Ordinary Madness vs. Barfly (1 Viewer)

Quigley

Quigley

Well, I watched "Tales of Ordinary Madness." I'm not even sure I liked it. I'll wait a day or two and watch it again. I guess I found Mickey Rourke's portrayal of Bukowski more interesting (and I was never a huge Micky Rourke fan until I saw "Barfly" a few weeks ago for the first time).

I can't help but wonder what people who actually know something about Bukowski think about these two movies (?). I guess I'm not thinking so much in terms of the cinematic elements but more in terms of which movie better portrays Bukowski and his worldview.

Thanks...
 
I didn't like Tales very much. As a Bukowski portrayal or a movie. Azzara was awful (surprisingly). Some nice cinematography in parts, particularily the hotel scene at the ocean. Mostly dissapointing, though.
I like Barfly a lot, and watch it every few months. I think Rourke's portrayal is pretty good, with some exceptions. The scene with Chinaski reciting poetry into a mirror while bleeding seems forced. Though that was Rourke's idea, not Bukowski's or Schroeder's. And the protrayal as Chinaski as a dirty ,filthy person was off target. No matter how down on his luck, Bukowski was always clean and neat (at least when not in the middle of a drunk).I think Sounse points this out in his bio. Also, John Thomas' Bukowski in the Bathtub makes this point evidently clear.
If you get the chance, see Crazy Love. Works as both a Bukowski portrayal and a film. Part Ham on Rye, Part The Copulating Mermaid of Venice, Calif., part filmmaker poetic license, but entirely infused with the Bukowski spirit. Reccomended.
 
i disagree with you hoochemonkey about the scene in barfly, "youth fenced in, stabbed and shaven, taught words, propped up to die" in my opinion, that is one of the best scenes in the film. and as far as mickey rourke's portrayal of Henry Chinaski, Bukowski himself said he was very pleased with it and in fact, hit the nail right on the head. I agree with him.

I havent seen tales of ordinary madness so I don't really have a basis for comparison on the two films. Which also leads me to believe that my post in this thread is totally pointless. enjoy!
 
HenryChinaski said:
and as far as mickey rourke's portrayal of Henry Chinaski, Bukowski himself said he was very pleased with it and in fact, hit the nail right on the head. I agree with him.
Click to expand...
Funny, I read so many different quotes about this. I think during the film's promotion, right before it came out, Bukowski was saying nice things about everyone involved in Barfly, because that's what you do when you're trying to sell a movie. But a couple of weeks ago, Linda said Bukowski though Barfly was a piece of shit. Her emphasis, not mine. ;)

Tales of Ordinary Madness was boring man! I practically fell asleep watching that. Terrible. Ben Gazzara as Bukowski? Oh lord.
 
I don't know if i agree with that whole trying to sell movies thing...

I kindof think it all goes back to Buk being all like...don't get stuck on old shit. he didn't care about the repetitiveness of the whole thing. after a while he just didn't care for it anymore. he even says it in the bukowski tapes..."like Barfly, forgive me..." and so on and so forth.
 
I'm pretty sure she was talking about its merits as a film, but that's Linda saying it, not Bukowski, so I guess strictly speaking it's secondhand information. Maybe she thought it was a piece of shit and was projecting. I don't know. Just going by what she said his opinion was.
 
Thank you all for your thoughts and impressions. I'll get "Crazy Love," I really wasn't aware of the movie (thanks Hoochmonkey!). I can see that "Tales..." is not universally loved... interesting.

Thanks again... :)
 
B didn't like the way Rourke portrayed him in the film and he wasn't too happy with him as person when they saw each other on the set during the shooting. he has said so in many, many interviews.

he was supportive of the film, though, basically because of Barbet. He did admire Barbet, a rare thing in B, I mean, admiring a LIVING human being!
 
he even says it in the bukowski tapes..."like Barfly, forgive me..." and so on and so forth.
Click to expand...

I've been trying to run down a copy (apparently, it's available in 2 DVD's) of "The Bukowski Tapes" but it isn't all that easy. Nothing at Amazon... seems like a few, very small vendors on the web... any suggestions for a place to buy "The Bukowski Tapes?"

Thanks...
 
cirerita said:
eBay... the DVDs are actually VHS rips, so don't expect a great quality.
Click to expand...
Yeah, and the quality of those varies quite a bit. Keep an eye on the eBay forum here, because I'm sure the next time a legit first-generation copies is available it will be the topic of much discussion (and last second bid sniping ;)).
 
chinaski,

I'm a Bukowski fan, yes, but not a freak. I've watched The Bukowski Tapes once, Barfly once, Tales once, etc. I don't recall having watched anything TWICE. So, no, I don't know any of those interviews by heart, though I recall many of the episodes, especially the first one.
-"Nature? Gimme the cities, gimme smog" :D

Books are a different matter, though.
 
cirerita said:
eBay... the DVDs are actually VHS rips, so don't expect a great quality.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the lead on obtaining "Tapes." I'll watch eBay. And wait to see if anything pops up here on first-generation copies that might become available.

:)
 
Quigley said:
I can't help but wonder what people who actually know something about Bukowski think about these two movies.
Click to expand...
Barfly is better than Tales as far as movies go. The movie introduced Bukowski to some people who otherwise had never heard of or read anything by him. Rourke does a pretty good job and was entertaining as Bukowski. He's an underrated actor anyway. I remember reading somewhere that Bukowski liked Rourke's interpretation and said that young guys were going to start getting drunk and go around acting like him.
 
Quigley said:
Thanks for the lead on obtaining "Tapes." I'll watch eBay. And wait to see if anything pops up here on first-generation copies that might become available.
Click to expand...

actually i got a bootleg copy off ebay and the quality is quite excellent. i think i paid 12 dollars for it and yeah the quality isnt as bad as some seem to think it is. the only problem being the parts arent broke up into chapters. that's really the only downside to the bootleg. but, beggers cant be choosers.
 
Re Bukowski's thoughts on Mickey Rourke's portrayal, I was struck by how in the bonus materials for Barfly there's an interview segment in which Bukowski praises Rourke in an "and I'm not just saying this" sort of way (that may after all be tongue in cheek, meaning "of course it hardly needs saying that I *am* just saying this"), while in Born Into This there's a scene where Bukowski says that Rourke got it wrong by being too swaggery and braggy and not being mellow enough. And doesn't someone else in Born say that Rourke was an odd choice because he was too young? (Which seems odd, given that in the bonus materials it says that Chinaski was supposed to be 24 (I think)).
 
for the mellow performance, watch Matt Dillon in Factotum when it comes out. Very mellow.
 
It's out on dvd. I have it here next to me. Got it over the net a week ago...

Ps.: thanks for the link to the Bukowski Tapes...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That particular torrent didn't work, btw, though I did manage to find one that did. Just so you know they're out there. There were some great moments in there, but I have to say it didn't leave much of an impression on me over all.

Tales of Ordinary Madness, on the other hand, I bailed on less than fifteen minutes in. Gazzara just repulsed me. Is the character supposed to be that off-putting? Meh.
 
chinasky said:
Are you in U.K.? I can't seem to find it on amazon or netflix etc.
Click to expand...

No. I'm in Denmark. I bought "Factotum" (along with "Crazy love" & "Born into this" ) on www.laserdisken.dk I think they ship all over...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Be careful ordering DVDs from outside of your home country. Unless you have a "multi-region" DVD player (or the DVDs are region 0, which is very uncommon for studio releases) they might not be playable in your country.
 
chinasky said:
Re Bukowski's thoughts on Mickey Rourke's portrayal, I was struck by how in the bonus materials for Barfly there's an interview segment in which Bukowski praises Rourke in an "and I'm not just saying this" sort of way (that may after all be tongue in cheek, meaning "of course it hardly needs saying that I *am* just saying this"), while in Born Into This there's a scene where Bukowski says that Rourke got it wrong by being too swaggery and braggy and not being mellow enough.
Click to expand...
Mike Watt: Bukowski movies Ordinary Madness, Barfly, and now Factotum, are coming out. Do any of them bear any resemblance to the reality?

Linda Bukowski: Well, of those three, Factotum is the only one that gets any kind of inner stuff coming through. The other two are, and I'm not just saying it for myself, I'm saying it the way Hank tells about them. He really, really was not happy with either one of them at all. At all. He didn't dig them. But especially Mickey Rourke. (laugh) He couldn't handle Mickey Rourke. Mickey Rourke played a guy that was a character. He wasn't the right guy. He played a character, and Hank was very upset, because he played a slob.

And my husband, even when he was on the skids, was not a slob. He was very clean. (laugh) Like I think I told you, he had two sets of clothing, and every night, he'd wash what he wore the day before, and the next day, he'd wear the clean set. And he kept his hair nice. And here's this slob walking around with a load in his pants in Barfly. And Hank was really upset about that. But, you know, he liked Barbet Schroeder so much, and they'd worked together for so long, he just didn't want to hurt his feelings.
 
barfly!!! mickey rourke's best film ever if u ask me (btw do u think he is trying to look like bukowski these days looking at his "jobs")
 
I think the two are completely different kinds of films. Barfly, as played by Rourke, is a funny Hollywood film (as funny as Buk's Phila period can be), versus Tales which is a very challenging, raw film. I have to say I love both. I enjoy Barfly for its humour, but I also enjoy Tales for its, well, its madness. Maybe Tales could have used a touch more humor to make it play more like a Bukowski piece, but it's bizzare and twisted enough to feel like a bad hangover day, which I'm sure Buk had his share of. Pauline Kael, the New Yorker film critic (still untouched by any other critic, IMO) loved Tales for it brutalness and the sense that you've experienced something very genuine and out of the ordinary after watching it. I would think Buk would be proud of that accessment, although he didn't like the film.
 
I wrote, back on 4/19/06:

>Re Bukowski's thoughts on Mickey Rourke's portrayal, I was struck by how in the bonus materials for Barfly there's an interview segment in which Bukowski praises Rourke in an "and I'm not just saying this" sort of way (that may after all be tongue in cheek, meaning "of course it hardly needs saying that I *am* just saying this"), while in Born Into This there's a scene where Bukowski says that Rourke got it wrong by being too swaggery and braggy and not being mellow enough.

-- and then disappeared without seeing the following from mjp:

mjp said:
Mike Watt: Bukowski movies Ordinary Madness, Barfly, and now Factotum, are coming out. Do any of them bear any resemblance to the reality?

Linda Bukowski: Well, of those three, Factotum is the only one that gets any kind of inner stuff coming through. The other two are, and I'm not just saying it for myself, I'm saying it the way Hank tells about them. He really, really was not happy with either one of them at all. At all. He didn't dig them. But especially Mickey Rourke. (laugh) He couldn't handle Mickey Rourke. Mickey Rourke played a guy that was a character. He wasn't the right guy. He played a character, and Hank was very upset, because he played a slob.

And my husband, even when he was on the skids, was not a slob. He was very clean. (laugh) Like I think I told you, he had two sets of clothing, and every night, he'd wash what he wore the day before, and the next day, he'd wear the clean set. And he kept his hair nice. And here's this slob walking around with a load in his pants in Barfly. And Hank was really upset about that. But, you know, he liked Barbet Schroeder so much, and they'd worked together for so long, he just didn't want to hurt his feelings.
Click to expand...

Thanks so much for that, brother. Bullseye on point. And a quick googling, btw, for those interested, turns up the entire interview here:

http://www.hootpage.com/hoot_watt-lindabukmeanintr.html

[Entirely off-topic postcriptum:]

Hey all: back in the day, last year when I first signed on and posted ten or fifteen times, I ran into some original writings from one of you. The one I recall was like an e-book that I think I might have linked to from someone's profile here. It was like a personal philosophy of life kind of thing, and I can't for the life of me remember who it was nor find any clues in the threads I posted on or the profiles of those who chimed in at the time. Any leads would be much appreciated. Thankee.
 
chinasky said:
Hey all: back in the day, last year when I first signed on and posted ten or fifteen times, I ran into some original writings from one of you. The one I recall was like an e-book that I think I might have linked to from someone's profile here. It was like a personal philosophy of life kind of thing, and I can't for the life of me remember who it was nor find any clues in the threads I posted on or the profiles of those who chimed in at the time. Any leads would be much appreciated. Thankee.
Click to expand...

that was probably Brother Schenker.
 
If you don't have any information about Barfly, I find it a good movie. Of course Rourke was overdramatic in the movie. But I didn't know this when I watched Barfly for the first time.

I still like the movie although Crazy love is the best.

I read Under the vulcano and I liked the novel.
The movie was kinda shitty. But suppose I didn't read the novel...

Ordinary madness is bad, very bad.
 
And yet there is evidence that Bukowski liked Rourke and his performance. For example, I've been thumbing through Reach for the Sun recently and in there he writes letters praising Rourke and his Chinaski. He's not so kind about Faye Dunaway. Yes I've seen later interviews where he states the opposite. But this seems quite normal for Bukowski, to like someone or something and then change his mind later.

My opinion is that the whole farce of getting Barfly made just pissed him off so much that he eventually just wanted to turn his back on it and seperate himself from the whole project.

Having finally replaced my old VHS copy with a new DVD and watch it again, I will say that Crazy Love is a fine movie and it does a good job of capturing the tone of Bukowski's short stories. But I still like Barfly best - just a good memory for me that all.

I'll have to owe you the other cent.
 
Iliked rourke in allmost all of his work,except Barfly he missed the boat in this one it was like he was playing an actor playing Buk in a bad play,never sold me on his role.If he acted like he did in the Pope ofGrenwich Village then we would have a good Bukowski movie.I think Buk was too deep for Rourke.I wonder who today can really play the man,Penn,Hanks use at least two actors one for 1-25,25-55 you get the picture.
 
Factotum is unbelievably pathetic! Considering the subject matter even a third grader could make the movie interesting, and this wasn't. A complete failure on all accounts...

Barfly is great, and I think Mickey did a heck of a job... Buk: "Mickey Rourke is a real human guy, on and off the set. And in Barfly he really came through with the acting. I felt his enjoyment and inventiveness. Faye Dunaway just can't match his talent or his humanness but she filled her role."

I liked Tales, although it was a bit slow... and the guy was too clean and easy. Still, had some redeeming qualities and interesting scenes. I especially like the "little gun." And the girl is really attractive! Buk: "He had appealing eyes like a constipated man sitting on the pot straining to crap. I liked the eyes. But take that away and he was too comfortable. Nice macho guy, but self-pleased, not insane at all. Probably a great variety of ass had cooled him out."

The Charles Bukowski Tapes are good, too. The piano music gets to be hypnotic, and the freeze frame grows on you... Buk: "I liked them the first time I saw them. Second time, it was just an old drunk talking away. It's very hard to see them all at once. It's like reading a book of poetry straight through. It's jarring."

Crazy love is ok. Worth seeing once, but don't get excited about it.

Other films based on Bukowski's work include Love is a Dog from Hell (1987 - Belgium) and Walls in the City (1995). In 1990, Bukowski narrated an HBO documentary called The Best Hotel on Skid Row.

Anyway...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Isn't Crazy Love and Love is a Dog From Hell the same movie? just different titles for different releases? what's Walls in the City? haven't heard of it, but I'm intrigued....
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, Crazy Love is the same film as Love is a Dog From Hell. I think its pretty good - better than Tales... and Factotum.
I haven't seen Walls in the City, but have read about it. It was out from Screen Edge who distribute the later copies of Bukowski At Bellevue. Sounds like the Bukowski reference is pretty weak. The guy on the cover looks a bit like Rourke in Barfly and it seems to be set in bars etc..

Here a write up

http://www.dvdmaniacs.net/Reviews/U-Z/walls_in_the_city.html
 

Similar threads

justin grimbol
tales of ordinary madness
Replies
29
Views
9K
Andreas
Andreas
willrodgers
Tales Of Ordinary Madness US DVD Release
Replies
25
Views
4K
Bill Sikes
Bill Sikes
HenryChinaski
The Ordinary Madness of Charles Bukowski: BBC Doc
Replies
13
Views
8K
roni
roni
cirerita
The Ordinary Madness of Charles Bukowski - BBC doc
2
Replies
43
Views
16K
roni
roni
Austin Charles
Factotum vs Barfly: Which do you think is better?
Replies
38
Views
15K
Klaudia
Klaudia

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top