 more episodes that we will potentially cover, including 12 Years a Slave, Black Mass, and Public Enemies. I think Bill Camp is the mascot for our podcast, Remy.

Remi: 37:49

That is truly unbelievable. I don't think there are any actors that are gonna beat that. In fact, I'm saying it right now, it's a personal goal to somehow, some way get Bill Camp in some capacity on this podcast. He has to know that we are covering him 13 different times. He should be honored. Faced with no real alternative, Richard and Mildred agree to take the plea deal to avoid going to prison. In court, they do exactly what their lawyer instructed them to do and plead guilty. The judge sentences each of them to one year in jail, then immediately suspends the sentence for 25 years, on the condition that they leave Caroline County and the state of Virginia right away and cannot return together for that entire period. After that, Richard and Mildred say goodbye to her family, and the moment is fraught with tension, since some of Mildred's relatives openly blame Richard for taking her to Washington to get married, believing his decision is what set everything in motion. I also just want to point out that I'm not sure if this is accurate, but in the film it appears that Richard and Mildred live with Mildred's family, and Richard's mom is even there as well. I'm not really sure of the exact living situation, but it is a very close-knit family.

Ashley: 39:19

They were living with her parents at the time they were arrested.

Remi: 39:23

Despite everything, Richard and Mildred still love each other, so head back to Washington, D.C. together, where they'll stay with Mildred's cousin Alex and his wife Laura. Life in Washington is immediately hard on Mildred. The city is run down and looks nothing like rural Virginia. And at night, the noise from the street keeps her awake and anxious. To make matters worse, Richard must travel back to Virginia for his job as a bricklayer nearly every day, while Mildred stays behind, isolated and unhappy. One night, Richard notices that Mildred seems distant and asks. Her, what's wrong? At first, she tries to brush it off, but soon admits she had always believed that Richard's mother would be the one to deliver their baby.

Ashley: 40:17

She was a midwife.

Remi: 40:19

That makes a lot of sense. I didn't really understand why Mildred had always envisioned Richard's mother delivering the child. Richard listens to Mildred intently, then pauses for a moment, before quietly responding with a simple Okay. When it's time for the baby to be born, they pack up and head back to Virginia, under the cover of night, with Mildred hidden beneath a coat in the back seat to keep out of sight. Once they near the county line, she switches cars, with Raymond driving her the rest of the way, followed by Richard a few minutes later. Once she has safely reached her destination, Mildred is quickly ushered inside where she is greeted by her family and Richard's mother, Lola Loving, played by Sharon Blackwood, who is in the midst of readying for the delivery. I'd also just like to point out that this film portrays going into labor accurately, especially the timing of events after Mildred's water breaks. You see, in most movies, when a woman's water breaks, it's treated as more of a heads up, it's time to go to the hospital sort of thing. When in reality, this is a sign that labor has just begun or is already underway. Loving is one of the few films that I've ever seen that actually portrays this process correctly, playing out largely the way it would in real life, and I just want to say that I truly appreciate that attention to detail.

Ashley: 41:50

Yeah, I don't know if I've ever seen it where the water breaks right before labor. It is always while a woman is just kind of standing in her kitchen and she looks down and is like, we have to go to the hospital now.

Remi: 42:03

Exactly. That's how it's treated in basically every TV show or movie. The water breaks and that means it's time to go to the hospital. Well, in reality, it means that the baby is coming right that second. It's not like a, oh, you've got another 15, 30 minutes. No, it is happening right that second. After many long, exhausting hours, Richard and Mildred finally welcome their first child, a tiny baby boy named Sidney, into the world. Not long after the birth, Sheriff Brooks and his deputies arrive without warning and surround the house. For the safety of their newborn child, Mildred hands baby Sidney over to a family member. Then her and Richard both surrender willingly and are promptly arrested for violating the terms of their parole. Back in court, the judge orders Richard and Mildred to post a $200 bond, which would be roughly $2,200 today when adjusted for inflation. Moments before the couple is sentenced by the judge, their lawyer, Frank Beasley, rushes into the courtroom and takes full responsibility by explaining that he mistakenly told the Lovings that they could return to Virginia for the birth of their child. Luckily, this admission works and the judge shows leniency by releasing the couple and issuing a final warning that if they return to Virginia together again, they will go to prison next time. Richard and Mildred return to Washington, D.C., resuming their life in exile, only this time with a newborn son in tow. As the years pass, the Loving's family continues to grow with the addition of two more children named Donald and Peggy, yet Mildred still deeply misses her own family and her home back in Virginia. One day, Mildred is watching the civil rights movements march on Washington, live on television, when Laura suggests that she try writing a letter to Robert F. Kennedy, asking if maybe he can help with the Loving's legal situation. After considering Laura's proposal, Mildred decides to write a letter to RFK explaining everything that they've been through, never really expecting any sort of response. Sometime later, Mildred gets an unexpected phone call from an ACLU attorney named Bernard Cohen, played by Nick Kroll, who tells her that he's interested in taking on the Lovings case totally free of charge. The Lovings meet with Bernie in person soon after, where he explains that the quickest way forward would be to appeal their original conviction in Caroline County, which could move the case into federal court and possibly all the way up to the Supreme Court.

Ashley: 44:56

And when he says which could move the case into federal court, that's because he is assuming correctly that the state court is going to deny the appeal. So to get to any sort of federal court or the Supreme Court, you have to exhaust all of your appeals at the state level.

Remi: 45:13

Well, the only issue with this is that the window of opportunity to appeal their initial conviction has long since passed. And the only way to reopen it again would be for the Lovings to return to Virginia in order to be arrested again. Richard then makes it very clear that he and his wife have no plans of ever voluntarily going back to jail again. So Bernie promises to find an alternative legal route and continue to assist them however he can. Around this time, while playing in the street one day, young Donald is hit by a car. Thankfully, he survives, but Mildred has had enough with city life, so tells Richard that she wants to move back to Virginia, despite knowing the consequences should she ever be caught. Richard agrees, and soon after, the lovings quietly move back to Virginia in secret, initially renting a room before learning that their friend Raymond has found a more permanent, secluded home for them where they won't draw any unwanted attention.

Ruth Negga: 46:23

But I thought Jim's brother said it was fine here.

Loving scene: 46:27

I don't trust it. Too many people. Where is it? King and Queen County. Just a farmhouse out there. I figure it gets you out the county but keeps you close. You'll be on your own out there, don't have no phone or nothing, but no one's gonna find you unless they know to look.

Remi: 46:45

I can get word to you when you need it. Elsewhere, Bernie has hit a wall in his efforts to move the Lovings case forward on his own. So enlists the aid of fellow civil rights attorney Phil Herschkop, played by John Bass. The two soon devise a long-term strategy together involving a series of appeals designed to push the case through the federal courts, with the ultimate goal of reaching the Supreme Court. As part of this strategy, Bernie advises the Lovings to take part in a photo essay with Life magazine, in an effort to increase the public's awareness of the case and garner further support for the Lovings and their cause. Not long after, Life magazine sends photographer Gray Villette, played by Michael Shannon, out to the Lovings' house, and what begins as an awkward visit doesn't stay that way for very long. Over dinner, Greg regales the Lovings with lively stories, quickly earning the family's trust while effortlessly putting everyone at ease in the process.

Loving scene: 47:53

So uh I can't go back without a photo. No photo, no job, and this is Life magazine, and the pigeon guy isn't around.

Nick Krull: 47:59

Pigeon gong! Pigeon gong!

Loving scene: 48:01

That's right. I'm looking up at this office building and it hits me. Right. I go 55 stories up, and I talk some office girls and uh let me look out the window. Before they could do anything, I throw open the window, sit on the ledge, and dangle my feet out. They start screaming, but I got this great shot of my feet flying over 42nd and Fifth Avenue. Yes, what happened? Security threw me out headfirst. But Life magazine hired me the next day.

Ashley: 48:33

Oh my god, these kids are so cute.

Remi: 48:38

They are all really adorable. They didn't get a ton of screen time, but in scenes like this, I think it does a great job of realistically capturing the family's atmosphere because these kids are just being kids. I don't even know if the director was telling them what to do. It's really great. By the end of the night, Gray Villette has taken a series of quiet, intimate photographs showing Richard and Mildred sitting, talking, and basically just happily living their lives together. After their appeal is rejected by the Virginia Supreme Court, the Lovings issue a statement to the media announcing that they will be reluctantly returning to Washington, D.C., despite secretly having no intention of ever leaving their home in Virginia again. Though Richard is clearly uncomfortable talking to the press, Mildred believes that sharing their story has only helped them gain the public support, so agrees to participate in a television interview, pushing them further into the spotlight, and with a little help, closer to some sort of justice. Now, Ashley, I have a question here. The Lovings have seemingly been banned from Virginia, yet they are clearly still living their lives there and are even doing TV interviews and photo shoots at their home. So how are they not getting arrested again during all of this for technically violating their parole?

Ashley: 50:08

That is a very, very good question. And the reason is because their attorneys worked out an agreement with the DA of Virginia to allow them to live in Virginia freely during the appeal process.

Remi: 50:22

Okay, that makes sense. I wish that had been shown in the film, but the movie very rarely leaves the loving's point of view, and that would be focusing more on Bernie, I guess.

Ashley: 50:33

And one thing I've noticed here, just looking at your page of notes about the movie, is that a big chunk of it is before any sort of talk about the Supreme Court even happens. It sounds like that's really the bulk of the movie. And that is because anything having to do with the Supreme Court is really the attorneys that were doing all of this. I think Bernie said or estimated that he met with the lovings maximum six times. So anything about all of that would have been focused on the attorney. So it's interesting to me, and I like that the director really focused on how all of this impacted the lovings because it is their life and it is their story.

Remi: 51:19

And the main focus of the film is always them and their love for each other. That is the main point of the movie, is that this is just a simple couple who loved each other and wanted to spend their lives together, and all of this other stuff sort of happened around them just because this is something that needed to happen in America, this monumental ruling that allowed people of other races to get married and live happily together without fear of totally unnecessary racist persecution. Nearly 10 years after their original conviction, the United States Supreme Court finally agrees to hear the Lovings case, with the state of Virginia arguing in defense of its anti-miscegenation laws, which claim that interracial marriage disrupts the natural order of things and harms society by bringing mixed-race children into the world. How fucked up is that?

Ashley: 52:19

And this is the late 60s, people. This is not 1920s, this is not that long ago.

Remi: 52:25

And this was an actual law that Virginia had on the books. This is unbelievably racist and prejudice, and I just am in shock that this was even still going on in the 60s.

Ashley: 52:39

And not just Virginia, several other states. I'll have some numbers for you in a bit.

Remi: 52:44

When it comes time for the Supreme Court hearing, Richard and Mildred choose not to attend, even though Mildred seems interested, but will only go with Richard by her side. And Richard wants no part of the courtroom spectacle.

Loving scene: 53:01

You know, Richard, it's of course up to you not to attend, but You should know the Supreme Court only hears one out of every four hundred cases. It's historic. Thank you, Mr. Corn. Well Is there anything you'd like me to say to them? And by them I mean the Supreme Court justices of the United States.

Ashley: 53:40

Ugh, that is just such a sweet scene. The reason Mildred didn't want to go, she was too anxious. And Richard said he didn't want to go because he just thought the whole ordeal would be confusing to him and he wouldn't understand what was being argued or said. And that's the reason he told Bernie that he didn't want to go. I imagine there was also an insane amount of anxiety there, too.

Remi: 54:06

And I also just want to highlight Joel Edgerton's performance in this film, who, again, has about twenty words he says in the entire film total, but just the subtle stuff he does with so little, the way his voice cracked when he said he loved his wife, it gave me chills. I think he is a brilliant actor, and both him and Ruth Nega do a brilliant job in these roles. While the lawyers argue the case in Washington, Richard and Mildred stay home, far removed from the legal process deciding their future and many others just like them. In the end, the Supreme Court rules in their favor, and the lovings are finally allowed to live together openly as a family in Virginia without the looming threat of being constantly harassed and arrested by white authority figures. Just before the closing credits, we learn that Loving v. Virginia made the prohibition of marriage based on race unconstitutional. The Supreme Court stated that marriage is an inherent right. Seven years after the court decision, Richard Loving was killed by a drunk driver. Mildred never remarried and lived the rest of her life in the home Richard built for them. Though shy of the press and ever reluctant to be called a hero, Mildred was interviewed shortly before her death in 2008. She spoke of Richard, saying, I miss him. He took care of me. And that was Jeff Nichols loving. Any initial thoughts, Ashley?

Ashley: 55:51

Yeah, when I learned he died seven years after the ruling, it made me so sad.

Remi: 55:59

It is heartbreaking to hear this is the type of couple you would have hoped lived to be in their 90s together and would have been content just being in each other's company. So it is extremely tragic that Richard's life was cut tragically short like that. Seven years. It's horrible.

Ashley: 56:19

And so did the movie not have a Supreme Court scene because they weren't there?

Remi: 56:24

It had Nick Kroll as Bernie addressing the Supreme Court in what I'm assuming was just some opening statements, but for the most part, yeah, that was it. It focuses on Richard and Mildred and how they are just home, living their life, and they get a call saying that they won. And that's it. It's really, really simple.

Ashley: 56:47

I really like that that is the direction the director took with this movie because you could have easily gotten bogged down and legalese and really had Bernie be the main character and the Lovings just be supporting players, which would have taken away from their story and the backbone of the case and story, which is their love for each other.

Remi: 57:13

I also feel like this story in another director's hands could have easily changed a lot of things, especially Richard's soft-spoken man-of-few words nature. I think it would be very easy for a Hollywood movie to have Richard and Mildred go to the Supreme Court, and Richard addresses them and says the I love my wife thing at the Supreme Court. That seems like something that would happen in a big Hollywood movie like this. And I admire the restraint in keeping things extremely realistic and grounded and sticking to the facts.

Ashley: 57:52

Well, what happened after this movie was released?

Remi: 57:55

Well, Loving premiered at the Cannes Film Festival on May 16th, 2016, where it was selected to compete for the Palme d'Or.

Ashley: 58:05

Oh wow. For those of you at home that don't know much about Cans, that's like the most prestigious award you can win at Cannes, or at least one of them.

Remi: 58:15

Yes, I don't believe it won, but even being nominated is an incredible honor. The film later opened with a limited release in the United States on November 4th, 2016, debuting in just four theaters across New York City and Los Angeles, including Arc Light Hollywood and the Landmark Theater. It then expanded to a wider release on November 23rd, 2016. The film went on to have a modest but successful theatrical run, earning approximately $12.96 million worldwide, on an estimated budget of $9 million. Loving holds an approval rating of 88% on Rotten Tomatoes, with a critical consensus that reads, Loving takes an understated approach to telling a painful and still relevant real-life tale, with sensitive performances, breathing additional life into a superlative historical drama. Loving also received numerous awards and nominations following its release. At the 74th Golden Globe Awards, it earned two nominations, including Best Actor for Joel Edgerton and Best Actress for Ruth Nega. Nega's performance was further honored with a nomination for Best Actress at the 89th Academy Awards, as well as a nomination for the BAFTA Rising Star Award at the 70th British Academy Film Awards. And that was loving, a refreshing change of pace for this salty old podcaster.

Ashley: 59:56

It really was, and it was just kind of an episode we needed in the moment.

Remi: 1:00:01

Seriously. And I'm willing to bet that this film did not impact. Very much, and probably kept things historically accurate. But I don't know for sure, and actually, I believe that's where you come in.

Ashley: 1:00:15

It sure is.

Loving scene: 1:00:18

They were the loving kind. She was black, he was white. In Virginia 1958. They found love amongst the hay.

Ashley: 1:00:35

Richard Perry Loving was born on October 29, 1933. He grew up in Central Point, Virginia, a quiet community in Caroline County, about 50 miles northeast of Richmond. Like many states at the time, Virginia enforced Jim Crow Laws, a system of policies that enforced racial segregation and discrimination against black Americans. Richard attended racially segregated schools and churches, but his everyday life was more integrated than typical of the time. For 25 years, his father worked for one of the wealthiest black men in the county, and his mother was a midwife who delivered most of the local babies, black and white.

Remi: 1:01:19

So his family was very integrated.

Ashley: 1:01:22

It sounded like the community was. Many of Richard's closest friends were also black, including the brothers of a girl he would one day marry. That girl was Mildred Dolores Jeter, born on July 22nd, 1939. She came from a family of black and Native American heritage and grew up in the same Central Point community with her seven brothers. Richard and Mildred first met when he was 17 and she was just 11. He often stopped by the Jeter home to listen to her brothers play what she affectionately called hillbilly music.

Remi: 1:01:58

I'm assuming that's bluegrass.

Ashley: 1:02:01

The two began casually dating years later when she was in high school. At age 16, she became pregnant by another man, and Richard, already working as a construction laborer and bricklayer, moved into the Jeter household to help support her. Life was simple at first. On weekends, Richard drag raced with his friends and spent countless hours working on the race car. And the hard work paid off. His team won nearly every single race they entered.

Remi: 1:02:31

So Richard was not exaggerating when he said he lost count of how many times they won.

Ashley: 1:02:38

Although Sidney, born on January 27, 1957, wasn't Richard's biological son, Richard raised him as his own. Mildred and Richard went on to have two other children, Donald, born on October 8, 1958, and Peggy in 1960. To fully appreciate what happened to Richard and Mildred next, you have to understand the world they were living in. By the 1950s, the Supreme Court had already begun striking down laws rooted in racial discrimination. In 1956, Morgan v. Virginia banned segregated seating on interstate buses. Ten years later, Broder v. Gale declared segregation on public transportation unconstitutional. In 1960, Boynton v. Virginia outlawed segregated restaurants and bus terminals. Despite these landmark rulings, the South rarely accepted them willingly. Even after the court ruled segregated schools unconstitutional in Brown v. Board of Education, nearly every state that made up the former Confederacy refused to comply, arguing that integrating schools would lead to interracial relationships and eventually interracial marriages. At this time, twenty four of America's 48 states outlawed interracial marriage entirely.

Remi: 1:04:05

Wow, so almost half.

Ashley: 1:04:08

In Virginia, these laws were particularly aggressive. The state enforced what it called racial integrity statutes, designed explicitly to preserve the so-called purity of the white race.

Remi: 1:04:23

This is so goddamn infuriating and ridiculous.

Ashley: 1:04:27

The centerpiece of these laws was Virginia's one-drop rule. Codified in the 1924 Racial Integrity Act, it required every resident to be legally classified as white or colored, which was defined as having, quote, one drop of non-white blood. Under the law, it was a felony, punishable by up to five years in prison for a white person to marry someone of any other race. Despite these laws and with the support of their parents, Richard and Mildred wed in 1958. Since they couldn't do so legally in Virginia, they made trips to Washington, D.C. on May 24th and June 2nd. They obtained a marriage certificate during the first visit, and during the second, Mildred's father and brother served as witnesses to the union.

Remi: 1:05:20

In the film, Mildred and Richard's parents are not objecting to the marriage at all, but it is implied that they know that it's gonna lead to trouble.

Ashley: 1:05:32

Mildred didn't realize their marriage was considered illegal back home. Richard knew it was against the law, but he didn't understand how severe the consequences could be. After marrying, the couple moved into a downstairs bedroom in Mildred's parents while they decided their next steps, unaware that not everyone in their community approved of their relationship. On July 11th, a little over a month into married life, law enforcement received an anonymous tip about them. A local judge signed an arrest warrant for unlawful cohabitation, meaning they were living together and having sexual relations without a valid marriage license. Officers visited the house several times during the day, but the lovings were never home. On July 14th, they switched tactics and raided the house around 2 a.m. Three officers burst into their bedroom demanding to know what a white man was doing in bed with a black woman. Richard pointed to the marriage certificate hanging in their room while Mildred told them she was his wife. After that, one officer bluntly replied, not here, you're not. Both were arrested and taken to Boeing Green jail. Mildred, just 19 years old, was held in the only cell reserved for women. Richard's sister bailed him out the next day, but Mildred had to stay a few days longer before being released to her dad. Their arrest warrants were then changed to reflect new allegations, leaving the state to marry someone of another race and returning to Virginia to live as husband and wife, an act the state considered an attempt to evade its anti-miscegenation laws. After their arrests, Richard and Mildred were forced to live separately with their respective parents. On October 13th, 1958, a grand jury issued a formal indictment. They were charged with unlawfully and feloniously leaving Virginia to be married and returning with the intention of living as husband and wife, an act the Commonwealth claimed violated its peace and dignity.

Remi: 1:07:57

That is so outrageous.

Ashley: 1:07:59

The case was assigned to Leon Bazile, a judge well known for staunchingly supporting Virginia's racial integrity laws. And if there is a villain in this story, it is this man.

Remi: 1:08:15

So by staunchly supporting the racial integrity laws, you mean he was a racist.

Ashley: 1:08:20

Oh, a big one. The facts of the case weren't in dispute when it went to trial on January 6, 1959. After hearing the state's evidence and realizing the severity of the charges, the Lovings changed their pleas to guilty. Judge Bazil sentenced them to one year in prison but suspended it under one condition. The Lovings had to leave Virginia immediately and couldn't return together for 25 years. If they did, even just to visit, they could be arrested again and sent to jail for a year.

Remi: 1:08:54

But they were allowed to come separately?

Ashley: 1:08:57

Yes.

Remi: 1:08:59

Okay, just not together as a couple.

Ashley: 1:09:02

Banished from their home, the Lovings moved to Washington, D.C. and stayed with Mildred's cousin. Richard kept his job as a construction worker and bricklayer, but neither adapted to city life. Mildred was especially miserable and missed her family deeply. Despite the threat of rearrest, they returned to Virginia from time to time to see their relatives. They took precautions, often staying in a neighboring county, with Richard only going out at night. On March 28, 1959, the day before Easter, their fears came true when they were arrested for violating probation during the trip back home. The lawyer told Judge Bazile he misunderstood the probationary terms and mistakenly advised the Lovings that they could return to Virginia together as long as they didn't stay overnight in the same house. Basile accepted this explanation and dismissed the charges, warning that next time he wouldn't be so forgiving. Over the next four years, the Lovings lived in Washington, D.C. and made intermittent trips home, mostly for the holidays or to deliver their daughter Peggy. Mildred reached her breaking point when Donald was struck by a moving vehicle. He was fine, but she had had enough. Under her cousin's suggestion, she wrote to U.S. Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy, hoping that President JFK's support of the upcoming Civil Rights Act would help her predicament. In response, RFK said there was nothing he could do but suggested she contact the American Civil Liberties Union, which I'm going to call the ACLU from here on out.

Remi: 1:10:43

But she did get a response from RFK.

Ashley: 1:10:47

Yes. And she took his advice on June 20th, 1963. The ACLU forwarded her letter to a young attorney named Bernard Cohen.

Bernie Cohen: 1:10:58

We have three children and cannot afford an attorney. We wrote to the Attorney General. He suggested that we get in touch with you for advice. Please help us if you can. Hope to hear from you real soon. Yours truly, Mr. and Mrs. Richard Loving.

Ashley: 1:11:10

Cohen was only a couple of years out of law school, having earned his degree in 1961. When he read Mildred's letter, he knew exactly how serious and complicated their situation was. He arranged to meet at a small office he kept in Washington, D.C. and took to them immediately. They weren't crusaders or activists trying to change the law. They just wanted to live as husband and wife in the place they called home.

Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri (trailer): 1:11:43

It's a God-given right, I think.

Ashley: 1:11:46

Cohen thought he could appeal the Loving's conviction under several grounds. First, he believed what happened to them was a clear violation of the due process and protection clauses of the 14th Amendment, which instructs that states must apply their laws equitably to ensure equal rights and fair treatment to all citizens. This is basically the grounds that the Supreme Court cites for shutting down all of the cases that came before them around this time that were rooted in racism. With this clause in mind, Cohen was prepared to argue that Virginia's marriage laws weren't written in fairness. They were explicitly designed to protect, quote, only the purity of the white race, end quote. There were no similar restrictions on any other racial group marrying outside their race.

Remi: 1:12:38

So only white people could marry white people in their eyes.

Ashley: 1:12:42

As the laws were written, it was white people cannot marry anyone who is, quote unquote, colored.

Remi: 1:12:49

That is so ridiculous.

Ashley: 1:12:51

Cohen also viewed the 25-year banishment as unreasonable and arbitrary, a clear violation of the basic fairness due process requires. Cohen took the case despite having a huge obstacle ahead of him. The Lovings pled guilty in 1959. A plea that almost always eliminates the possibility of an appeal. Usually, when you plead guilty, one right you do give up is your right to appeal. Virginia law also required that any appeal be filed within 60 days of conviction, a window that closed years earlier. While trying to find some sort of loophole, Cohen stumbled upon a 1949 Virginia Supreme Court ruling that said when a sentence is suspended, the case remains in the purview of the court, meaning the judge still has authority and the conviction could be reviewed at any time.

Remi: 1:13:51

This is not explained at all in the film, like we've mentioned numerous times. The movie is from Richard and Mildred's perspective. So this was a part of it that did confuse me a lot, is that I knew that they had these obstacles, and it was never really explained how they got around it.

Ashley: 1:14:13

And I think that is because it is based on the Loving's point of view, and I don't really think you need all the legalese to really follow and understand the true story.

Remi: 1:14:24

I agree, but it was a problem that was brought forth in the film that was never really addressed again.

Ashley: 1:14:34

So they could have had one more scene with Bernie explaining to them in simplified terms what had happened to maybe orient the viewer a little bit more.

Remi: 1:14:44

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. Yeah.

Ashley: 1:14:47

Well, armed with that 1949 precedent in mind, Cohen filed his first motion on November 6, 1963. He asked Judge Bazil to review the loving case and set aside the conviction and sentence because the 25-year banishment constituted cruel and unusual punishment since it was unreasonably long and a violation of due process. He also argued that Virginia's marriage laws denied the lovings the equal protection promised by the Constitution because it violated the fundamental right to marry whoever one chooses. In conclusion, he reminded the court the sentence caused the lovings undue hardship since they could not visit their families together. And then, silence. Seven months passed without a single word. In fact, in June 1964, Mildred even wrote to Cohen to ask if he remembered them, expressing hope that the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which banned segregation in public places, might help their case.

Remi: 1:15:52

So she was basically calling him and being like, hey, you remember us?

Ashley: 1:15:56

Writing. Meanwhile, her and Richard were back in Virginia, living quietly in a nearby county, but keeping their Washington, D.C. address active in case they needed to flee at a moment's notice. Cohen reassured them he was still working on the case and realized he needed help. His law professor introduced him to another young attorney named Philip Hirschkopp.

Remi: 1:16:20

This is portrayed in the film as well. Bernie goes to meet his old professor, and that is how he is introduced to Hirschkop.

Ashley: 1:16:29

After graduating from law school in 1964, Herschkop immersed himself in civil rights litigation in the South. There, he gained knowledge and experience with the tactics states used to defend discriminatory laws, including how to challenge them. By the end of their first meeting, Cohen and Hershkop joined forces. In October 1964, the young attorneys petitioned the federal court to review the constitutionality of Virginia's ban on interracial marriage and to protect the lovings in the meantime. They asked for an injunction, an order preventing Virginia from arresting Richard and Mildred while their case was being reviewed. They argued the Lovings faced irreparable injury every day they lived under threat of arrest and that Virginia's marriage statutes existed, quote, solely for the purpose of keeping the Negro people in the badges and bonds of slavery, end quote. But a federal judge wasn't convinced. He ruled that there was no permanent injury and denied the injunction. But at the same time, he would allow a panel of three judges to address the constitutionality of the Lovings conviction if the state of Virginia continued to ignore Cohen's earlier motion asking Judge Bazial to review the sentence. If the state refused to do so, then the federal court would step in. Meanwhile, the Lovings defense team worked out an informal agreement with the prosecution that allowed them to live in a nearby county without fear of arrest. In the event political pressure forced the Attorney General to take action, he promised to give the Lovings advance notice so they could flee to Washington, D.C. before being arrested. And kudos to this DA because it actually sounds like he stuck to his promise. Finally, in January 1965, Judge Bazil responded to Cohen's motion. He ruled that the Lovings' 25-year banishment was not cruel and unusual because they could still visit Caroline County separately. His ruling also contained a summary of his views on interracial marriage bans.

Judge Bazile: 1:18:50

Oh my god. And he placed them on separate components.

Remi: 1:19:11

Wow, so just using God as an excuse for a whole bunch of racist bullshit.

Ashley: 1:19:19

Right? Despite nothing of this being in the Bible and just completely overlooking one of the Ten Commandments, love thy neighbor.

Remi: 1:19:27

Yeah, people seem to ignore parts of the Bible that don't support their specific beliefs.

Ashley: 1:19:34

While Kuhen and Hirschkop weren't surprised by this outcome, they knew they needed to go through the motions of the state appellate process before they had a chance of having the case heard by the Supreme Court. By the end of the month, lawyers for both sides debated next steps. Virginia's attorney insisted the case must be heard by the state's own Supreme Court before going into the federal system. On November 12th, a panel of federal judges agreed. It was customary and required that appeals before. Exhausted at the state level before reaching the federal system. But the judges added something significant. The Virginia Supreme Court would have to address the constitutionality of the state's laws against interracial marriage, all while allowing the lovings to live in Virginia throughout the appellate process. For the first time since they married in 1958, they were legally allowed to visit their families, attend gatherings, and live in their hometown without fear of arrest. The case finally reached the Virginia Supreme Court on March 7, 1966. Cohen and Hershkop argue that Judge Bazil made several critical errors in the handling of the Lovings case. First, they argued he was wrong to conclude that Virginia's laws against mixed marriages didn't violate the state constitution or the Fourteenth Amendment. During oral arguments, they pointed to Perez V Sharp, a landmark California Supreme Court case from 1948. This was the first time a state court determined statutes prohibiting interracial marriages violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, while also recognizing the right to marry as a fundamental one. California really leading the way here. Second, they believed the judge violated Virginia's sentencing code calling for reasonable limits to suspended sentences, further arguing a 25-year banishment was far beyond what any court should be allowed to impose. The Virginia Supreme Court ultimately upheld Judge Bazial's finding that the Lovings violated a valid state law, but it determined he sentenced them improperly. The case was sent back to the lower court for resentencing, while the defense continued to appeal the overall legitimacy of the conviction and law to the final step, the Supreme Court of the United States. While preparing their appeal, Cohen and Herschkop, neither of whom had ever argued a case in front of the Supreme Court before, sought advice from lawyers associated with the ACLU and those who had experience in constitution and human rights law.

Remi: 1:22:25

This would probably be the most nerve-wracking day in a attorney's life addressing the Supreme Court.

Ashley: 1:22:34

Oh, for sure. And especially these guys are less than a decade out of law school at this point. Several justice agencies, including the NAACP and the National Catholic Conference for Interracial Justice, wrote briefs to the Supreme Court detailing their support of the Loving case and why they believed marriage laws violated constitutional rights. Only North Carolina supported Virginia's claims that marriage was an issue states should be allowed to regulate.

Remi: 1:23:06

Tisk, Tisk, North Carolina.

Ashley: 1:23:09

Through intense preparation, the Loving's attorneys grew increasingly confident in their chance at victory. Between 1958 and 1965, seven more states repealed laws against interracial marriage. And more and more racist laws were also under intense scrutiny. In addition to Brown v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court heard McLaughlin v. Florida in December 1964, a case in which a couple were charged with unlawful interracial cohabitation. In July 1966, Cohen and Hershkop submitted their appeal to the Supreme Court and raised two primary questions. Were Virginia statutes banning racial marriage a violation of the due process and equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment? Were the statutes a violation of a constitutional right to privacy and right to marry? The good news came on December twelfth, nineteen sixty six. The case would be heard. The Lovings weren't actively involved in legal planning as everything unfolded. Their attorneys estimated meeting with them less than six times throughout the entire process. Richard and Mildred tried to maintain a semblance of normal life, mostly keeping to themselves, their families, and a small circle of friends. But at times that was hard to do. For example, Life magazine sent a photojournalist to document the family's day-to-day routine. It was published in a March 1966 photo essay titled The Crime of Being Married. A documentarian named Hope Bryden followed the family around for weeks. She planned to complete the project after the case had made its way through the court system, but by that time she had filed everything away and didn't give it a second thought. Footage from her abandoned film and unpublished photos from the Life magazine publication were later used in the 2011 HBO documentary, The Loving Story. Across all interviews, the Loving stressed that they didn't set out to change the law. They just loved each other and wanted to live together near their families. On April 10th, 1967, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Loving V, Virginia. Richard and Mildred were too nervous to attend, but Richard asked his attorney to relay the following message. Tell the court I love my wife, and it is just unfair that I can't live with her in Virginia. Their legal team argued that Virginia's prohibition on interracial marriage was rooted in slavery-era laws dating back to the 1600s, laws originally designed to prevent marriages between white and enslaved people. They emphasized that Virginia's Racial Integrity Act existed solely to protect the so-called purity of the white race and did nothing to preserve the quote racial integrity of any other group. At the heart of their argument was one essential question. Could a state forbid marriage between two consenting adults solely because of their race? They reminded the justices that these laws were created to keep slaves in their place and to rob a group of people of their dignity. The Lovings, they argued.

Bernie Cohen: 1:26:34

That is the right of Richard and Mildred Loving to wake up in the morning or to go to sleep at night, knowing that the sheriff will not be knocking on their door or shining a light in their face in the privacy of their bedroom.

Ashley: 1:26:49

Virginia's Assistant Attorney General, Robert McEwan, the third, defended the state's position. He suggested that Virginia and any other state had the right to revise its laws to ensure that whites married only whites, blacks only blacks, Asians only Asians, and so on.

Remi: 1:27:11

This is some straight up Nazi shit.

Ashley: 1:27:14

In his view, the Fourteenth Amendment didn't apply to marriage restrictions, and the state had legitimate authority to prevent the quote sociological and psychological evils of interracial unions. To support his claim, he relied heavily on a book by Dr. Albert Gordon, a rabbi, sociologist, and racist whose views aligned closely with Virginia's stance.

Remi: 1:27:42

A rabbi? Oh, that's a bummer too.

Ashley: 1:27:46

In his view, it was necessary to prohibit interracial marriage to protect the well-being of the people and society. When pressed on whether the same logic could be applied to marriages crossing religious lines, McHulwain insisted that religious differences were far less troubling than racial ones.

Remi: 1:28:09

Bending the rules so it fits your specific point of view. Fuck this guy.

Ashley: 1:28:16

While the crux of his argument was a faulty assertion that children of interracial marriages suffered greater psychological difficulties because of their parents' quote, rebellious attitude toward society, self-hatred, neurotic tendencies, immaturity, and other detrimental factors. End quote. What a liberal viewpoint that is, Remy.

Remi: 1:28:48

I just do not understand how anyone could have this point of view on things.

Ashley: 1:28:53

On June 12, 1967, the Supreme Court announced its unanimous decision in Loving View, Virginia, which I'm going to point out here, it is very, very rare that the Supreme Court unanimously agrees on something. The justices ruled that states could not outlaw interracial marriages, declaring such bans a direct violation of the 14th Amendment and recognizing the right to marry as a fundamental, basic civil right of all citizens. With that, the Loving's convictions were reversed, and all states were forced to strike down their interracial marriage bans. Remarkably, Alabama was the last to do so, not getting around to it until November 2000.

Remi: 1:29:43

What? Within my lifetime, it took them that long? 2000? That is unacceptable.

Ashley: 1:29:52

It means that the law was still on the books, but it wasn't being enforced. But still, it should have been a removed long, long, long ago.

Remi: 1:30:00

Oh yeah, we just never got around to that one.

Ashley: 1:30:03

After the ruling, Richard built a home for his family in Caroline County on an acre of land his father gifted them as a wedding present. He and Mildred spent the next several years living quietly in the community where they fell in love and called home. Just nine years later, on June 29th, 1975, the Lovings were struck by a drunk driver while coming home from an evening out.

Remi: 1:30:28

Oh, Mildred was in the car with him?

Ashley: 1:30:31

Yes, Richard was killed immediately, and Mildred lost vision in her right eye.

Remi: 1:30:36

Oh my god, I had no idea. I was just assuming that Richard had been driving by himself at the time.

Ashley: 1:30:43

She never remarried and continued living in the home Richard built her until she died of pneumonia on May 2nd, 2008. Today, Peggy is the only child still alive. Their second son, Donald, died in August 2000, and their eldest Sydney in May 2010. No details are available about their causes of death. The Lovings attorney went on to have impressive careers. Bernard Cohen, MVP of the story, worked in the Virginia House of Delegates from 1980 to 1996. Immediately upon entering office, he sponsored a bill to decriminalize homosexuality. Just three years later, he successfully passed Virginia's Death with the Dignity Bill. Throughout his career, he focused on enhancing the rights of criminal defendants or plaintiffs in legal proceedings. He also backed a nuclear freeze resolution seeking an agreement between the United States and Soviet Union to halt the testing, production, and deployment of nuclear weapons. As I was looking through these attorneys' careers, it just warmed me to read about how they continued to fight for the rights of people that are typically discriminated against.

Remi: 1:32:16

And I also find it so endearing that he had so little contact with the lovings, yet fought for them constantly for many, many, many years. He was fighting on their behalf and for many, many other people out there who deserved to have the same rights. And I just applaud this man for going above and beyond and really being a fine attorney.

Ashley: 1:32:44

Philip Hirschkop successfully argued two more cases in front of the Supreme Court. In 1968, an Arkansas law prohibiting educators from teaching Darwin's theory of evolution in state schools was ruled unconstitutional. We actually have a movie coming up that's not specifically about this case, but it's pretty much the exact same argument. Then in 1974, he argued that mandated leave policies for pregnant teachers should be abolished, a case he again won. Throughout the rest of his career, he served on the board of the ACLU and Penal Reform Institute, primarily focused on prison reform in Virginia. From what I could tell, he's still alive and 89 years old today. Beginning in 2003, higher courts around the country began hearing cases on restrictions against same-sex marriages. On July 26, 2015, under Alberga Fell v. Hodges, the Supreme Court declared that such bans violated the 14th Amendment. Rulings were connected to Loving v. Virginia at the state and federal level. The Lovings have been memorialized in other ways. In 1996, Showtime released a movie called Mr. and Mrs. Loving. June 12th, the day of the Supreme Court's ruling, is actually Loving Day, an unofficial holiday celebrating interracial marriage. There was also an opera made about the case that premiered in Norfolk, Virginia in late April 2025. And finally, I'd like to close this segment with a statement made by Mildred on June 12, 2007, the 40th anniversary of the Loving V, Virginia decision. My generation was bitterly divided over something that should have been so clear and right. The majority believed that what the judge said, that it was God's plan to keep people apart, and that the government should discriminate against people in love. But I have lived long enough now to see big changes. The older generation's fears and prejudices have given way. And today's young people realize that if someone loves someone, they have a right to marry. Surrounded as I am now by wonderful children and grandchildren, not a day goes by that I don't think of Richard, and our love, our right to marry, and how much it meant to me to have that freedom to marry the person precious to me, even if others thought he was the wrong kind of person for me to marry. I believe all Americans, no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry. Government has no business imposing some people's religious beliefs over others, especially if it denies people's civil rights. I am still not a political person, but I am proud that Richards and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, black or white, young or old, gay or straight, seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That's what loving and loving are all about. And that is the true story of Jeff Nichols loving.

Remi: 1:36:50

Very well said, Mildred.

Ashley: 1:36:53

I know she is just really a pioneer, even if she doesn't consider herself that or didn't consider herself that. She was. She fought for something that she wanted and believed she and everyone else should have.

Remi: 1:37:09

Marriage between two consenting adults, regardless of race, religion, or sex, is a right that everyone should have.

Ashley: 1:37:19

And just everything about the story and movie just really warmed my soul. I adore Richard and Mildred Loving. I am inspired by everything they did. And it really is, like the director and everyone who participated in the film said, a story that more people should know about because it is beautiful.

Remi: 1:37:45

And we haven't mentioned it until now, but how appropriate is it that their last name is Loving? And this was a historic case about two people in love.

Ashley: 1:37:57

It really is. It's one of those things that they just say, like, you can't make this shit up.

Remi: 1:38:03

I had not heard of this case, like I said, until the film came out, and the film was just called Loving. And I was surprised when I found out that that was literally the real life people's last names. It is so appropriate.

Ashley: 1:38:19

And in that last sentence from Mildred that I read when she says that's what loving and loving are all about, that first loving is the core case.

Remi: 1:38:30

Well, before we get into our objection of the week, Ashley, I just want to thank you for talking me out of covering this one for our seasonal switcheroo episode. I was originally going to read the book and do all of the research while Ashley watched the film for this one. And I would have been really, really, really out of my element with all this Supreme Court stuff, and am so glad that I stuck to the film, which is much more of a character study, and that's more of my lane.

Ashley: 1:39:04

Yeah, I think any episode that has to deal with the Supreme Court or even civil law, I'll make sure that is not our switcheroo episode because there's just a lot of differences from the criminal justice system that come to play in those situations.

Remi: 1:39:22

But now let's get into our objection of the week. Your Honor, I object! And why is that, Mr.

Michael Shannon: 1:39:31

Eden? Because it's devastating to my case! Overrule. Good call!

Ashley: 1:39:36

Remy, I'm gonna have you go first on this one because you said you only had one thing you jotted down, and I have four, so I want to pick one that you don't pick.

Remi: 1:39:45

Okie dokie, I'll start things off. And just a quick rundown for any new listeners. Our objection of the week is the most why did they do that change in the adaptation from real life to silver screen? And mine this week is basically their. Firstborn child, Sidney. I'm also going to object to this on leading because the film leads you to believe that Sidney is Richard's child. And in the film, they are rearrested in Virginia when they return for Mildred to give birth to Sidney. And that is not exactly how things went down in reality. So that is my objection of the week.

Ashley: 1:40:35

I also had that one. I don't really know why they had Sidney be born when he was born. They had two other kids. Three of them were depicted in the film. Maybe it was because they would then have to explain where Sydney came from.

Remi: 1:40:51

I would assume it was done for dramatic purposes.

Ashley: 1:40:55

But they did go back to town to give birth to their second and third.

Remi: 1:41:00

Very true. I'm not sure why they chose to portray it in that way. And the only thing I can come back to is leading. They were leading us to believe that Sidney was Richard and Mildred's first child, and not a child from someone else as it was in reality.

Ashley: 1:41:18

And I don't really like that change because Sidney was Richard's son. He was his dad. He is the man who raised him, and Richard was Sidney's dad. He viewed him as his own biological son. He was his son. They didn't need to do that.

Remi: 1:41:35

And I almost think that would have been more powerful if he just loved Mildred and took this child in as his own. And I think it would have been a powerful little addition to the film. Not necessary, but I do think that the movie was leading the audience to believe that Sidney was Richard's son.

Ashley: 1:41:57

Well, I had three others that again, all these changes are pretty darn minor. That's why they make it into the objection. And I really do think it is just to streamline the process a bit. The objection I'm gonna pick is in the film, you said it was Mildred's father who served as the witness at their wedding. In reality, it was her father and her brother. For the criteria, what one is more minor?

Remi: 1:42:28

You win this one. Mine is a bigger change than yours. So yeah, I'll hand it to you on this one. That was a minor detail that they could have included in the film and just chose not to. It's not even for dramatic purposes.

Ashley: 1:42:46

And with that, let's get to our verdict.

Verdict: 1:42:50

At the conclusion of each episode, our hosts will deliver a verdict based on the film's accuracy. If the film is an honest portrayal of the events, then it will earn a not guilty verdict. If the adaptation is mostly factual, but creative liberties were taken for the sake of entertainment, the film will be declared a mistrial. But if the film ultimately strays too far from the truth, then it will be condemned as guilty and sentenced to a life behind bars.

Ashley: 1:43:18

I'll kick this one off, Remy, since you went first. I'm gonna keep it short and sweet. If there is anyone out there that is listening that has any question what Remy and I are going to say, I will truly be shocked. This is obviously a not guilty verdict. No question. It follows the story pretty much to the T. Any changes, at least the four I caught, were incredibly minor, obviously just made to streamline the process. And the amount of research that the director, the screenwriter, the producers, the actors took, and not only the amount of research, the amount of care that they took to depict this movie accurately is apparent.

Remi: 1:44:01

It shows.

Ashley: 1:44:03

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say you agree with me, Remy?

Remi: 1:44:06

Yeah, no surprise on this one. This film is getting a not guilty verdict. In fact, it is possibly one of the most not guilty films we've seen. Maybe second only to A Cry in the Dark, which we also covered this season. But yeah, this film gets almost everything exactly right. And the fact that there are multiple times in this story that they could have chose to embellish things. They could have had Richard give his speech in front of the Supreme Court. They could have had their child die when he was struck by a car. There's a lot of things they could have done to Hollywoodize this story, and they didn't. They chose a very restrained approach. And though I will admit it wasn't the most entertaining film to watch, I admire its attention to realism. And I think it resulted in a very respectful, well-made interpretation of the Lovings story.

Ashley: 1:45:09

I think a big reason why that happened is because as you were going through the pre-production, all of the original players in this, before they even got to the director, Colin Firth, for some random reason, I didn't see that coming, and the director of the documentary, they really believed that this story needed to be told. And everyone that they invited on to participate shared the same sentiment.

Remi: 1:45:37

Yeah, they all agreed, and I do too. This is something that I feel like the general public, myself included, when this film came out, are very unaware of. And this is a really historic case, and something that has helped change the lives of millions of people in the United States. And I think that all of the actors involved did a magnificent job. You played me a clip of the real Mildred Loving, and my God, did Ruth Nega nail her voice. I did not hear any clips of Richard, but from what I gather, they kept it very close to how the real man was. He was a man of few words.

Ashley: 1:46:28

They sound very similar. And just how Joel Edgerton portrays him, his body movements, how he carries himself, it is very similar to the clips I've seen of the real Richard Loving. If you do want to see more, there's lots of it in the documentary.

Remi: 1:46:47

And this was a film that everyone involved seemed to take great care and respect with. So yeah, without a doubt, loving gets a not guilty. Ashley, what is on the docket for two weeks from now?

Ashley: 1:47:04

I am so excited for this. We were originally on the fence whether there was gonna be enough material to do my portion of it. And man, am I so happy there was because we are gonna be covering one of my favorite movies, three billboards outside of Ebbing, Missouri. I am so excited. If I hear you watching this movie downstairs, it's gonna be really hard for me to stay working in my office. I'm gonna want to jump down and watch it with you. It's not gonna spoil anything. I've seen this movie so many times, and I absolutely love it.

Remi: 1:47:40

And I cannot wait to discuss this film. It has one of the most amazing casts in a film that I can even remember: Francis McDormott, Woody Harrelson, Sam Rockwell, Peter Dinklage, and it's directed by one of my favorite directors, Martin McDonough. And we will have so much to talk about two weeks from now.

Ashley: 1:48:05

And until then, if you are just shivering in anticipation like I am, stay tuned at the end for a clip of the trailer.

Remi: 1:48:12

But until next time, court is adjourned.

Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri (trailer): 1:48:19

I guess you're Angela Hayes' mother. That's right. Mangela Hayes' mother. So, Mildred Hayes, why did you put up these billboards? My daughter Angela was murdered seven months ago. It seems to me the police department is too busy torturing black folks to solve actual crime. Dixon, I'm in the middle of my goddamn Easter dinner. Target. I know, Chief, but I think we got kind of a problem. Son, son, but not a good I'd do anything to catch your daughter's killer. I don't think those billboards is very fair. We've had two official complaints about those billboards. From a hoof. The lady with a funny eye. A lady with a funny fucking eye. A lot of good friends, Willoughby. Of course not. I said, of course not.