First there was Barfly, starring Mickey Rourke as Charles Bukowski's alter ego Henry Chinaski. Then there was Factotum, with the surprising choice of Matt Dillon to play Hank. As a great fan of Bukowski's work, I was anxious to see each of these films, but only enjoyed one. Bukowski created powerful images in his stories that can never truly be translated onto film; he was one of the greatest writers of the 20th century and knew how to make you feel each punch, each drink, and each hopeless laugh. In order to come close to putting on a screen what Bukowski put in one's head, a filmmaker must be bold and brave in his/her decisions. Although he was much criticized for his portrayal (even by Bukowski himself), Mickey Rourke took the chances neccesary to make the viewer understand Bukowski's delicious depravity in Barfly. Rourke's Chinaski was a parody of himself, a joke, and a tragic genius. This interpretation of the role was expressive and conceptual and I enjoyed it very much. Faye Dunaway also handled herself beautifully as the exquisite victim of her own faults. In contrast, Matt Dillon "chose" to downplay his performance in Factotum, showing Chinaski as a shy and confused man. I think he may have been playing himself. The directing, like the screenplay, was unremarkable and bland. The recreation of the scene from Barfly, in which Hank meets Wanda (this time played by a dour Marisa Tomei), made the whole affair seem lackluster and sad. I want to feel my Bukowski like a slap in the face. So, by a landslide, as one of the most underrated actors in Hollywood, it's ROURKE for the win.
http://www.spout.com/films/264322/default.aspx
http://www.spout.com/films/2333/default.aspx