Ordinary Madness vs. Barfly

#1
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...
 

hoochmonkey9

Art should be its own hammer.
Moderator
Founding member
Over 5000 posts
#2
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.
 

HenryChinaski

Founding member
Over 1000 posts
#3
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!
 

mjp

The stone that the builder refused
Moderator
Founding member
Over 5000 posts
#4
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.
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.
 

HenryChinaski

Founding member
Over 1000 posts
#5
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.
 

mjp

The stone that the builder refused
Moderator
Founding member
Over 5000 posts
#6
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.
 
#7
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... :)
 

cirerita

Founding member
Over 1000 posts
#8
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!
 
#9
he even says it in the bukowski tapes..."like Barfly, forgive me..." and so on and so forth.
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...
 

mjp

The stone that the builder refused
Moderator
Founding member
Over 5000 posts
#12
cirerita said:
eBay... the DVDs are actually VHS rips, so don't expect a great quality.
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 ;)).
 

cirerita

Founding member
Over 1000 posts
#13
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.
 
#14
cirerita said:
eBay... the DVDs are actually VHS rips, so don't expect a great quality.
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.

:)
 
#15
Quigley said:
I can't help but wonder what people who actually know something about Bukowski think about these two movies.
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.
 

HenryChinaski

Founding member
Over 1000 posts
#16
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.
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.
 
#19
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)).
 

Bukfan

"The law is wrong; I am right"
Over 5000 posts
#22
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:
#25
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.
 

mjp

The stone that the builder refused
Moderator
Founding member
Over 5000 posts
#26
chinasky said:
Tales of Ordinary Madness, on the other hand, I bailed on less than fifteen minutes in.
You didn't miss anything. ;)
 

Bukfan

"The law is wrong; I am right"
Over 5000 posts
#27
chinasky said:
Are you in U.K.? I can't seem to find it on amazon or netflix etc.
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:

mjp

The stone that the builder refused
Moderator
Founding member
Over 5000 posts
#28
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.
 

mjp

The stone that the builder refused
Moderator
Founding member
Over 5000 posts
#29
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.
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.
 
#30
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")
 
Top