Hacker Cinema
Wild at Heart
1990 · Film · 125 min
Directed by David Lynch
Young lovers Sailor and Lula hit the road to start a new life together away from the wrath of Lula’s deranged, disapproving mother, who has hired a team of hitmen to cut the lovers’ surreal honeymoon short.
5 positive3 neutralfrom 8 commenters
Where to watch
No streaming data for this title.
8 comments on Hacker News
I believe Cage had a massive tax bill to pay at some point which led to him appearing in basically anything he was offered, including what is without doubt the worst film I have ever watched, Left Behind [1]. One review I read said something along the lines of "phoning it in would be too kind a description, Cage is so devoid of effort or emotion in this film he regularly appears to have been photoshopped in afterwards" which really summed it up perfectly.
Having said that, both before and after the money trouble, he made some superb movie choices and put in some outstanding performances - think Wild at Heart, Pig, Unbearable Weight etc. Hats off to you Nick.
[1] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2467046/
I feel the same. If Blue Velvet was the first Lynch movie I saw, I surely wouldn't have bothered with the rest, and I would have missed out on what I now consider one of my absolute favorites (Mulholland Drive). Same goes for Eraserhead and Wild at Heart.
It's amazing how some of the smaller, passing shots from his films stick with you. I haven't seen Elephant Man for decades but the scene at the beginning when he's at a freak show and his handler is forcing him to turn around for the audience still haunts me. Same for many of the scenes in Wild At Heart.
If you enjoy surreal movies then definitely Blue Velvet and Wild at Heart. Just don't watch them with your kids. (Or parents...)
They are not 'normal', which is something I always admired about David Lynch. He had a very personal style and vision, and stuck with it.
> known for cult films like Mulholland Drive, Inland Empire and Wild at Heart
Really? No, really? Not Twin Peaks? Not Lost Highway? Not Eraserhead, not The Elephant Man? Not Dune?!
I’m not necessarily disagreeing with your list, even though some of those are mediocre at best, but yeah I did mean per year, and limited to Hollywood (Parasite for instance not counting). And no, ok, I will also straight up disagree with the second Knives out Movie which I thought was absolute trash. A perfect example of poor storytelling and the form over substance of modern cinema.
But just taking say 1992 you have Last of the Mohicans, The Unforgiven, My Cousin Vinny, Malcolm X, Bad Lieutenant, Scent of a Woman, Reservoir Dogs, Dracula, Chaplin.
And then a bunch of fun schlomp like Arizona Dream, Basic Instinct, Sister Act, Army of Darkness, Home Alone 2, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, The Mighty Ducks, Wayne’s World.
These are all undoubtedly great movies.
And then another huge bunch of watchable stuff easily comparable to some of your mentions like Watcher or High Life.
And 1992 is not an outlier.
In 1993 you have Jurrasic Park, Groundhog Day, Whats Eating Gilbert Grape, Scindlers List, Meanace 2 Society, Alive, Dazed and Confused, Falling Down, In The Name of The Father, True Romance, Demolition Man, Carlitos Way, The Secret Garden, Philadelphia, A Perfect Workd, Cool Runnings, Short Cuts.
In 1991 Silence of The Lambs, Ternimator 2, JFK, Point Break, Thelma and Louise, Boyz in the Hood, The Doors, My Own Private Idaho, Barton Fink, The Fisher King, Naked Lunch.
In 1990 Goodfellas, Hunt for Red October, Total Recall, Edward Scissorhands, Home Alone, Godfather 3, Dances with Wolves, Tremors, Back to the Future 3, Awakenings, The Witches, Wild at Heart, Jacobs Ladder, Nikita, Slacker, Millers Crossing.
And the quality difference is massive too, not just somewhat better. Like just Millers Crossing is miles better than anything that has been made in the last 5 years, and I’m picking at random.
In 1994 Shawshank Redemption, Pulp Fiction, Forrest Gump, The Lion King, Speed, Ace Ventura, Dumb and Dumber, Stargate, Natural Born Killers, The Crow, Clercs, Maverick, Ed Wood, In the Mouth of Madness, Interview With The Vampire.
I could go on.
And this is not even talking about how the 80s is a better decade for cinema, or how the 70s is the peak of the power of the author with far more experimental, artistic, and substantial productions.
Has quality declined? Yes. Massively. Humongously. Stupendously.
Wow. I've been a fan of Harry Dean Stanton for a very, very long time. His first credit is in the 1950s-- and he has a movie in post right now!
Some notable films you might want to check out (but might not realize are worth it)
Repo Man 1984 -- a major role for him in a cult classic from the punk rock era. Also young emilio estivez
Paris Texas 1984 -- A great film from the german director Wim Wenders, very much like a german David Lynch
Pretty In Pink 1986 -- A John Hughes film, Harry Dean Stanton plays Molly Ringwald's father in a touching performance
Wild at Heart 1990 -- An avant garde film by David Lynch with Nicholas Cage and Laura Dern in their prime. Probably Lynch's best movie, in my opinion.
The Straight Story 1999 -- Also by David Lynch this is actually a G rated film, about a guy who goes to visit his brother. It's kinda spectacularly touching while still being extremely minimalist in story.
Big Love 2006-2010 -- HBO TV Series about a mormon polygamist marriage, where Harry Dean Stanton plays an evil cult leader, super creepy, super effective and a "you love to hate him situation".
That may be a bit too many suggestions, but I pared it down from the 199(!) credits he has. I have seen all of the above and can recommend them all, though several are avant garde or not designed to be happy fun movies.
Also note he has a movie coming out soon-- Lucky -- where he plays the titular character and it looks to basically be an ode to Harry Dean Stanton.
RIP Harry-- you impacted my life and I will miss you.
My priority is to maintain the level of engineering in mobile development [I'm currently a lead mobile engineer in nyc].
If you phrase it that way, then I guess things are pretty simple: your highest priority is your career, not your relationship. Which is of course, perfectly fine -- I know many quite happy, well-adjusted people who, when a romantic partner gets a job offer (or needs to finish grad school, etc -- I have no idea what's drawing her to live in Chicago for 6 months), just kind of shrug and say "Well, we had a good run. But you know, your life's work is your life's work."
Then again, if you were to phrase it like this:
My SO is the best thing that ever could have happened to me. She's literally given me her all -- mentally, physically, and spiritually. And she proves it to me all the way, each and every night. Everytime I look at her, I feel like I've won the lottery... Zuckerberg, Brin, Page, Musk might as well all just be beggars. I couldn't even imagine letting her go.
Then things would be pretty simple, also. One's life work is important and all -- but when you think about, jobs come and go, don't they, and money always comes around, doesn't? But the love of someone (who truly loves you back) can't be weight against any amount money, recognition or praise by strangers. Especially not recognition and praise by some "hot" company that can easily turn around in the space of those same 6 months, pull out everything from beneath you, and basically leave you twisting in the wind.
If so, then I know what I'd chose, in your shoes.
"If you are truly wild at heart, you'll fight for your dreams... Don't turn away from love, Sailor... Don't turn away from love... Don't turn away from love."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_at_Heart_(film)