Bukowski didn't dig it.

I'm hardly surprised. Rourkes' portrayal of Chinaski was ridiculously bad. Matt Dillon nailed his character way better in Factotum.


"If i wanted all that cgi sh*t,i'd go home and stick my dick in a nintendo"
Quentin Tarantino

In Hollywood he said that it was good. Not great, just good. Then again, it was a work of fiction. Very true fiction, but still fiction. Actually, I don't know much about it outside the novel.

“If you want a symbolic gesture, don't burn the flag; wash it.”

- Norman Thomas

Just watched the special features documentary from the Barfly dvd, "I Drink, I Gamble And I Write...The Making of Barfly" In it Bukowski says the following quotes concerning the movie...ON MICKEY'S ACTING:
"I'm just not saying this to say it. I'm really very pleased with, uh, his acting and what he's doing with the character. It's uh...it's magic."
"Micky doesn't only imitate me, he's improved upon me. He's created his own character with this thing. He has lended to me, he has added to me. He's brought his own inventiveness and I really appreciate it."
ON THE FILM ITSELF:
"I might be more recognized, yes. Success is always dangerous. It can make an *beep* out of anybody. And I don't know what it will do to me. Uh...that's all."
"I would say it's best not to trust any of this. I'll be glad when it's all over and I'm sitting in my room alone again, with a bottle and a typewriter and the radio on and I'm being all alone again and filling up again and being myself again."
Some of the quotes look harsh in print. When watching the documentary, however, he says them with great affection. I think it's his way of acknowledging the performance of Rourke while still expressing some trepidation about the hollywood film process. In any case, it's a great film and I'm glad I own it...

I think over time Bukowski got pissed off having to battle the image of Bukowski that Rourke created in the film. Its almost like he had to attack it to assert himself over the image.
You can see how the liberties that Rourke took with the character would grate on you over time. I dont think Rourke had the koan of Bukowski down. Though I dont think this destroys the movie or the script. Rourke just didnt nail the character on an internal, subtle level.

Factotum on the other hand is an idealized version of Bukowski. The brooding artist that maybe Bukowski saw himself as but without the rought exterior that came through in interviews.

I'll take Barfly anyday over Factotum.

Judging from Hollywood, Hank liked it a lot...it's just after a while it became an image, people had an expectation for him to be like that, and that sucks. On the other hand, it helped sell a lot of his books. I agree totally with the guy who says Rourke should play him now, he looks more beat up than Bukowski ever did!

Problem with Rourke at that age, and Dillon, is the audience sides with the character immediately because they have a certain glamour. I think it would be more interesting to have an actor the audience initially feels repelled by. Like, here is a creep in a bar, now we follow him and explore his life.

http://www.agcwebpages.com/BLINDITEMS/2021/FEBRUARY.html

55. ENTERTAINMENT LAWYER 02/05 **8**

https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2021/02/blind-item-8-reader-blind_5.html

Reader Blind: What A list Bad Boy actor/director (Mickey Rourke or Sean Penn) was obsessed with a Los Angeles underground writer (Charles Bukowski), so much that he dedicated a film to him ("Barfly")? The writer wasn’t too impressed with the actor however, and was not really a movie fan. The writer was more intrigued by the actor’s junkyard dog bodyguard (Chuck Zito), thought he was more interesting and real, and that drove the actor crazy with jealousy. Mickey Rourke or Sean Penn/Charles Bukowski/"Barfly"/Chuck Zito (Bukowski's reaction to the film "Barfly") (Hell’s real-life angel)

Apparently earlier Bukowski was well satisfied with Rourke's performance. Don't know why he complained later. The actors are not some robotic dummies. They can interpret a character however they see fit.