I really enjoyed this film and thought I'd entertain the thought of how Bukowski would feel about Matt Dillon's portrayal as Chinaski. I think he would have preferred it to Rourke's. Also, how did you feel about it?
Matt dillon's performance in factotum film
- Thread starter pentangular87
- Start date
Preferred Barfly as a film, but Dillon is pretty good as Chinaski. I actually thought Rourke was decent, anyway. Dillon perhaps edges it on the run down, cynical, man of the world bored of it all score, while Rourke has more humour and free spirit about him that I enjoyed.
I get the feeling Buk would've found fault with anyone playing him (/his alter ego) because it was such a personal thing that nobody could really quite pull it off, without actually being him. Am about to watch "Crazy Love" by the two Belgian directors, which was well received by Buk (think he said something about their ending being better than his - "hey why didn't I think of that?" - in a documentary) - perhaps partially because Chinaski's not in it...?
I get the feeling Buk would've found fault with anyone playing him (/his alter ego) because it was such a personal thing that nobody could really quite pull it off, without actually being him. Am about to watch "Crazy Love" by the two Belgian directors, which was well received by Buk (think he said something about their ending being better than his - "hey why didn't I think of that?" - in a documentary) - perhaps partially because Chinaski's not in it...?
Thanks. Should have searched first.
I almost feel as though there are certain differences between Bukowski and his character Chinaski, and perhaps they were somewhat demonstrated in the films. Whether or not those differences are significant, perhaps Rourke played a better Chinaski, and Dillon played a better Bukowski.
Last edited by a moderator: