Wild at Heart (1990)

Very well executed

Pretty Good

One of my all time favorites.

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

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.

Yawn.I had such high expectations for this movie since it's a Lynch and the premise sounds seriously bad ass. But it just isn't. 80% of this movie is just stupid dialogue (from a car), unnecessary sex scenes and Nicholas Cage being an awful actor. I was seriously looking forward to Bobby Peru and even he was a let down.As the title suggests, I did stop watching this movie prematurely. There was about 30 minutes left which came as a major surprise to me since there had been little to no build up at all and the movie was about to end.Creepy characters speaking nonsense (seriously, what the hell are the Cajuns even talking about?) does not make for a compelling movie. A swing and a miss from Lynch.

(Originally reviewed: 23/03/2017) David Lynch's Wild at Heart could have been something, if it weren't so disgusting and purely stupid. The film opens with a confrontation between Cage and an African American man with a knife, during this scene Cage beats him up and smashes his head of the floor until his brains are clearly seen, it's not only violent, but unnecessary, sadistic and not as cool as Lynch thinks, because straight after Cage lights a cigarette and does a sort of 'look at me pose' which came off as extremely annoying and pathetic. Then the picture gets slightly better until it grew tedious, but also vile, with its lack of humanity; some people may find this picture outrageously funny, I find it outrageously awful and distasteful, because there's a lot of ugliness and a nonsensical story that includes character's that look like they should have been in the 1980's The Howling; which is no compliment if you know the film. Another observation I made was the soundtrack, it's just ultimately bland, noisy or forgettable. The acting is fairly bland, Cage play's an over the top, slightly boring, unlikeable character, and his girlfriend played by Laura Dern has all the talent of a pole dancer, she looks good but is really commanding with she opens her mouth. Other bad performances include Diane Ladd, as Lulu's mother, she's overdramatic and fairly awful, as well as William Dafoe who plays a creepy, low life loser who's simply disgusting, and even starts massaging Lulu's breasts while Cage is away; maybe this seemed like a good idea at the time for Lynch, but watching it, I didn't see why this scene had any business being in the picture; it was plain and simple distasteful. There's a lot of sex, a lot of blood and a lot of swearing but without interesting character's and some sort of competent story, the film just falls apart, and if it hadn't have been for Harry Dean Stanton's well-grounded supporting performance as Diane Ladd's character's partner, the picture would have gone down as the worst thing Nicolas Cage has ever been in, and that's saying something, when you have seen some of his modern outings. The dialogue and writing are utter garbage, here's a bit of dialogue that Lynch thinks passes as adequate "can I p**s on your head, I don't mean your head I mean the toilet head", and it gets worse there's randomness all over the place, three ugly fat girls take their clothes off walking around, (I could have hurled), there's a character who speaks with a helium type voice in a bar, I guess for intended humour, it wasn't funny, and there's a terrible sequence where one of these supernatural freaks does some of the worst acting I've ever seen by shouting "F**k me Reggie" a dozen times at the top of her voice while about to shoot someone; it makes little to no sense, just like the story which has these monster undertones and other themes, but never decides what film it actually wants to be, leaving an angel to come down and let Cage know he should be with Lulu after walking away and getting beat up by thugs later on, I mean come on, it's allegedly not a sci-fi film, but do they expect me to believe this trash is what passes for an ending in an alleged 'crime drama', something I could not fathom; which reminds me of some embarrassing moments where Lynch thinks it's a musical and let's Cage sing, and the second time is even more embarrassing because they end the picture with some dumb sing-song, which had me thinking really?. There's even technical problems with some painfully aggravating screeching in the background towards the 1 hour mark and appallingly unbelievable moments where Cage and Dern pull up at a crash, See that two people are dead, and see the third suffering from blood loss, and try and clam her until she start's going berserk over a credit card saying, I can't find my credit card or something like that, not bothered that she could die at any minute, the characters are unlikeable, stupid and idiots. Overall I hated this picture, it's ugly, sadistic and made me feel uneasy, it's narrative is an incoherent jumble and the acting for the most part sucks; Lynch may have thought his picture was funny, but in fact, I didn't, I found it repulsive and a real piece of absolute garbage.

Wild at Heart is less a movie and more a psychological journey. It's hard for me to judge it the way I judge other movies; it simply can't be put under the same standards. Most movies are about entertainment and telling a story; this movie (like Blue Velvet before it) is about intense emotions, the darker side of the soul, and the warped mind of director David Lynch. David Lynch is one of the few directors left who still expresses himself through his work; he is one of the last true film artists. He indulges himself here, perhaps to an extreme. I'm not even sure I can say that this movie "entertained" me in the usual sense; but I relished the experience.Personally, I think they do a great job-it is meant to be humorous, and it works as a perfectly good counterpoint to the increasingly sinister obstacles they must overcome. Here is where the movie really shines: Lynch lets his imagination run wild in his depiction of a bizarre and dangerous underworld of criminal activity. Willem Dafoe is pitch-perfect as the sleazy hit-man, and the scene where he tries to seduce Laura Dern in the hotel room is one of the most disturbing moments of sexual tension ever caught on film. As with most David Lynch films, there are so many small details, so much humor and intelligence (as opposed to your average Hollywood hit) that it can be enjoyed over and over again. All in all, I think "Wild at Heart" is an underrated movie that, while far from Lynch's best, is very enjoyable. It is well-filmed and -directed, and there is a feeling of strength and energy that makes the film even more appealing.Overall rating: 7 out of 10.