Factotum (movie)

[roni]

I introduced myself in the New Blood section, if you'd like to read it.

Yes, you Did. - By Now!

As far as "Roni" goes, he made a snide comment about me when I had a perfectly valid point. So, whether "Roni" is a popular member of this forum or not, I'll be damned and/or banned before I'll apologize.
There's nothing less interesting or more lightweight than a snide internet cowboy...especially one who names himself after rice-dinner-in-a-box.

wow! what a 'hello'! thanks!


ok, I'll be honest for a moment - I am the LEAST person who 'sets anyone straight' just because of being new and innocent.

But there Are a LOT of persons, who start here, posting harsh oppininons in ANY post but the 'new blood'-one, where they should do for a START - Especially when they're not only one-time-members but intend to stay here. Now, YOUR 'introduction' here WAS one of these posts.

So, I don't WANT you to apologize, anyhow.
I don't Need you to apologize - just, please, prove me wrong (from your very first post that is!) - and I'll be FINE as Hell!


p.s.:
yes, I AM a kraut. I especially like Sauerkraut with Bratwurst and mustard. And No, I'm Not named after some rice-fast-food.

p.p.s.:
and you definitely will NOT be abandoned here because of ANYTHING you say about me!
Definitely Not! - Feel FREE to say Anything!
really!

 

[RichardWagons]

Fair enough.I am not here to post negative things for attention because daddy didn't give me enough hugs or whatever. I just want to have some laughs and make a few comments here and there...nothing special.

 

[Father Luke]

I just want to have some laughs and make a few comments here and there...nothing special.

Your shoes are untied.

 

[CarversDog]

I'm taking a plunge on the Factotum movie soon. Bought it at Blockbuster today (previously viewed DVD, a mere $9.95) along with The Wild Parrots of Telegraph Hill. I saw the film-maker of the latter in discussion at the Beat Museum last year but I've yet to ever see the full documentary until this evening.

 

[Gerard K H Love]

Rodger, if The Wild Parrots of Telegraph Hill is about the birds that escaped from a pet store shipment in N.Y.? It is a very good science story about survival and adaptability. Kind of like Factotum. ;)

 

[CarversDog]

These are the parrots of San Francisco but otherwise, yes, the same story. The NY parrots adapted as well as the S.F. birds and they are mentioned at the end of the film. An excellent little piece, though slightly overbaked.

Now, on to Factotum ... I watched the first half last night and was greatly impressed, I have to say. I was initially disappointed that the film had been modernized but then the set and production design kicked into full gear. All of the interiors are retro and period, cloaking the film in a weird sort of time warp, Chinaski as a man living in a time that is not his own. That, frankly, was a brilliant and unexpected touch. As for Dillon's perfromance, I like the understatement he brings to his interpretation. So what if he's not the growling, bombastic Bukowski/Chinaski we know and love? This is Dillon's interpretation and it works for me. I'll watch the remainder of the film this evening.

 

[CarversDog]

Okay, I finished watching the film last night and I have to say that I vastly enjoyed it. No, it's not a literal adaptation of the book in any regard; in fact, one huge chunk of the book that I can think of never made it to the screen. There are also elements from two or three other Bukowski stories in the screenplay, as well as one (or was it two?) poems.

This is an attempt to examine the Bukowski persona, to look at him beyond broad caricature, the anti-Barfly, if you will. On that level alone the film works tremendously well. Dillon's Chinaski is a troubled fellow. You see it etched on his face in every frame he is in. All he wants to do is write but worldly demands -- like love, lust, paying the rent -- keep standing in his way.

I will definitely watch it again.

 

[Bukfan]

It's an ok movie. When I watched it at the cinema for the first time, I was disappointed. It was too slow. But later on when I bought the DVD and watched it again, I saw it in a different light. I think it's actually quite good considering it's a low budget movie made in a few weeks. Dillon is a much more believable Chinaski than Mickey Rourke. I like Barfly but Rourke was too much of a Chinaski caricature in some scenes (other scenes were great). Factotum and Barfly is apples and oranges. You can't really compare them. Different approaches altogether.

 

[CarversDog]

As I said, Factotum is the antidote to Barfly.

 

[Erik]

This is an attempt to examine the Bukowski persona, to look at him beyond broad caricature, the anti-Barfly, if you will.

Good point Carver. Undoubtedly the director must have had Barfly in the back of his head when making Factotum. It would be interesting hearing what Barbet Schroeder makes of it.
I think both films have their merits.

 

[CarversDog]

Indeed both films have their merits but Factotum chooses to humanize Bukowski, whereas Barfly panders to myth.

 

[mjp]

But if you saddled the director of Factotum with Mickey Rourke, you would have a completely different movie. And if Dillon was in Barfly, you'd have a completely different movie.

The director sets the scene, but whether the story ends up being believable or farce is mainly up to the actors. Barfly had a couple of hams and prima donnas as the stars. Factotum had actors. But Barfly is great as over-the-top farce.

 

[CarversDog]

It's really a shame that Rourke flamed out -- much of it his own doing. He truly is a gifted actor.

But you're right, Michael, and the point has been made here already: comparing the two movies really is an apples and oranges affair. Both Bent Hammer and Barbet Schroeder are talented but totally different directors. BTW, I just ordered Born Into This. Never saw it before and I'm looking forward to it.

 

[Bukfan]

BTW, I just ordered Born Into This. Never saw it before and I'm looking forward to it.

It's great! You won't be sorry that you ordered it. It's about 2 hours long plus it has a lot of bonus material, such as the last footage of Buk reading some poems etc.etc.

 

[CarversDog]

I ordered from Amazon with two-day shipping so it should be here soon.

 

[rjwink666]

Factotum, left me with the same feeling I felt after I saw the 'Ask the Dust' the films were ok but the books were better, usually I find it's the other way round especially when I think of the adaptations of 'Fight Club', 'Trainspotting', 'The Thin Red Line' and 'American Psycho' that were better then the reading experience.

 

[CarversDog]

The Thin Red Line was an excellent film, though I did not think so the first time I viewed it. Had to see it twice to fully appreciate it.

 

[zemryis]

Bukowski HATED "Barfly". He thought it was a prime example of hollywood's superficial stupidity. He hated Rourke's performance, and the fact that he didn't take time to learn the character. His cocky boisterousness. "The kid didn't get it." And the way that he was picking up good-looking women, rather than the damaged goods we know him for...

A good documentary which hits on this is Bukowski: Born Into This.

Nobody will ever know what he would've said about "Factotum", but I felt that it did a MUCH better job at capturing "the darkness" & "the solitude", to say the least...

 

[applesauce]

I absolutely agree. Barfly sucked. Factotum stayed far truer to Bukowski, and did a far better job at capturing that dirty quality that we all love him for.

 

[nervas]

Wow, I couldn't disagree with you more. When was the last time you watched either movie?

 

[mjp]

Never, I think.