I do know that Nicolas Cage often plays men who are bad but redeemable, and Wild at Heart is one of the more interesting takes on the character he plays and on the 'lovers on the run' genre. Roger Ebert famously diverged from audiences on that film, yet they seem with him on this one. I couldn't tell what was so different about how what this movie was doing and what a well-regarded Lynch, Blue Velvet, was doing.

After watching it myself and having a pretty good time with it I was a bit perplexed by this reputation. In my experience, popular audiences tend to agree with that, often regarding Wild at Heart as one of Lynch's worst or at least 'lesser' works. Its rottentomatoes score indicates a mixed consensus.

Wild at Heart, however, comes with a lot of reputational baggage. How do you rate a David Lynch movie? The surrealist director has an approach to filmmaking so different from the usual methods that they're difficult to compare to anything outside his filmography, yet he's also gained mainstream critical respectability and wide audience recognition despite his confrontational and unconventional style.

Wild at heart david lynch online free