The TV-movie from 1996 that starred Lela Rochon and Timothy Hutton was enough. This is just desperate Oscar bait. What a smh, people will do anything to get awards, even if they have to copy something that's been done already. Bring back real artist and real filmmakers who know how to create from scratch.
shareWhy should this trouble you? In fact, you consider that it has Oscar potential and go on to question why anyone would do it?
It sounds crazy, making me question your motives.
I personally never said it had potential for any award, I was just going on what was being said about it, and all this Oscar talk. And that's when I questioned the reason and timing of why the filmmakers chose to put another version of a story that's already out there, and that is readily available to people of all ages and generations to see.
share@Quen20
So what if it was made before? Movies and TV shows are remade and updated literally ALL the damn time. I remember seeing that film (which was pretty good,BTW----I'd definitely recommend it.) A story like the Lovings' should be told again because people need to be reminded---especially today's young people, who can take everything for granted as if it was always a certain way, when it wasn't---that certain freedoms weren't always free, that people had to fight like hell for those freedoms to come to pass---like the simple right of interracial couples to get married---and that it was a long hard fight for people to gain those particular freedoms---like the right to vote, for instance. So that's why this story needs to told again, and because frankly, a lot of young folks today probably never even heard of this case. Also movies are always going to be made whether there are awards or not, so I don't know why you're even whining about that. Also, why are you so quick to slam this as "Oscar bait" when it just came out and hasn't even been nominated for anything yet? People need to actually SEE the film before they can even decide whether it's "Oscar bait" or not. So quit whining about it----that's how it's always been. And what do you care? You obviously haven't even seen it, so why even say anything about it at all? That's why your silly little rant sounds so ridiculous and just plain stupid on top of that.
Well activista, you have a right to your opinion just like I have a right to mine. Now I've said what I had to say about why I think it's being remade, and I'm sticking to it. I don't think I'm on any type of rant, I'm just responding to people who keep saying anything to me. Personally I was done with the conversation after I made my initial statement. And as far as me seeing it or not, why not ask me, instead of making assumptions to what I've done.
shareThis was a million times better than the TV movie so I would say, yes, it needed to be done.
share[deleted]
It "was enough?" Does the topic disturb you?
This will get a much wider audience. It's not just about awards, it's about visibility. It's a timely topic and was an extremely important case which still reverberates in today's society (which apparently hasn't come nearly as far as we might have thought).
Constitutional law and how it relates to human beings might be the number one most important point of discussion in the US right now. Sorry if you thought a TV movie from 20 years ago "was enough." Personally, I don't think there will ever be "enough."
Movies are IQ tests; the IMDB boards are how people broadcast their score.
Well kay_rock, when you combine the TV-movie with the HBO documentary, and all the literature written about it, in my opinion, it is enough. Anybody of any age, generation,etc. can go on Youtube, google, or any social media outlet and can learn about this, understand what it was all about and get the point. This whole making another movie about it was just a way to give some actors some employment, which is fine, I understand they have to work like everybody else, but like I said in my previous post, the studios and filmmakers could've given them something original to work with. And no, the topic does not disturb me.
shareWow. You have issues.
By all means, keep revealing... I mean sharing. We're all fascinated to see one of you people up close. It's educational.
Movies are IQ tests; the IMDB boards are how people broadcast their score.
[deleted]
Why not do another one? First of all, not everyone has a TV, and many more don't watch... every thing.
shareWhy do another one? Because director/writer Jeff Nichols is a master filmmaker and storyteller. Just watch TAKE SHELTER (2011), MUD (2012) and MIDNIGHT SPECIAL (2015) to see his special brand of filmmaking. I'll watch anything he is involved with. I'll be watching LOVING in a short while. I am sure it will keep me mesmerized, just like the rest of his films. His characters are human, not cartoonish or unreal. His films contain characters you actually care about. How many directors today can you say that about? Damn few.
share"Master" filmmaker? Maybe in his own mind he believes he is. Uh, that title is reserved for people like Martin Scorsese and Steven Spielberg. When this guy has put in enough years and films to really prove himself in the industry, then he "might" get on that list.
See that's the problem with the young filmmakers today, and their so-called fans, they're so quick to put them on pedestals and give them these titles before it's even earned.