Lula (Laura Dern) standing by a black convertible as Sailor (Nicolas Cage) sits inside
Film review

Wild at Heart

1990 · Directed by David Lynch · 2h 05m · MPA R

In a sentenceNicolas Cage conducts his courtship as though someone might hand him a microphone

Sailor (Nicolas Cage) and Lula (Laura Dern) are lovers on the run through America, pursued by people who threaten their hopes of freedom. Their journey takes them through a world of crime and violence, with their relationship at the centre of the story. Around them are Bobby Peru (Willem Dafoe), Marietta Fortune (Diane Ladd) and Johnnie Farragut (Harry Dean Stanton). David Lynch writes and directs this adaptation of Barry Gifford’s novel, combining the lovers’ road journey with musical and Southern Gothic elements and references to The Wizard of Oz.

Plays from YouTube when you press play; nothing loads from them until then.

Fi1m review

Lynch’s lovers-on-the-run romance is funny, frightening and carried by Nicolas Cage and Laura Dern. Its detours sometimes become tiresome, but their chemistry keeps us interested when the film starts enjoying its own oddness too much.

David Lynch’s Wild at Heart is a funny, frightening romance whose detours are worth tolerating for Nicolas Cage and Laura Dern. Working from Barry Gifford’s novel, Lynch sends Sailor and Lula through a lovers-on-the-run story crowded with crime, violence and threats to their escape. He treats their desire to be together seriously, even when almost everything around them is exaggerated for comic or frightening effect. The film runs for 125 minutes, and it does not need all of them.

We were horrified by the opening violence. Lynch makes the brutality so forceful that the road ahead never feels like a safe route out, however much the lovers might want it to be. The shifts into humour can be disconcerting, and for a while that uncertainty is exactly what keeps the film alive. The comedy offers little reassurance about what sort of trouble might come next.

Cage’s Sailor is the main reason the romantic side survives: the Elvis mannerisms are funny, but his commitment stops them becoming a party turn. He plays the swagger as though it is an entirely sensible way to conduct a relationship, and Dern gives him something more than an appreciative audience. Her Lula makes the lovers’ attachment convincing enough that we care what interrupts it. There is warmth between these two even when Lynch seems determined to make every surrounding encounter an ordeal.

Frederick Elmes’s cinematography gives the film some discipline, using carefully composed frames and saturated colours to make its feverish changes of mood readable. There is pleasure in looking closely at an image even when the story has begun to wander. Patricia Norris’s production design helps make this America feel inhospitable to the lovers, which gives their wish to escape some force. The images remain compelling through stretches when the journey itself begins to drag.

Duwayne Dunham’s editing handles the jolts between romance, menace and comedy more persuasively than it handles the length of the journey. Individual changes of tone can make us sit up, but the accumulation of detours leaves stretches feeling longer than they should. Angelo Badalamenti’s music is well suited to the film’s overheated feelings, giving the romance enough weight to withstand some of the surrounding mockery. Neither the score nor the cutting can make every diversion feel necessary.

The references to The Wizard of Oz suit a road story about people looking for freedom in a frightening America. Lynch also draws on musical romance and Southern Gothic, and the mixture is often funny because Cage and Dern make their attachment so straightforward. The trouble comes when another eccentric encounter seems to exist chiefly to demonstrate how eccentric Lynch can be. The later stretches are less involving because their comedy too often weakens the danger.

That weakness matters because Lynch has persuaded us to care about Sailor and Lula, and sometimes seems willing to waste that achievement for a joke. Yet the affection between Cage and Dern survives enough of the distractions to keep this a romance worth watching. The 18 certificate is fair warning about the brutality; the warmth does not make it a gentle evening. Choose it when a love story with some nasty company sounds appealing.

Critical consensus AI synthesised

66
Positive
11
Mixed
3
Negative
2
Empire
1 January 2000 · Kenny Matheson
85*

The critic describes the film as a weird and wonderful twist on the road movie that delights and offends in equal measure. They praise its warped humour, the performances of Nicolas Cage and Laura Dern, and Lynch's imaginative direction as a cinematic tour de force.

Read the full review →
Little White Lies
17 August 2020 · Lillian Crawford
80*

The critic praises the film's portrayal of female trauma through Laura Dern's character Lula, who maintains agency and finds empowerment in her relationship rather than being defined by her past assault. The piece highlights the consensual and fulfilling depiction of her sexuality as a key positive element.

Read the full review →
Radio Times
★★★★ · Alan Jones
80

Director David Lynch goes over the top with an ultra-violent and sleazily sexy pulp art attack featuring Elvis-loving ex-convict Nicolas Cage and his trailer-trash girlfriend Laura Dern pursued through the Deep South. It is stuffed with deranged visuals, haunting weirdness and exuberant camp in a hip and hypnotic rollercoaster ride.

Read the full review →
Los Angeles Times
12 August 1990 · Peter Rainer
70*

The critic describes the film as a startling conglomeration of genres including road movie, musical, Southern Gothic, sitcom and sci-fi, comparing it to a Lynch-remade Wizard of Oz. He praises Lynch's ability to unbind genre rules and create a hallucinatory jumble of tones that connects on deep levels through imagery and pop culture references.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
19 August 1990
70*

The critic examines the film as a violent story of romance on the run that both idolizes and undermines the road movie genre, with references to The Wizard of Oz. It notes how the protagonists navigate a world of crime, violence and dreams of freedom in a contemporary twist on the classic form.

Read the full review →
The Times
1 December 2005
70*

The critic describes the 1990 film as a story of redemption whose journey passes through weird torments, blood, guts and nastiness. They praise the special edition DVD's restored print and the film's bizarre world where malevolence stalks and the only safe place is love in a person’s heart.

Read the full review →

Straight answers AI written, from our review

Is Wild at Heart worth watching?
Wild at Heart is worth watching for anyone who wants a lovers-on-the-run romance with real menace attached, and we scored it 78. Nicolas Cage and Laura Dern make the couple convincing enough to carry the film through detours that go on too long. Choose it when a love story with some nasty company sounds appealing.
How long is Wild at Heart, and what is it rated?
Wild at Heart runs 2h 05m and is rated R by the MPA in the US. It is a crime and thriller film.
Where can I watch Wild at Heart in the US?
Wild at Heart is available to rent from Amazon Prime Video from $3.99. Availability is checked daily; the links above go straight to each service.
How violent or frightening is Wild at Heart, and is it suitable for children?
Wild at Heart carries an 18 certificate and is not suitable for children. The opening violence is forceful enough to horrify, and the film keeps swinging between brutality, menace and comedy in ways that offer little reassurance about what comes next. The warmth between the lovers does not make it a gentle evening for the squeamish.
How does Wild at Heart compare to Badlands?
Wild at Heart and Badlands both follow a fugitive couple, but Lynch's film is louder, stranger and more theatrical in its violence, while Malick's is colder and clearer about how little its lovers understand themselves. Cage and Dern give the warmer romance; Sheen and Spacek give the tighter film. Pick Badlands for discipline, Wild at Heart for heat.
Is Wild at Heart based on a true story or a book?
Wild at Heart is based on Barry Gifford's novel of the same name, not on a true story. David Lynch writes and directs the adaptation, adding musical, Southern Gothic and The Wizard of Oz elements to the lovers' road journey. You do not need to know the book to follow the film.
What should I watch after Wild at Heart?
After Wild at Heart, try Badlands (1973, Fi1m 91): Another fugitive couple, with the romance made colder and the violence less theatrical. Then True Romance (1993, Fi1m 82): Crime, courtship and dangerous company, with a similar weakness for outsized characters; and Love Lies Bleeding (2024, Fi1m 75): Desire and grotesque violence collide in another romance with little interest in restraint.

Cast

Awards

Academy Awards, 1991

Nominated
Best Supporting Actress

Cannes Film Festival, 1990

Won
Palme d'Or

If you liked this, try…

  1. Badlands (1973, Fi1m 91)Another fugitive couple, with the romance made colder and the violence less theatrical.

  2. Pierrot le Fou (1965) · not reviewed yetFor lovers on the run through a film that keeps changing its rules.

  3. True Romance (1993, Fi1m 82)Crime, courtship and dangerous company, with a similar weakness for outsized characters.

  4. Love Exposure (2008) · not reviewed yetA long, unruly romance that takes its lovers seriously amid considerable absurdity.

  5. Love Lies Bleeding (2024, Fi1m 75)Desire and grotesque violence collide in another romance with little interest in restraint.

Free account

Know what to watch tonight

Two lists that know where things are streaming, collections you can share, your own score beside ours, and Discover that remembers what you have seen.

  • Want to see, sorted by what is streaming now
  • Seen, with your score out of ten
  • No adverts, ever