Wild at Heart begins with an arresting scene of bloody violence by one of the two lead characters, Sailor Ripley, and this immediately grabs our attention. After this he hooks up with his lover, Lula, who he fiercely protects, and goes on a bizarre road trip into the deep south of the states, while avoiding Lula's mother, played with passion by a deservedly Oscar-nominated Diane Ladd, who has an obsessive hatred for Sailor. They meet an assortment of weird people, especially Bobby Peru, and also Perdita Durango, who has appeared recently in a film with her name as the title, also written by Barry Gifford. It is classic David Lynch, with a homage type theme to the Wizard of Oz. It has the sensuality and eroticism later seen in Lost Highway, the violence and gore, the head sequence after the bank robbery being graphic, and a general uneasiness throughout. But it is a darkly humorous and transfixing piece.
272 Reviews
A symbol of Lynch's individuality and personal freedom.
ruthierocks13 November 2008
Wild at Heart is probably the most conventional David Lynch film I've seen. That being said, it still remains very far from mainstream. Wild at Heart revolved around a young couple, played to perfection by Nicolas Cage and Laura Dern. Fast paced, mostly ridiculous, and pretty unrealistic, Wild at Heart is far from perfect, but a very fun film to watch.
The premise is strange, but intriguing. A young couple is separated when the guy, an Elvis fanatic named Sailor (Nicolas Cage), goes to prison for manslaughter after defending himself against a man who threatened him. When he gets out, he is desperate to get Lula (Laura Dern), the girl he loves, back again. Lula is more than willing to pick up the relationship, but if her mother has anything to do with it, she won't have a chance. Being young and in love, the girl rebels. However, her mother's desperation leads her to contact a hit-man she is in knows and the young couple is forced to run away. The two lovebirds head to California and encounter all sorts of crazy situations along the way.
Arguably the best thing about Wild at Heart is its great cast. Nicolas Cage is in his prime here and the role is, somewhat, reminiscent of the "repeat offender" he played in Raising Arizona. Nicolas Cage was great in his pre-action-hero movies. Laura Dern is equally excellent. I'd never understood the reason for her popularity in sexy roles. It's effective here, though, and she embodies sweet yet trashy Lula wonderfully. Supporting performances by Willem Defoe, Harry Dean Stanton, and Diane Ladd also provide liveliness that enhances the film.
Although it deals with such serious subjects as murder, incest, and general family dysfunction, Wild at Heart is anything but serious. The film is chocked full of amusing moments and over the top clichés. The best example of this is the presence of a rich, older crime boss with a penchant for having young preferably naked young girls surrounding him at all times he's present. There are a few moments when the style gets repetitive and the characters do something worthy of much eye-rolling. Despite that, this movie is never boring and fairly unpredictable.
Wild at Heart is a fun adventure to hitch a ride on. It is full of energy and snappy dialogue. Unlike most Lynch films, it is very linear and straight forward. The acting is excellent and the characters are strangely likable. Wild at Heart feels a little long and drags in a few places toward the end, but this barely hinders the film in its entirety. This is an amusing film, one that would make a good introduction to Lynch for those unfamiliar. For the rest of us, it's simply an enjoyable piece of film-making.
8/10
The premise is strange, but intriguing. A young couple is separated when the guy, an Elvis fanatic named Sailor (Nicolas Cage), goes to prison for manslaughter after defending himself against a man who threatened him. When he gets out, he is desperate to get Lula (Laura Dern), the girl he loves, back again. Lula is more than willing to pick up the relationship, but if her mother has anything to do with it, she won't have a chance. Being young and in love, the girl rebels. However, her mother's desperation leads her to contact a hit-man she is in knows and the young couple is forced to run away. The two lovebirds head to California and encounter all sorts of crazy situations along the way.
Arguably the best thing about Wild at Heart is its great cast. Nicolas Cage is in his prime here and the role is, somewhat, reminiscent of the "repeat offender" he played in Raising Arizona. Nicolas Cage was great in his pre-action-hero movies. Laura Dern is equally excellent. I'd never understood the reason for her popularity in sexy roles. It's effective here, though, and she embodies sweet yet trashy Lula wonderfully. Supporting performances by Willem Defoe, Harry Dean Stanton, and Diane Ladd also provide liveliness that enhances the film.
Although it deals with such serious subjects as murder, incest, and general family dysfunction, Wild at Heart is anything but serious. The film is chocked full of amusing moments and over the top clichés. The best example of this is the presence of a rich, older crime boss with a penchant for having young preferably naked young girls surrounding him at all times he's present. There are a few moments when the style gets repetitive and the characters do something worthy of much eye-rolling. Despite that, this movie is never boring and fairly unpredictable.
Wild at Heart is a fun adventure to hitch a ride on. It is full of energy and snappy dialogue. Unlike most Lynch films, it is very linear and straight forward. The acting is excellent and the characters are strangely likable. Wild at Heart feels a little long and drags in a few places toward the end, but this barely hinders the film in its entirety. This is an amusing film, one that would make a good introduction to Lynch for those unfamiliar. For the rest of us, it's simply an enjoyable piece of film-making.
8/10
If you thought Lost Highway was David Lynch at his strangest, wait until you see Wild At Heart!
TheLittleSongbird12 October 2014
Wild at Heart is not David Lynch at his best, personally much prefer Blue Velvet, The Elephant Man, Mulholland Drive and The Straight Story and is definitely not going to be everybody's cup of tea. But while it has its flaws Wild at Heart still impresses and fascinates in many ways, also don't think that it's his worst like some people I know in the past have said(that'd be Dune). The story does feel very randomly structured at times, especially true with Crispin Glover, and some of the pacing slackens; the film could have done with being shorter as some scenes did feel too padded and underdeveloped, and the script can be a confused jumble and not always easy to understand completely(though admittedly there are some quotable lines). There are many great things with Wild at Heart however because the cinematography is stunning, the scenery is bursting with vivid colour and there are plenty of bold colours and lighting with some of the visuals being wonderfully deranged. There is also a hypnotic soundtrack that adds so much to the feel of the film, the music choices being also quite interesting, while Lynch's direction while not the best he's ever done(tied between Blue Velvet and Mulholland Drive) but it is very adept and has his unique style all over. The story is not the best but the atmosphere is just great, just loved the campiness, the eroticism and haunting weirdness, it's hardly uneventful and there are some memorable moments like the incredibly chilling robbery sequence and the ending. The Wizard of Oz references while a little over-used are fun. The characters are not likable at all, in fact in the cases of Marietta and Bobby a few of them could be seen as loathsome, but considering the atmosphere and viciously violent but also sexy content of the film it is clear that they weren't intended to be. The performances are fine, Nicholas Cage will induce polarising opinions but while he was wooden to start with he was charming and entertaining once he warmed up. Laura Dern is alluring with the two working comfortably together, while Diana Ladd manages to be both hilarious and scary and Willem Dafoe is unforgettably creepy. The cameos acquit themselves well too. All in all, incredibly strange and not without flaws but also fascinating. 7/10 Bethany Cox
A Lynchian Love Story
truemythmedia27 February 2020
I feel like "Wild at Heart" is one of Lynch's forgotten films, and I can sort of see why. Though I enjoyed my time with Sailor (Nicolas Cage, "Leaving Las Vegas"), Lula (Laura Dern, "Marriage Story"), and all the other various other bizarre characters that populate this weird romantic tale, I can honestly say that this is one of my least favorite Lynch movies. It's not bad, it just doesn't do a whole lot for me, especially when compared to Lynch's masterpieces (Twin Peaks TV show, "Eraserhead", "Mulholland Drive", "Inland Empire"). When Lynch is at the peak of his directing powers, his films can prompt me to question and meditate upon the very nature of our reality; "Wild at Heart" is just a decent road trip movie with a few really quirky moments and a whole lot of wackos.
As a side note: it blows my mind that this won the Palme d'Or in 1990. According to IMDb's trivia section on this film, Roger Ebert, who seemed to have a distaste for Lynch (check out his "Blue Velvet" review), booed so loudly that it almost drowned out the cheers when the award was announced. Though I honestly don't think this film deserves to stand beside the likes of other winners like "Parasite", "Shoplifters", "Blue is the Warmest Color", or "4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days", I also can't ever imagine being so upset over a film award that I'd boo the recipient... but hey, that's just me.
As a side note: it blows my mind that this won the Palme d'Or in 1990. According to IMDb's trivia section on this film, Roger Ebert, who seemed to have a distaste for Lynch (check out his "Blue Velvet" review), booed so loudly that it almost drowned out the cheers when the award was announced. Though I honestly don't think this film deserves to stand beside the likes of other winners like "Parasite", "Shoplifters", "Blue is the Warmest Color", or "4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days", I also can't ever imagine being so upset over a film award that I'd boo the recipient... but hey, that's just me.
Mesmerizing.
Vancity_Film_Fanatic1 March 2005
Recipient of the prestigious Palme d'Or award at Cannes, David Lynch's "Wild at Heart" is an amazingly brilliant spectacle for the senses. Bold splashes of deep red, curiously staged musical numbers (Nicolas Cage does his own singing and he's great!), and the continuous references to "The Wizard of Oz" help create a surreal and dreamlike texture to the narrative. The story in brief: Sailor and Lula (excellent performances from both Nicolas Cage & Laura Dern); two broken souls passionately in love, flee the vengeful wrath of Lula's mother Marietta, who for reasons of her own will stop at nothing to ensure the lovers are kept apart. Diane Ladd practically steals the show in her brave portrayal of Lula's psychopathic mother Marietta. Gut wrenchingly violent in places, hopelessly romantic in others; Lynch has crafted an adult fairy tale worthy of multiple viewings. Recommended to those who enjoy and appreciate abstract methods of film-making a definite 10/10!
Lynch and Cage
gavin694213 July 2017
Young lovers Sailor (Nicolas Cage) and Lula (Laura Dern) run from the variety of weirdos that Lula's mom (Diane Ladd) has hired to kill Sailor.
Early test screenings for the film did not go well; Lynch estimated that 80 people walked out of the first test screening and 100 in the next. At the time of its release, the film received mixed critical reviews and was a moderate success at the box office, grossing $14 million, above its $10 million budget. The film won the Palme d'Or at the Cannes Film Festival, at which it received both negative and positive attention from its audience. Diane Ladd was nominated for Best Supporting Actress for both the Academy Awards and the Golden Globes. It has since received some positive re-evaluation from critics.
I can certainly understand the reactions to this film. It is weird, and not just David Lynch weird. The blend of Elvis and "Wizard of Oz" is strange. I also understand the re-evaluation, given how Lynch has become something of a giant in the film world (not to mention Cage really blowing up in the 1990s). I don't know if this is anyone's favorite Lynch film, but it probably isn't anyone's least favorite.
Early test screenings for the film did not go well; Lynch estimated that 80 people walked out of the first test screening and 100 in the next. At the time of its release, the film received mixed critical reviews and was a moderate success at the box office, grossing $14 million, above its $10 million budget. The film won the Palme d'Or at the Cannes Film Festival, at which it received both negative and positive attention from its audience. Diane Ladd was nominated for Best Supporting Actress for both the Academy Awards and the Golden Globes. It has since received some positive re-evaluation from critics.
I can certainly understand the reactions to this film. It is weird, and not just David Lynch weird. The blend of Elvis and "Wizard of Oz" is strange. I also understand the re-evaluation, given how Lynch has become something of a giant in the film world (not to mention Cage really blowing up in the 1990s). I don't know if this is anyone's favorite Lynch film, but it probably isn't anyone's least favorite.
In A Word: Outrageous!
ccthemovieman-17 January 2006
Outrageous! This is another sick-but-fascinating David Lynch film, maybe his sickest, although I've never seen Eraserhead.
The most interesting feature of this strange movie, I think, was the weird characters, one after the other. Make that ultra-weird.....and the strangest of them all is "Bobby Peru," played by Willem Dafoe. In all my years of movie watching, I think "Bobby Peru" still has to rank in the top five of the creepiest characters. He is so outrageously disgusting and perverted you just have to laugh out loud at him.
In fact, "outrageous" might be the best word to describe this film, characters and all.
This wild and entertaining film sometimes makes me shake my head in disgust that I own it, and at other times makes me just laugh out loud at the absurdity of it. You really have to have a dark sense of humor to appreciate much of it. I do, to some degree....enough to keep viewing this.
Nicholas Cage is particularly fun to watch and provides most of the laughs. Laura Dern is also convincing as a trailer-trash-type. If you want a clue on why Dern would play such a sleazy role, check out her real-life mom in this film, Diane Ladd, who plays her mother in the movie. It looks like Mom passed on her wholesome values.
As with some other Lynch films, the music is outstanding: just a great soundtrack. I bought the CD to this a year after first seeing the movie, and I've always enjoyed it. And, another Lynch trait that certainly is here is the excellent visual style, which is enhanced by the widescreen DVD.
So, if you are looking for an outrageous two hours and you aren't easily shocked or offended, this would be a film to consider.
The most interesting feature of this strange movie, I think, was the weird characters, one after the other. Make that ultra-weird.....and the strangest of them all is "Bobby Peru," played by Willem Dafoe. In all my years of movie watching, I think "Bobby Peru" still has to rank in the top five of the creepiest characters. He is so outrageously disgusting and perverted you just have to laugh out loud at him.
In fact, "outrageous" might be the best word to describe this film, characters and all.
This wild and entertaining film sometimes makes me shake my head in disgust that I own it, and at other times makes me just laugh out loud at the absurdity of it. You really have to have a dark sense of humor to appreciate much of it. I do, to some degree....enough to keep viewing this.
Nicholas Cage is particularly fun to watch and provides most of the laughs. Laura Dern is also convincing as a trailer-trash-type. If you want a clue on why Dern would play such a sleazy role, check out her real-life mom in this film, Diane Ladd, who plays her mother in the movie. It looks like Mom passed on her wholesome values.
As with some other Lynch films, the music is outstanding: just a great soundtrack. I bought the CD to this a year after first seeing the movie, and I've always enjoyed it. And, another Lynch trait that certainly is here is the excellent visual style, which is enhanced by the widescreen DVD.
So, if you are looking for an outrageous two hours and you aren't easily shocked or offended, this would be a film to consider.
Languorous violence
rmax30482330 June 2004
Warning: Spoilers
When Lynch wants to say something he takes his time, no doubt about it. Sometimes he takes his time even when he doesn't have much to say. Example?
Isabella Rosselini in torn stocking, shabby wig, and red shoes is swaying gently to some music when Willem DaFoe crashes in and gives her a vigorous smooch. That's the beginning and the end of the scene. Another example? Cage and Laura Dern are having an argument just after he's let out of the slams. She's nervous and upset because she hasn't seen him in six years. He looks at her intently and tells her it's a mistake for them to get back together again. There is about a twenty-second closeup of Dern's magnificent blue eyes. They don't drip with tears. They don't even blink. They stare directly into the camera. Why? Like you, I'd have to guess. (I'd guess that her unblinking, unteary stare is meant to tell us that she sees things pretty clearly despite being shaken. That's pretty banal, I know, but my mind is open to other interpretations.)
I don't mean to sound as if I'm bashing the movie because that's not what I mean to do. Let's linger a little over a much later scene. It takes place in the middle of a city street, El Paso I would guess, but it's one of those industrial-area streets that are deserted on weekends. It's a wide sun-baked silent street cluttered with drunken-looking telephone poles and lined with one-story factories and warehouses, and there is a city skyline way in the distant, cerulean with urban haze. And Cage is walking alone through this bleak and ominous landscape. But it's not only the visuals that makes this scene outstanding. A handful of viperous dudes wearing black fall in behind Cage's figure and another group of Thugees finally blocks his way in mid-street. The music comes to an abrupt halt. Nobody says anything. The atmosphere throbs with threat. Cage sets down his suitcase, takes the time to deliberately light a cigarette, looks around him, and asks, "Okay -- what do you faggots want?" What they want is to beat the hell out of him, and they get their wish. The unconscious Cage has a vision of The Nice Witch of the West (don't ask) and when he recovers he finds he's still surrounded by these sadistic brutes who ask him if he's had enough. He struggles to his feet, gingerly feeling his "broken" rubber nose, and says, "Yes, I've had enough. Furthermore, I'd like to apologize for referring to you dudes earlier as homosexuals. You've taught me a lesson." Then he runs away ecstatically. How many other movies can boast ten minutes worth of film like that?
Now, I can see where a lot of ten-year-olds (or ten-year-old minds) might be bored with this film. It's long. There isn't an abundance of violence, although DaFoe does get his head blown off by twin blasts from a shotgun. I mean, quite literally, his head is blown completely off. It bounces off the wall like a football and lands with a loud splat on the pavement. So maybe there's a little hope for the horror afficionados after all, but not much, when you get right down to it.
The movie is punctuated with violence and, even more, with oddities, but mostly it moves languorously. Cage and Dern thrum through the Texas night in a shiny old convertible whose radio plays nothing but news like, "A man won his appeal today for dismissal of charges that he ate his own child." Well -- not that, but equally weird. One relative of Dern gets his kicks by putting a cockroach directly on his nether orifice. Willem DaFoe should definitely sue his dental surgeon. He thrusts his mouth close to Dern's at one point, urging her to say something filthy to him and he'll let her go, and his mouth is like a limpet's, his lips a disgusting circle of membrane filled with hideous teeth.
I wouldn't argue that "Wild at Heart" should be put into a time capsule, but it's not a movie that's easy to forget. David Lynch may or may not be a hot commercial property but he's one of the most original directors working today.
Isabella Rosselini in torn stocking, shabby wig, and red shoes is swaying gently to some music when Willem DaFoe crashes in and gives her a vigorous smooch. That's the beginning and the end of the scene. Another example? Cage and Laura Dern are having an argument just after he's let out of the slams. She's nervous and upset because she hasn't seen him in six years. He looks at her intently and tells her it's a mistake for them to get back together again. There is about a twenty-second closeup of Dern's magnificent blue eyes. They don't drip with tears. They don't even blink. They stare directly into the camera. Why? Like you, I'd have to guess. (I'd guess that her unblinking, unteary stare is meant to tell us that she sees things pretty clearly despite being shaken. That's pretty banal, I know, but my mind is open to other interpretations.)
I don't mean to sound as if I'm bashing the movie because that's not what I mean to do. Let's linger a little over a much later scene. It takes place in the middle of a city street, El Paso I would guess, but it's one of those industrial-area streets that are deserted on weekends. It's a wide sun-baked silent street cluttered with drunken-looking telephone poles and lined with one-story factories and warehouses, and there is a city skyline way in the distant, cerulean with urban haze. And Cage is walking alone through this bleak and ominous landscape. But it's not only the visuals that makes this scene outstanding. A handful of viperous dudes wearing black fall in behind Cage's figure and another group of Thugees finally blocks his way in mid-street. The music comes to an abrupt halt. Nobody says anything. The atmosphere throbs with threat. Cage sets down his suitcase, takes the time to deliberately light a cigarette, looks around him, and asks, "Okay -- what do you faggots want?" What they want is to beat the hell out of him, and they get their wish. The unconscious Cage has a vision of The Nice Witch of the West (don't ask) and when he recovers he finds he's still surrounded by these sadistic brutes who ask him if he's had enough. He struggles to his feet, gingerly feeling his "broken" rubber nose, and says, "Yes, I've had enough. Furthermore, I'd like to apologize for referring to you dudes earlier as homosexuals. You've taught me a lesson." Then he runs away ecstatically. How many other movies can boast ten minutes worth of film like that?
Now, I can see where a lot of ten-year-olds (or ten-year-old minds) might be bored with this film. It's long. There isn't an abundance of violence, although DaFoe does get his head blown off by twin blasts from a shotgun. I mean, quite literally, his head is blown completely off. It bounces off the wall like a football and lands with a loud splat on the pavement. So maybe there's a little hope for the horror afficionados after all, but not much, when you get right down to it.
The movie is punctuated with violence and, even more, with oddities, but mostly it moves languorously. Cage and Dern thrum through the Texas night in a shiny old convertible whose radio plays nothing but news like, "A man won his appeal today for dismissal of charges that he ate his own child." Well -- not that, but equally weird. One relative of Dern gets his kicks by putting a cockroach directly on his nether orifice. Willem DaFoe should definitely sue his dental surgeon. He thrusts his mouth close to Dern's at one point, urging her to say something filthy to him and he'll let her go, and his mouth is like a limpet's, his lips a disgusting circle of membrane filled with hideous teeth.
I wouldn't argue that "Wild at Heart" should be put into a time capsule, but it's not a movie that's easy to forget. David Lynch may or may not be a hot commercial property but he's one of the most original directors working today.
Arteries Have Become a Bit More Clogged...
Xstal24 July 2020
Lynch on the road to hell
Coventry12 February 2004
The most creative and controversial director in cinema is back with a road-movie! Wild at Heart is one rough roller coaster ride and a typical Lynch-cocktail of violence, sex and of course
bizarre characters. I challenge you to find one personality in this film that could be referred to as a normal human being'. As usually, Lynch introduces a bunch of wicked individuals in his film who're all messed up in the head pretty bad. Yet, I feel like Wild at Heart might be Lynch's most accessible film (outside The Elephant Man and The Straight Story). The structure remains chronological and quite easy to follow. Unlike the previous Blue Velvet, I feel like the plot and development of Wild at Heart is a bit inferior to the wonderful photography. The greatest aspects in the screenplay are in fact the delicious side-chapters that are told without absolute necessity. Like the story about Lula's cousin Dell (Crispin Glover), the torture of Harry Dean Stanton's character and the nasty and disturbing images of a car accident the protagonists come across. These are the little sequences that truly prove Lynch's talent as a storyteller. Overall and simply put: this movie is COOL! It's a joy to watch and you really hate to love some of the offensive characters. Willem Dafoe takes the cake as Bobby Peru. His portrayal is a neat follow-up to Blue Velvet's Frank Booth. Peru is a filthy and despicable pervert with itchy-trigger-fingers! It's a damn shame he hasn't got any more screen time. Wild at Heart surely isn't the greatest masterpiece out there, but you should love it for what it is: an absurd and entertaining adventure with a couple of thought-provoking values and an extraordinary love-lesson.
Inventive, bleak romance drama has power
emm11 December 1999
A real stimulatingly offbeat exhibition from Lynch is the dark and wild backdrop of a romantically engaged traveling pair: "Sailor" who is on parole after committing a brutal murder, and "Lula" whose mother demands her to return from a spoiled trip to Texas with help from a detective. It's a twisted, artsy journey that is often repulsive and long to boot (and certainly not for the squeamish!), but fares inventive at a certain degree and boasts some of the strongest performances ever worked on a Lynch film, perhaps even in 1990. Cage's concert act and the magically rendered semi-ending are two classic acclaims put together in this moving cinematic collage.
RATING: * * *
RATING: * * *
Beautiful, violent, funny and surreal--a masterpiece from David Lynch
BrandtSponseller22 July 2005
This is one of my favorite David Lynch films. It is also one of the more transparent, easy to understand Lynch films, although that's not the reason why it's one of my favorites. But that fact also makes Wild at Heart a good candidate for introducing someone to Lynch.
On the other hand, although it's more transparent and linear on a surface level, I'm still not sure I've figured out the multilayered, bizarre subtexts and symbolism that lie deep beneath the surface--even though I've seen it a few times now. Assuming that there is indeed something to figure out. To an extent, it seems like maybe the hint of something "deeper" is in this case more of a red herring. This is one of Lynch's funnier films, albeit very macabre humor. It contains references to all of Lynch's most common "content quirks"including sequined ingénues singing jazz, manipulative housewife types, shots of asphalt speeding by, minor characters with freaky speech "impediments", severed body parts, and on and on--but it's almost as if he's making fun of himself. Combine that with excellent performances (including a hilarious bit part for Crispin Glover, one of my favorite actors/personalities), a sublimely incongruous score, and a retro, gripping, violent road trip saga cum romance that presages both Oliver Stone's Natural Born Killers (1994) and just about all of Quentin Tarantino's career, and you've got quite a film.
Wild at Heart, based on a novel by Barry Gifford, is the tale of Sailor (Nicolas Cage) and Lula (Laura Dern), a doe-eyed, "classy white trash" couple. As the film starts--and what a start it is--someone tries to stab Sailor to death as he's exiting a theater. Sailor will have none of it, and Lynch begins the film on an exhilarating, brutally violent note--this is not a film for the faint of heart. To complicate matters and set up the primary conflict, we learn even before the attempted stabbing that the hit man was sent by Lula's mother, Marietta Fortune (Diane Ladd), who claimed that Sailor tried to seduce her in the bathroom (this isn't quite true, as we learn in detail later).
There isn't a character in the film who isn't involved with some shady business, either presently or in the past. Sailor and Marietta's tensions stem from many years ago, when Lula was just a girl (she's supposedly quite a bit younger than Sailor). The events of the film's opening result in Sailor being imprisoned. Lula dutifully waits for his release, much to the consternation of her mom. The basic gist of the film is disarmingly simple--Sailor and Lula are headed across the country, with an eventual goal of California, as Marietta tries to arrange for Sailor to be put away for good. There are many finely realized subplots and detailed tangents, but that's the crux of the plot on the surface.
In addition to his typical hyperreal/surreal weirdness, Lynch concocts a very improbable stew of influences that work together beautifully. Lula has something of an obsession with The Wizard of Oz (1939). She's haunted by visions of the wicked witch (including the "evil cackle"), and she sees the road trip as a veritable journey to the Emerald City. Lynch works in a lot of subtle references to The Wizard of Oz with other characters, too. Sailor is something like lounge version of Elvis reincarnated as a gangster flunky, with even better karate moves to match. Yet the two are huge heavy metal fans, especially of a band named "Powermad", whose music exquisitely punctuates many sequences, including some sublime dance scenes. In the first half, important scenes are set in New Orleans, with the familiar unsettling undertone that that locale often has in films--you can just smell the voodoo, sex, drugs and death bubbling beneath the skin of the city. Later scenes are set in the desolate, desert prairie country of Texas, which turns out to be even more unsettling (even though I really find such places refreshing and relaxing). There are other kinds of symbolic, stylistic and literal references worked into the film, such as the constant fire motif, which Lynch shoots beautifully, but the above is to just give you an idea of the stew.
It all seems like it should add up to some subtextual grand narrative, and maybe it does, but I haven't quite figured out what it all means yet. But it doesn't matter. The stylistic flourishes are ingenious superficially, too, and maybe Lynch _is_ just poking fun at being Lynch. Here, perhaps more than in any other work, he has found the perfect balance between the soap-operatic and the utterly bizarre--the filmic equivalent to author Harry Crews' best work.
Tarantino doesn't tend to have pithy subtexts in his films, either, but they're no worse the wear for that, and when Wild at Heart takes a turn into typical Tarantino territory, Lynch is just as captivating, gritty and groovy, plus he's doing it before Tarantino himself. At the same time, Lynch manages to maintain a parallel lush, erotic romance between Sailor and Lula--Dern is incredibly sexy/sensuous here. This material works as well, and supplies what just may be the message of the film after all--that love can (eventually) conquer all, even the stuff that's "wild at heart and weird on top".
On the other hand, although it's more transparent and linear on a surface level, I'm still not sure I've figured out the multilayered, bizarre subtexts and symbolism that lie deep beneath the surface--even though I've seen it a few times now. Assuming that there is indeed something to figure out. To an extent, it seems like maybe the hint of something "deeper" is in this case more of a red herring. This is one of Lynch's funnier films, albeit very macabre humor. It contains references to all of Lynch's most common "content quirks"including sequined ingénues singing jazz, manipulative housewife types, shots of asphalt speeding by, minor characters with freaky speech "impediments", severed body parts, and on and on--but it's almost as if he's making fun of himself. Combine that with excellent performances (including a hilarious bit part for Crispin Glover, one of my favorite actors/personalities), a sublimely incongruous score, and a retro, gripping, violent road trip saga cum romance that presages both Oliver Stone's Natural Born Killers (1994) and just about all of Quentin Tarantino's career, and you've got quite a film.
Wild at Heart, based on a novel by Barry Gifford, is the tale of Sailor (Nicolas Cage) and Lula (Laura Dern), a doe-eyed, "classy white trash" couple. As the film starts--and what a start it is--someone tries to stab Sailor to death as he's exiting a theater. Sailor will have none of it, and Lynch begins the film on an exhilarating, brutally violent note--this is not a film for the faint of heart. To complicate matters and set up the primary conflict, we learn even before the attempted stabbing that the hit man was sent by Lula's mother, Marietta Fortune (Diane Ladd), who claimed that Sailor tried to seduce her in the bathroom (this isn't quite true, as we learn in detail later).
There isn't a character in the film who isn't involved with some shady business, either presently or in the past. Sailor and Marietta's tensions stem from many years ago, when Lula was just a girl (she's supposedly quite a bit younger than Sailor). The events of the film's opening result in Sailor being imprisoned. Lula dutifully waits for his release, much to the consternation of her mom. The basic gist of the film is disarmingly simple--Sailor and Lula are headed across the country, with an eventual goal of California, as Marietta tries to arrange for Sailor to be put away for good. There are many finely realized subplots and detailed tangents, but that's the crux of the plot on the surface.
In addition to his typical hyperreal/surreal weirdness, Lynch concocts a very improbable stew of influences that work together beautifully. Lula has something of an obsession with The Wizard of Oz (1939). She's haunted by visions of the wicked witch (including the "evil cackle"), and she sees the road trip as a veritable journey to the Emerald City. Lynch works in a lot of subtle references to The Wizard of Oz with other characters, too. Sailor is something like lounge version of Elvis reincarnated as a gangster flunky, with even better karate moves to match. Yet the two are huge heavy metal fans, especially of a band named "Powermad", whose music exquisitely punctuates many sequences, including some sublime dance scenes. In the first half, important scenes are set in New Orleans, with the familiar unsettling undertone that that locale often has in films--you can just smell the voodoo, sex, drugs and death bubbling beneath the skin of the city. Later scenes are set in the desolate, desert prairie country of Texas, which turns out to be even more unsettling (even though I really find such places refreshing and relaxing). There are other kinds of symbolic, stylistic and literal references worked into the film, such as the constant fire motif, which Lynch shoots beautifully, but the above is to just give you an idea of the stew.
It all seems like it should add up to some subtextual grand narrative, and maybe it does, but I haven't quite figured out what it all means yet. But it doesn't matter. The stylistic flourishes are ingenious superficially, too, and maybe Lynch _is_ just poking fun at being Lynch. Here, perhaps more than in any other work, he has found the perfect balance between the soap-operatic and the utterly bizarre--the filmic equivalent to author Harry Crews' best work.
Tarantino doesn't tend to have pithy subtexts in his films, either, but they're no worse the wear for that, and when Wild at Heart takes a turn into typical Tarantino territory, Lynch is just as captivating, gritty and groovy, plus he's doing it before Tarantino himself. At the same time, Lynch manages to maintain a parallel lush, erotic romance between Sailor and Lula--Dern is incredibly sexy/sensuous here. This material works as well, and supplies what just may be the message of the film after all--that love can (eventually) conquer all, even the stuff that's "wild at heart and weird on top".
A dark and wicked yellow brick road journey a different take on life.
blanbrn2 June 2018
If you know anything about the works of David Lynch you know that it's different often dark and it challenges the mind as the world is never what it seems to be. With this 1990 work "Wild at Heart" it shows just how dark and different life can be for some like it's a twist and parody a dark like "Wizard of Oz" journey like film!
This film is very violent and erotic with intimate and wild raw sex scenes as it's a ride thru darkness and uncertainty. The story has Lula(Laura Dern) who loves and only wants to be with her ex-con boyfriend Sailor(Nick Cage) no matter how many times danger and death tries to get them. So both hit the road to find happiness only they find a wicked and cruel underworld awaits them on their road of journey.
This film proves life is no fairy tale as it's a dark and wild wicked madness journey for many this movie is also supported well by Willem Dafoe, Harry Dean Stanton, Isabella Rossellini and many others overall it's a pretty good cult classic film to watch.
This film is very violent and erotic with intimate and wild raw sex scenes as it's a ride thru darkness and uncertainty. The story has Lula(Laura Dern) who loves and only wants to be with her ex-con boyfriend Sailor(Nick Cage) no matter how many times danger and death tries to get them. So both hit the road to find happiness only they find a wicked and cruel underworld awaits them on their road of journey.
This film proves life is no fairy tale as it's a dark and wild wicked madness journey for many this movie is also supported well by Willem Dafoe, Harry Dean Stanton, Isabella Rossellini and many others overall it's a pretty good cult classic film to watch.
bleak
nickrogers19691 February 2009
Warning: Spoilers
This was the most hyped film of 1990. It was considered one of the coolest films of the 90's. I saw it once when it came out and the only things I remembered was the car accident with Sherilyn Fenn and the angel at the end. That's it. I saw it again for the first time in 19 years and I understand why. It's not very memorable because it isn't a very good movie.
Sure, there are some cool crazy characters (all right, they're all crazy!) and the photography of the bleak landscape is beautiful. David Lynch has also a cool way of using sounds and music which makes the film very eerie. Apart from that, the film is dangerously close to being a B-movie, almost laughable. It doesn't hold up.
Sure, there are some cool crazy characters (all right, they're all crazy!) and the photography of the bleak landscape is beautiful. David Lynch has also a cool way of using sounds and music which makes the film very eerie. Apart from that, the film is dangerously close to being a B-movie, almost laughable. It doesn't hold up.
A certain amount of fear, as well as things to dream about
chaos-rampant22 April 2016
This is how Lynch described his attraction to Gifford's book. It speaks just as well about every other film he made of course where a certain amount of fear makes the things to dream about stand out from the night as all the more urgent.
It has enough going for it either way; a road movie given to us with a gonzo eye, crime and anguish as kitchen- sink ritual, archetypally American male and female avatars of sexual youth, a sense of wanting to just love but the world is a wicked place, and if that's not enough something else will come along in the next scene.
It was awarded the top prize that year at Cannes. I would have to guess that the French saw some of this as archetypally tweaked America, quintessential in the fracture. It's the same audience that was going to receive Pulp Fiction with plaudits in a few years.
And this is the whole thing. At this point Lynch could still be thought of as one among the quirky bunch that included the Coens, Stone and soon Tarantino. But can he be thought of as one of them now? No indeed and that's how much he has evolved.
What sets Lynch apart is that others create movies as self-enclosed worlds; for Lynch it's rather one larger, open-ended world that he carries with him everywhere and now and then summons some part of it in movie form.
The Coens for example, who are closest to him in several ways, both work with metaphysics and indulge loves for song, noir and dreams. Blue Velvet and Raizing Arizona, I can't think of one without the other, both with a dreamlike noir engine that skewers idyllic middle America. But the Coens think up a story and cleanly work out its mechanism, Lynch's work seems to come from prolonged stays in meditative habitation of that world. They are intellectuals, he's spiritual (not the same as pious).
Except this one came from a book Lynch was given while finishing the Twin Peaks pilot and decided to do; not so much summoned from his world as he visited someone else's and came back with impressions. Now in my third viewing, it continues to be my least favorite of his post- Velvet long works that constitute the Lynch world but still one of the most endearing messes I know. It's Lynch letting out steam more than anything.
But I'll keep with me the powerful noir engine that creates the fearful dreaming; two women, mother and daughter, who are traumatized by something they (she) allowed to happen (rape, husband's murder) and this is now spilling and surging through the film as helplessness to resist evil (most notably seen in the helplessness to avert the PI's death and the Bobby Peru scene).
It does show Lynch as a humanist filmmaker, not a cynic, and that alone elevates it above mere carnage.
It has enough going for it either way; a road movie given to us with a gonzo eye, crime and anguish as kitchen- sink ritual, archetypally American male and female avatars of sexual youth, a sense of wanting to just love but the world is a wicked place, and if that's not enough something else will come along in the next scene.
It was awarded the top prize that year at Cannes. I would have to guess that the French saw some of this as archetypally tweaked America, quintessential in the fracture. It's the same audience that was going to receive Pulp Fiction with plaudits in a few years.
And this is the whole thing. At this point Lynch could still be thought of as one among the quirky bunch that included the Coens, Stone and soon Tarantino. But can he be thought of as one of them now? No indeed and that's how much he has evolved.
What sets Lynch apart is that others create movies as self-enclosed worlds; for Lynch it's rather one larger, open-ended world that he carries with him everywhere and now and then summons some part of it in movie form.
The Coens for example, who are closest to him in several ways, both work with metaphysics and indulge loves for song, noir and dreams. Blue Velvet and Raizing Arizona, I can't think of one without the other, both with a dreamlike noir engine that skewers idyllic middle America. But the Coens think up a story and cleanly work out its mechanism, Lynch's work seems to come from prolonged stays in meditative habitation of that world. They are intellectuals, he's spiritual (not the same as pious).
Except this one came from a book Lynch was given while finishing the Twin Peaks pilot and decided to do; not so much summoned from his world as he visited someone else's and came back with impressions. Now in my third viewing, it continues to be my least favorite of his post- Velvet long works that constitute the Lynch world but still one of the most endearing messes I know. It's Lynch letting out steam more than anything.
But I'll keep with me the powerful noir engine that creates the fearful dreaming; two women, mother and daughter, who are traumatized by something they (she) allowed to happen (rape, husband's murder) and this is now spilling and surging through the film as helplessness to resist evil (most notably seen in the helplessness to avert the PI's death and the Bobby Peru scene).
It does show Lynch as a humanist filmmaker, not a cynic, and that alone elevates it above mere carnage.
Crazy at Heart
secondtake9 November 2010
Wild at Heart (1990)
An inventive, crazy, abusive, drugged up, violent, sexed up, romantic, anti-romantic, road trip pseudo noir campy intense up and down silly disturbing movie.
But is it any good? Is it fun to watch, or moving, or beautiful? Maybe, if you are pre-disposed. At times I was amused or bemused or fascinating or surreal in a raw and theatrical way. It doesn't always add up, and even though it isn't meant to, the movie feels so self-indulgent you feel like the style is used to hide sloppy movie-making. It's a campy mess, really, with a whole slew of episodic turns and twists. You couldn't really care less about anyone or anything. It's too comic booky for that.
Nick Cage is a bit too much to take, too...you might find him funny, or just overacting. There are some terrific performances--a hyped up, silly sexy Laura Dern, a hardened Isabella Rosselini, a characteristic Harry Dean Stanton, an unpredictable Willem Defoe, and so on, quite a quirky cast! A lot happens in two hours, and it has that wide open American landscape behind it. It's no doubt sexist, but I doubt any of its fans care a bit.
And luckily, this kind of highly stylized film has its fans. Surely the glossy saturated nightmare and all the sex and violence is has all the earmarks of counterculture hedonism. That's good if you're into that. But I constantly think how much more powerful it could have been. There are moments, and scenes, that are fabulous, really brilliant. But in the long run it's a lazy movie, depending on its weirdness far too often. For me that's not enough. Curious, but not enough.
An inventive, crazy, abusive, drugged up, violent, sexed up, romantic, anti-romantic, road trip pseudo noir campy intense up and down silly disturbing movie.
But is it any good? Is it fun to watch, or moving, or beautiful? Maybe, if you are pre-disposed. At times I was amused or bemused or fascinating or surreal in a raw and theatrical way. It doesn't always add up, and even though it isn't meant to, the movie feels so self-indulgent you feel like the style is used to hide sloppy movie-making. It's a campy mess, really, with a whole slew of episodic turns and twists. You couldn't really care less about anyone or anything. It's too comic booky for that.
Nick Cage is a bit too much to take, too...you might find him funny, or just overacting. There are some terrific performances--a hyped up, silly sexy Laura Dern, a hardened Isabella Rosselini, a characteristic Harry Dean Stanton, an unpredictable Willem Defoe, and so on, quite a quirky cast! A lot happens in two hours, and it has that wide open American landscape behind it. It's no doubt sexist, but I doubt any of its fans care a bit.
And luckily, this kind of highly stylized film has its fans. Surely the glossy saturated nightmare and all the sex and violence is has all the earmarks of counterculture hedonism. That's good if you're into that. But I constantly think how much more powerful it could have been. There are moments, and scenes, that are fabulous, really brilliant. But in the long run it's a lazy movie, depending on its weirdness far too often. For me that's not enough. Curious, but not enough.
Wild at Heart
AzureTay15 April 2022
Warning: Spoilers
A one of a kind movie from a very special style of Director, David Lynch who has few peers in the art of cryptic indirect story telling. Wild at Heart is one of my favorite films of all time, it is incredibly quotable, stars one of my favorite actors (Nicolas Cage, reminder, favorite doesn't mean best). The movie is a wild ride scene to scene, start to finish with layers of meaning and mystique, David Lynch in typical style doesn't give anything away directly. All that said, it is highly enjoyable alone or with friends, it is both a somber reflection movie, and a great party movie, it is reality, or at least parallel to reality in that sense of open ended exploration of the emotional spectrum of reaction and content.
To start with, Wild at Heart is a romance movie in a very unconventional format, our heroes are generally bad people with lofty higher than life dreams and opinions of one another, and the crazed way Nick Cage presents himself gives the character of Sailor Ripley an incredibly unique style and movement: A presences that speaks for itself. The movie was adapted for film by Lynch himself from the book of the same name by Barry Gifford. I don't know how well the scenes, plot, emotions, or characters translate as I have never read the book, and perhaps if I did, it would demystify this movie and make it less meaningful.
Lynch himself talked about the book in interviews saying, "A certain amount of fear, as well as things to dream about." A statement loaded with unknowable ends, and yet also just presents how we all see the future. The quote presents a marvelous sense of invitation as well, the opening of a great mystery.
At its core, Wild at Heart is about the Future, the fearful uncertainty of it, and the promised fear that always comes with risking our dreams upon the future. Sailor is a prime example of machismo, American brashness and cultural violence. He has vigor, vitality, and vanity to spare. His love Lula as played by Laura Dern is no less bombastically bimbo and loyal. Both characters are genuine, human and real, while also being caricatures of the ideas of youthful invincibility, sex, and the sense of wanting a greater world and a greater future. They rush after that, calling everyone in their youth that there is something bigger and brighter out in the world for them, and everywhere they go, they find it lacking or feel the call all over again.
This movie is hard to talk about because of the layers of the human condition, the explorations of trauma shaping who we are, and how we learn by mistake and happenstance. It also has this motif of freedom or rather the belief of freedom, as Sailor often says, "This is a snakeskin jacket! And for me it's a symbol of my individuality, and my belief... in personal freedom." Lynch is a very careful director, the reoccuring use of this line implies something, and to me, it presents that freedom isn't a real thing, it is an abstraction, it is a belief, a rallying call, and a symbol, but not tangible. Sailor has it because he has his jacket that shows his personal freedom, but it, like the society that is around him, his relationships, and every other binding that gives him less freedom is on top of him, it actually constrains him, makes it harder to act in a way of personal freedom.
This movie, like most of Lynch's work is incredibly dense and hard to parse through, hard to explain and present, but ultimately, unlike most of Lynch's work, it is a solid and entertaining adventure romance movie outside of the messaging, commentary, and ideas he weaved into the dream of his movie.
A thing this movie does, since it focuses so much on freedom, dreams, hope, and the future, it shows Lynch can shake off the title of cynic, of misanthrope, and genuinely say he likes humanity, loves mankind, and sees them for their flaws but still thinks they are deserving of a brighter future.
Overall: 10 out of 10, I don't just recommend this movie, I love this movie. It is one of my favorites of all time and I encourage you to watch it.
Spoiler Stuff One of the finest scenes to ever be put in film is in this movie, near the end of the movie. Sailor is surrounded by a group of punks and simply says, "What do you Faggots want?" Gets the heck beaten out of him, hits the ground, has a trippy dream sequence with the good witch from the Wizard of Oz, and then stands back up still surrounded by the guys who beat him and says, "And I want to apologize to you gentlemen for referring to you as homosexuals. I also want to thank you fellows. You've taught me a valuable lesson in life." Then without skipping a beat he goes from a normal, hushed speaking voice to loudly screaming "LULA!" As loud as he can.
It is a mind blowingly weird scene the first time I watched it, and the third. And now as I've seen this movie dozens of times, it still is one of the funniest scenes I've ever seen.
To start with, Wild at Heart is a romance movie in a very unconventional format, our heroes are generally bad people with lofty higher than life dreams and opinions of one another, and the crazed way Nick Cage presents himself gives the character of Sailor Ripley an incredibly unique style and movement: A presences that speaks for itself. The movie was adapted for film by Lynch himself from the book of the same name by Barry Gifford. I don't know how well the scenes, plot, emotions, or characters translate as I have never read the book, and perhaps if I did, it would demystify this movie and make it less meaningful.
Lynch himself talked about the book in interviews saying, "A certain amount of fear, as well as things to dream about." A statement loaded with unknowable ends, and yet also just presents how we all see the future. The quote presents a marvelous sense of invitation as well, the opening of a great mystery.
At its core, Wild at Heart is about the Future, the fearful uncertainty of it, and the promised fear that always comes with risking our dreams upon the future. Sailor is a prime example of machismo, American brashness and cultural violence. He has vigor, vitality, and vanity to spare. His love Lula as played by Laura Dern is no less bombastically bimbo and loyal. Both characters are genuine, human and real, while also being caricatures of the ideas of youthful invincibility, sex, and the sense of wanting a greater world and a greater future. They rush after that, calling everyone in their youth that there is something bigger and brighter out in the world for them, and everywhere they go, they find it lacking or feel the call all over again.
This movie is hard to talk about because of the layers of the human condition, the explorations of trauma shaping who we are, and how we learn by mistake and happenstance. It also has this motif of freedom or rather the belief of freedom, as Sailor often says, "This is a snakeskin jacket! And for me it's a symbol of my individuality, and my belief... in personal freedom." Lynch is a very careful director, the reoccuring use of this line implies something, and to me, it presents that freedom isn't a real thing, it is an abstraction, it is a belief, a rallying call, and a symbol, but not tangible. Sailor has it because he has his jacket that shows his personal freedom, but it, like the society that is around him, his relationships, and every other binding that gives him less freedom is on top of him, it actually constrains him, makes it harder to act in a way of personal freedom.
This movie, like most of Lynch's work is incredibly dense and hard to parse through, hard to explain and present, but ultimately, unlike most of Lynch's work, it is a solid and entertaining adventure romance movie outside of the messaging, commentary, and ideas he weaved into the dream of his movie.
A thing this movie does, since it focuses so much on freedom, dreams, hope, and the future, it shows Lynch can shake off the title of cynic, of misanthrope, and genuinely say he likes humanity, loves mankind, and sees them for their flaws but still thinks they are deserving of a brighter future.
Overall: 10 out of 10, I don't just recommend this movie, I love this movie. It is one of my favorites of all time and I encourage you to watch it.
Spoiler Stuff One of the finest scenes to ever be put in film is in this movie, near the end of the movie. Sailor is surrounded by a group of punks and simply says, "What do you Faggots want?" Gets the heck beaten out of him, hits the ground, has a trippy dream sequence with the good witch from the Wizard of Oz, and then stands back up still surrounded by the guys who beat him and says, "And I want to apologize to you gentlemen for referring to you as homosexuals. I also want to thank you fellows. You've taught me a valuable lesson in life." Then without skipping a beat he goes from a normal, hushed speaking voice to loudly screaming "LULA!" As loud as he can.
It is a mind blowingly weird scene the first time I watched it, and the third. And now as I've seen this movie dozens of times, it still is one of the funniest scenes I've ever seen.
Did no one else think this was a comedy?
Alea Intrica21 July 2001
Ok, so not a "pure" comedy, since there are some pretty intense dramatic scenes, but 20 minutes into the film and throughout most of the rest of it, I can only assume Lynch is being funny. The whole Elvis imitation thing and the overblown drama of the relationship are camp humour. The Wizard of Oz links are also pretty funny. However, there are some heavy-handed attempts to create intensity, some of which fall flat and some of which work, and subplots that never get developed or seem to go anywhere. A pared-down version of this movie could have been brilliant as a dark comedy/drama. I can't help thinking that Lynch was throwing too many ideas around and didn't pull it together. It's also obvious he was working on Twin Peaks at the same time as they have a similar feel at points and some of the same devices are used in both.
I'd give it 6.5 (if I could), but gave it 6 since it's a little painful at points.
I'd give it 6.5 (if I could), but gave it 6 since it's a little painful at points.
mind blowing
ElWormo26 July 2015
Wild At Heart is one of those films that scoops you up and plants you directly in its own magical, twisted little world as soon as it starts and drops you back on boring old planet earth at the end feeling like you've just woken from a dream. At least that's the effect it had on me the first few times I saw it, and seeing it again last night for the first time in years the same is true, in fact it's possibly even better than I remembered. I can't be bothered to go into plot and character details, suffice to say that everyone involved gives top notch performances, and the story is deep enough to be engaging without being confusing. Sometimes funny, sometimes sad, occasionally terrifying, but always deliciously deranged, Wild At Heart is quite possibly one of the ten greatest pieces of cinema ever created in my opinion. I'm not even a massive David Lynch fan - in fact this is the only Lynch movie I've felt the need to watch more than once - however this one is a sublime, darkside masterpiece that blows away the competition. Give it a try.
Wild and hard
helpless_dancer5 January 2004
Crazy ride through the seedy underbelly of trashy America as two sleazy dirtbags go on the lam from an even seedier and more sleazy mama. Loved Defoe's character, he was walking evil. The dude really lost his head during the bank robbery. Fascinating film, well written and played.
SHOCK!
Hprog4 December 1999
This movie is along my TOP-10 favorites. It's a shocking experience and a proof of what David Lynch's movies mean to those of us who enjoy shocking movies. It's a love story told in a different way. Great acting, great music (from Classic to Speed Metal), erotism, suspense, this film has everything you could ever want in a good movie. Two thumbs up!
Desperate love on the run.
michaelRokeefe21 April 2000
Director David Lynch excels at the weird magic he weaves. A love starved young woman is on the run with a paroled murderer. A psycho mother puts a private eye and a deranged hit man on their trail. Some scenes are hard to watch; and then there are those typical Lynch scenes that you still don't know what the hell you saw. Very wicked soundtrack featuring Chris Isaak and Gene Vincent.
Nicolas Cage is infatuated with Elvis. Laura Dern is down right NASTY. Willem Dafoe, definitely bizarre. Diane Ladd is way over the edge. Crispin Glover is clever as a cabbage. Harry Dean Stanton always seems to be at ease being clueless. Sherilyn Fenn, a waste of beauty to play a corpse. The erotic, violent and irreverent script is what holds this cast together.
David Lynch fans get everything they could expect and then some.
Nicolas Cage is infatuated with Elvis. Laura Dern is down right NASTY. Willem Dafoe, definitely bizarre. Diane Ladd is way over the edge. Crispin Glover is clever as a cabbage. Harry Dean Stanton always seems to be at ease being clueless. Sherilyn Fenn, a waste of beauty to play a corpse. The erotic, violent and irreverent script is what holds this cast together.
David Lynch fans get everything they could expect and then some.
A Surreal, Nightmarish Road trip that's Wild at Heart and Weird on Top!
NateManD5 August 2005
"Wild at Heart" is one deranged and twisted road trip as only David Lynch could bring you. It's so dark but at times funny too. Lula (Laura Dern) and Sailor (Nicholas Cage)are in love, but Lula's mother played by Laura Dern's real life mother Diane Ladd is evil. She doesn't want to see them together. Because of a murder, Sailor is finally released from prison. Lula's mom hires people to kill sailor. So Lula and Sailor go on a crazy road trip with dark and fellini like characters. William Defoe is unforgettable as the creepy and perverted Bobby Peru. The film almost received an X/NC-17 rating. It's easy to see why, it has lots of disturbing sex and violence. But than again that's a David Lynch trademark. This film is probably on my list of favorite road trip movies, next to Godard's "Weekend" (1967), "Thelma & Louise" and "Natural Born Killers". Both Nicholas Cage and Laura Dern give amazing performances. Dern's character Lula is the complete opposite of Sandy in "Blue Velvet", cause she's so wild and sexual. But Lula still has a naive child like charm. It seems that actor Nicholas Cage was born to play Sailor, a charming Elvis like ex convict who wants to change his ways. Also check out Berry Gifford's sequel to Wild at Heart, "Perdita Durango" (aka. dance with the devil) These films are both Wild at Heart and weird on Top!
A corny 90s Bonnie and Clyde
johannesjt0923 April 2020
This film is very violent and raunchy in a corny 90s way. It kinda feels like David Lynch was going through a phase when he made this one, it has no lack of weirdness though, so that's always something you can expect from him.
The perfomrances are very overacted which I think is part of its charm, I don't find it as intriguing to look for hidden meanings or symbolism in this film so I'm not going to mention any. I can't imagine anyone saying this is the best Lynch film but it's an interesting watch if you happen to stubble upon it.
If you strip away the premise of the hitmen and neurotic mothers you will essentially find that at its core this film is about a couple running away from something that might seperate them. (Bonnie and Clyde?) With a side of trauma as a secondary theme.
A 6/10 from me.
The perfomrances are very overacted which I think is part of its charm, I don't find it as intriguing to look for hidden meanings or symbolism in this film so I'm not going to mention any. I can't imagine anyone saying this is the best Lynch film but it's an interesting watch if you happen to stubble upon it.
If you strip away the premise of the hitmen and neurotic mothers you will essentially find that at its core this film is about a couple running away from something that might seperate them. (Bonnie and Clyde?) With a side of trauma as a secondary theme.
A 6/10 from me.
Lynch attempts to out-Lynch himself
omelette00712 March 2012
Wild at Heart is not without superb elements, but overall, it's a disappointment. Lynch did what has been deadly to so many talented filmmakers - he bought into his own reputation. Wild at Heart is highly self-aware, furiously cranking up the Lynchian stylistic quirks with little awareness of the delicate balance that made former Lynch films great. Blue Velvet did descend into surreal, dark chaos, but it contrasted the depraved weirdness with common decency and compassion. Wild at Heart, on the other hand, is just a heady stew of violence, sex and bizarre happenings - very little here is recognizable as human behavior, and just about nothing as human goodness. If Blue Velvet was guilty of being a little too turned on by its own darkness, Wild at Heart is downright proud of presenting evil in a lurid, gleeful manner.
Nevertheless, if all you want from Lynch movies is memorable surrealism, wacky characters and delirious energy, Wild at Heart still offers plenty to savor. Parts of Wild at Heart do possess a mad energy and offbeat humor that is infectious. The performances are also highly entertaining - Nicolas Cage has rarely been better, and Dianne Ladd is hysterically funny in an utterly unhinged performance. But the madness of Wild at Heart all starts to seem too calculated, too soulless, and too ugly. The weirdness of Blue Velvet and Eraserhead almost always seemed organic, like a natural outgrowth of the film - Wild at Heart seems awkwardly scrambled together. Wild at Heart contains flashes of true Lynchian brilliance and a game cast, but they are lost in a nauseating, patchy, sub-par work.
Nevertheless, if all you want from Lynch movies is memorable surrealism, wacky characters and delirious energy, Wild at Heart still offers plenty to savor. Parts of Wild at Heart do possess a mad energy and offbeat humor that is infectious. The performances are also highly entertaining - Nicolas Cage has rarely been better, and Dianne Ladd is hysterically funny in an utterly unhinged performance. But the madness of Wild at Heart all starts to seem too calculated, too soulless, and too ugly. The weirdness of Blue Velvet and Eraserhead almost always seemed organic, like a natural outgrowth of the film - Wild at Heart seems awkwardly scrambled together. Wild at Heart contains flashes of true Lynchian brilliance and a game cast, but they are lost in a nauseating, patchy, sub-par work.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
