Factotum Movie
Storyline
TAGLINES
What matters most is how you well you walk through the fire.
This drama centers on Hank Chinaski, the fictional alter-ego of "Factotum" author Charles Bukowski, who wanders around Los Angeles, CA trying to live off jobs which don't interfere with his primary interest, which is writing. Along the way, he fends off the distractions offered by women, drinking and gambling.
| Matt Dillon | Henry Chinaski |
| Lili Taylor | Jan |
| Marisa Tomei | Laura |
| Fisher Stevens | Manny |
| Didier Flamand | Pierre |
| Adrienne Shelly | Jerry |
| Karen Young | Grace |
| Thomas Lyons | Tony Endicott |
| Dean Brewington | Old Black Man |
| James Cada | Bald Man |
| James Michael Detmar | Smithson |
| Kurt Schweickhardt | Ice Plant Supervisor |
| Dee Noah | Hank's Mother |
| James Noah | Hank's Father |
| Michael Egan | Taxi Office Clerk |
| Bent Hamer |
6.50 out of 10 (3886 votes)
Visitor Reviews
just because you've read a book . . .
posted on 29 Jun 2009doesn't mean this movie is good. i was really frustrated by it on many levels. it's kind of the tip of the hat to bukowski. hey, i've read that guy in college--let's see what matt dillon does with him. and i like matt dillon. i thought he came close to looking a little like hank, but mostly just the ruddy cheeks. i have to care about a character, though, and there just wasn't much here to care about. i think time might be cruel to bukowski, and that bothers me a lot, because the writing was solid in a sort of post counter culture time. hard to sit through, scenes that went nowhere, and a soundtrack that made me want to vomit. i ask for very little, got less.
A light-hearted look at the despairs of alcoholism
posted on 25 Jun 2009I saw the earlier Kitchen Stories by director Bent Hamer in a cinema in Berlin in 2004, which was an absolute delight. When I heard he was going to direct an adaptation of Bukowsky's work, I was surprised, given the very different material he handled in the rural Nordic settings in Scandinavia. So it seemed an odd choice to direct a movie like this, but it turns out to be a very refreshing and welcome take at "The Bukowsky Case".Essentially, this film is about the despairs of alcoholism, frighteningly brought to life by an array of simply stunning performances. Matt Dillon as Henry Chinasky is literally sweating alcohol. His face is red and swollen, he looks absolutely horrible. Once handsome but now an absolute has-been, who's sole interests are booze, gambling, sex and writing. People don't interest him at all, including the women, sex is all that interests him, if only mildly. Lily Taylor is a perfect match as his female interest and fellow barfly. But the real kudos are for Marisa Tomei in a relatively minor role but she really burns off the screen, alcohol set on fire. A real treat.It might not be a typical Bukowski-movie, in the sense of his sometimes brash, aggressive, perhaps even typical direct American style, so fans of his work might judge this movie very differently and perhaps argue this is not the real spirit of Bukowsky put to the screen. But director Hamer handles it with such warmth, humor, sly wit and at times very sharp observations that you really shouldn't care about this. Judge it on its own merits.Camera Obscura --- 9/10
From sheer excitement to utter disappointment
posted on 20 May 2009I am a huge Bukowski fan and love everything he's done. So when I heard they we're making a movie based on factotum I was exstatic. Matt Dillon being a part of it just made the movie more appealing to me. But when I finnally got a chance to sit down and watch the film I was really disappointed. The film, having been modernized, loses some of the feeling that you get from Chinasky in the book. In the book most of the events in the story occur during world war II, I didn't like the way the movie translated into modern times, I was lost at the stupid PT CRUISER at the beginning of the film, movies need to avoid such stupid stupid cars, but I digress. A lot of the best parts of the story are cut, or reworked to fit the film. That brings me to my main point, the book is told in the sense that Chinasky is lost, no where to be, no where to go, he is just drifting by, slowly a pattern develops, and the character becomes hilariously painful to watch. The film seems to have Chinaski on a quest and you lose some of the best dialogue in the whole story because of it. My favorite part of the book, where Chinasky is accosted by a large prostitute and has oral sex forced upon him does not apear in the film. This is one of the funniest parts of the book and I kept waiting for it to apear in the film, thinking "it's out of order Brian, it'll be there." But alas it was gone and I wept. This is more like a PG version of Bokowski's actual work. This film has a sort of European feel to it and I feel like some parts of the book have been misinterperted and I don't really like the way the director portrays these characters. Chinaski is supposed to be the mirror image of Bukowski, being that the character is essentially himself. But when I watch Matt Dillon's peorformance I am simply not feeling it. In my opinion this is not his best work. He seems to be trying to hard to be a character. It seems like he just stepped into a pair of boots that were simply to big for him to fill. I think I may be a bit too critical of this film being that Factotum is in my opinion one of the best books of the 20th century. It was just all the build up i think that killed it for me. After reading the book and reading all about how this film was great I ended up a little disappointed. All this aside there are a few moments where you can really feel Bukowski in Dillon's peorformance, for instance when he goes to collect his check after being fired, it was a really well done couple of scenes. There is a part when Dillon (Chinaski) gives his shoes to Ja n and the scene is PERFECT. Outside of those few things I was generally not happy with this movie.
Disappointing for Bukowski fans.
posted on 14 May 2009SPOILER WARNING! The movie just doesn't cut it. I have read most of Buk's work, and also seen the previous films by Hamer. Maybe I know Henry Chinaski too well.The strange thing is that I can't really pinpoint what I didn't like. Maybe my expectations were high. I guess every time a film is based on a book I have read and liked, I expect the film to be a lot like the film. However, I found Hamer and Stark had changed too much for me to instantly recognize it. A few of the best and funniest scenes are those that I thought they had picked straight out of the book. Other segments are just half of what they are in the book, often with the entire point of the segment left out.. Just don't see the point in that..Trivia: Bent Hamer and Jim Stark, the producer, did MAJOR changes between the first screenings and the theater premiere here in Norway. These decisions were based on fairly harsh criticism from the audience.My impression is that the good critiques the film received in both Cannes and here in Norway, were mostly because this film showed up as something fresh and different in a time dominated by thrillers, sci-fi and horrors. As plain and simple as that.(The role of) Marissa Tomei states in the film that when she met Chinaski the first time, he looked as if he could walk through walls. That nothing could ever stop him. Dillon couldn't walk through a wall if it were made of toilet paper.
drinks on me
posted on 12 May 2009This movie can't be discussed in depth without at least passing mention or comparison with Barfly. The two movies covered the same person, namely Bukowski's alter ego Henry Chianski and the two films even share a few of the same exact scenes. Each movie has humor but each takes it's own approach. Barfly went for the sheer exuberance at low life lifestyles. Factotum approaches the humor from a more sadness of the world level. I prefer the former to the later.I'd like to praise Matt Dillon for bringing more light to the works of Charles Bukowski but he seems to have done with out the joie de vivre that Bukowski seem to have in starts and fits. As a film itself the movie is well acted and though it's pacing suffers from points of near inactivity it manages to keep just enough attention to bring us through the end. The presence of Frank Stallone in the movie is greatly missed. After typing that out i still can't believe it.
better read the books
posted on 06 May 2009I think this movie couldn't be better, but the problem with Bukowski is how to make a movie out of his life, that is, his books. It is very hard to make a good film out of a Bukowski story. I think the film was OK, Matt Dillon characterization is great, even though I had preferred an older actor (Chris Cooper, Robert Duvall). The rest of the actors were fine too. I think anyways that taking Bukowski to the screen is pointless, I think you can only enjoy him in his books. The only good thing about this movie is that maybe it will take some new readers to Bukowski. It was short (at least here in Europe, I don't know how it will be edit in the USA), and I think that was intelligent. It was a good recreation of Bukowski atmosphere, so I rate this movie with a 6, and I think I'm being too generous.
Matt Dillon gives a stellar performance in a very good but somewhat frustrating adaptation of the work of Charles Bukowski
posted on 06 Apr 2009Matt Dillon is excellent as Henry Chinaski, author Charles Bukowski's literary alter ego, in this big screen adaptation of Bukowski's novel of the same name and some of his other stories.The story of the film is simply Henry, a maintenance drunk, trying to remain employed so he can make enough money to allow him to write, the only thing that really matters to him. However the women, gambling and looking for jobs often get in the way.Funny, sad and touching this is a zen-like meditation of a life lived on the fringes of society. Its a hard film to say more about since the film unfolds like a booze fueled slice of life. Its at times as if you've turned a camera on the people down at the local dive bar, but commented on by the smartest most literate guy in the place. You'd like to dismiss the witticisms as clever writing except that this was the life that Bukowski lived and wrote about.I liked the movie a great deal but only up to a point. The problem for me is that the film seems not to really have a point. Its just a slice of life where things happen and continue to happen well after the film ends. Its not a bad thing, since thats the way real life is, but I couldn't seem to shake the nation that the film was trying to get to some point that never arrived. If I could compare it to say Robert Altman's Short Cuts (or several other Altman films for that matter) where the film takes these small slices of life and interweaves them and really never comes to any conclusion and never seems to be angling things into any direction in particular, here you have what is an extended slice of life but it seems to want to have a point, while at the same time not have a point, or it wants to mirror Bukowski's writing but be be something more.Its frustrating. Its very good, but very frustrating.
Counter-culture icon looks so pretty.
posted on 25 Feb 2009Some twenty or so years ago, Charles Bukowski was a hero of mine. I blindly accepted the image that was created by intellectual types and seen in various films. Of course, I never got to meet the intellectual types that prescribed Bukowski as a hero. They usually could be found safely behind the counter at hipster video stores and record shops. These people hardly talked and when asked a question, usually sneered and nodded in some vague direction. They were useless when it came to locating a specific title, but their shelves were always stocked with strange and unique titles. To be inducted in the secret hipster club, I believed I had to shed my bourgeois up-bringing and espouse the counter-culture.My introduction to Bukowski started with the movie Barfly, the late 80's film that starred Mickey Rourke and Faye Dunnaway. I was a fan of Rourke at the time. He also embodied a sort of modern male fantastical anti-hero, a brooding intellectual type. At the time, this appealed to me. Barfly's hero scoffed at convention. A mid-30's tramp, who lives life with no ties, answers to no one, --Oh--and to be recognized as a genius by a hot female literary snob, icing on the cake. Afterwards, I read Post-Office and Hollywood, the later being Bukowski's take on his experience with the film.Now, allow me to fast-forward to the latest film based on Bukowski's book Factotum, one which I read and enjoyed. Bukowski takes the form of Chinaski in this novel. I often wonder where Bukowski ended and Chinaski began. 20 years after Barfly, the fictional movie Bukowski is still the same. I have watched about an hour of the movie and I have yet to see signs of the facade cracking. Here is why Factotum Bukowski was my hero. Chinaski is handsome (played by Matt Dillon). He has clean neat hair, styled, but not over the top. When Dillon smokes and writes, he looks cool. Chinaski goes from job to job, ignoring and/or fighting with various bosses. He screws two floozies, one of whom he lives with, walks out on, only to return to with little repercussion. Chinaski is his own man and we never see him emote. He's a sterile, one-dimensional, 30 something, James Dean archetype. Factotum lies to the viewer. It does so by haranguing the idea of a man (a writer) without consequence. A poor man, who's suffering for his art. What could be cooler than that? Now, let's say there are some truths to Factotum, in that the events took place. What the audience is missing is the pain that shrouds Chinaski's existence. Maybe the point of this movie, and most movies, is that for 80 mins., we need to escape the world that's filled with consequence and pain and take-up vicariously with an anti-social womanizer, that smokes, talks, drinks with detached coolness. One who rejects conventional behavior of job and family. My hero used to be Movie Bukowski. Long ago, that would have worked. It was easier then. Now, I have yet to claim a hero. Things are not as easy. Hipster logic and movie renditions of counter-culture icons offer no solutions or even ask questions.
Very Bukowski
posted on 18 Jan 2009This movie reeks of Charles Bukowski's cynical view of the world, but isn't a terrible film overall. It's not your typical "all ends well" story, but effectively reproduces Bukowski's novel of the same name, in a modern setting. Dillon delivers an effective performance of the "self employed" vagabond (Chininski), while Lili Taylor's portrait of Jan was also very interesting. I wouldn't know where to categorize this movie; its not exactly a comedy in the classical sense, although it does have its moments. It can be a little slow, and depressing at times (although Chininski wouldn't really care), and the plot will often times be lost to the viewer, but it's worth watching at least once.
Excellent
posted on 27 Dec 2008I'm proud that this movie came out of MN, I wish I would have gotten a chance to be a bigger part of it. Granted I arrived late to the screening, and got in about 20minutes late, what I saw I thought was wonderful. It's very lyrical, moody -yet subtle. I think this is some of Matt Dillon's finest work to date, and Marisa Tomei's part is wonderfully underplayed - subtle, quirky, and interesting. Lily Taylor also does a fine job - it was enjoyable to see her in a larger part, then a lot of things she's recognizable from. I also liked that it was movie taking place in MN that wasn't in the dead of winter... that was nice change of pace. Def worth checking out.
Wickedly funny, near perfect dark comedy
posted on 21 Nov 2008Deliciously acerbic, wickedly funny, fast paced, expertly crafted dark comedy. Based on an autobiographical novel by the misanthropic Charles Bukowski, The Norwegian co-writer-director Bent Hamer, who made the droll 2003 comedy, "Kitchen Stories," has created a nearly perfect film here. Factotum, we are told in the opening credits, is a word that means "a person who performs many jobs." Indeed, the story is more-or-less organized around the myriad jobs sought and botched by the protagonist, unsuccessful short story writer and all around lowlife Henry Chinaski (Matt Dillon). The other principal organizing focus in Chinaski's life is the women he squeezes and drinks with, primarily slutty Jan (Lili Taylor) and, more passingly, the somewhat classier Laura (Marisa Tomei). Rounding out the cast are Henry's horse race handicapping buddy Manny (Fisher Stevens) and Pierre, a wealthy Frenchman who composes operas and surrounds himself with prostitutes (Didier Flamand).If one were to posit a film genre called comedy noir - dark, devilish American comedies set in lowlife surrounds like taverns and sleazy apartments, when possible dimly lit and narrated by the anti-hero protagonist, intoning in flat, world-weary, matter-of-fact voiceovers, as in a Raymond Chandler detective story - then "Factotum" would be the defining film for this genre. What other films to include? Among recent ones, "Hustle & Flow" comes quickly to mind. "The Big Lebowski," and maybe some other films by the Coens. Quite a lot of Jim Jarmusch's oeuvre, but "Down By Law" for sure. Steve Buscemi's "Trees Lounge." "Pulp Fiction," of course. This film is steeped in richly cynical dialogue, well written (in collaboration with Jim Stark, who also co-wrote "Cold Fever"), well photographed (by John Christian Rosenlund), and well edited (alas, no credit is given for this achievement on either the IMDb or the film's own website). Dillon and Taylor give superb turns. My grade: 10/10 (A)
FAC.TO.TUM...Maybe a Man that took TOO MANY JOBS???
posted on 28 Sep 2008Matt Dillon gives a brilliant performance in this dark little film as he drifts from job to job and attempts to write at night. Wish I could have had more empathy for his character as the film progresses from one weary place, bed and job to another. Okay, writers do have deep thoughts and often are cynical because of the reality of life, but by the time the last scene goes to fade, I wanted out of the world of FAC.TO.TUM.However, the cast is simply terrific in developing characters that are manic depressive and the black humor and dialog are very witty and keep you wondering what in hell they are going to say next. I also thought the pauses between characters enriched the story and made each actor on camera distinct and honest.With his role in CRASH, and now this dark character in FAC.TO.TUM, Matt Dillon is developing into an exciting and dramatic actor. Bravo, Matt!
First real Bukowski movie...
posted on 08 Jul 2008Matt Dillon as Henry Chinaski is great (his best performance yet, little better then his role of Mattew in "The Saint of Fort Washington" from 1993)... He hit jackpot and do great job to play Hery Chinaski (Charles Bukowski alter ego). His Hank in movie is the same character like in the book (young, alcoholic, cynic, lazy)... Dillon role hit the spot like Johnny Depp performance hit the spot with his role of Raul Duke (Hunter S. Thompson's alter ego) in "Fear & Loathing in Las Vegas"... You have 2 great actress in the movie : cute Lili Taylor as Jan (yunger than in the book) but great role as Hank's great love (see her good role as Nell in bad "Haunting" where she beat in acting C. Zeta - Jones); and in cameo role Marisa Tomei as Laura.. Bent Hamer made beauty full film with great actors and one of best soundtracks from drama ever (from Me of course)... If you are fan of Bukowski work you will like the movie... If you didn't read any of his great books see the movie then go in book shop and buy Charles Bukowski novels..
Quirky Stroll often mockingly fun
posted on 04 Jul 2008Factotum as a movie is a quirk, it offers a twisted glib outlook on life. It's a bit more of a drama than a comedy and it works pretty well although pacing is slow. Matt Dillon as the lead character Chinaski does a great job of rolling along with alcohol, women, and menial employments. At center is his mocking jeering narration of work and life and his character's troubles with stabilizing his routines. He doesn't care, and this makes for quite a few entertaining scenes to say the least....perhaps ones that are pathetic in a real sense of the word. This is not about breaking out of life's problems but a flowing detailed look at the how these problems are manifested and cyclical. Would've liked a bit more history of the character, but the movie does a good job of capturing who a factotum is and what he experiences.
Best adaptation of Bukowski yet
posted on 04 Jul 2008After watching Factotum I started re-reading the book, which I had first read some 20 years ago. I was surprised to note how faithful the film was to the book. Even some of the bits which didn't make it to the final film are included in the DVD's deleted scenes. Matt Damon, cast against type, has done an admirable job, and for my money is more on the nose than Mickey Rourke. The standout performance, however, is that of Lili Taylor; bringing to life the essence of Bukowski's women. The direction is assured and unobtrusive. This movie will have special appeal to Bukowski's fans but others should find plenty of things in it to enjoy.
An entertaining film for fans of the author
posted on 30 Jun 2008"Factotum" is far from an ideal Bukowski adaptation. It never captures the full essence of the man behind the legend. Everyone knows that Bukowski liked to drink, liked to sleep with women, and spent a lot of time on skid row. The film shows that very well. What it overlooks is something key to the genius of Bukowski. Reading a book of his poetry proves that for all his sordid tales of booze and women, he made many intelligent comments about the dehumanization of society. There was much more to him that just a drunk. "Barfly" is much better at capturing this aspect of the man.That being said, its still an entertaining film for fans of the author. Matt Dillon, while far from looking the part, does a good impersonation of him. Even better is Lili Taylor as Jan, one of his lovers (shes constantly referenced throughout his books). It was a good decision for Bent Hamer to include Bukowski's poetry as narration. This is where his true genius shines through and is easily accessible to the audience. Its not a good introduction to the man, but for fans and art house snobs, it's not a bad way to kill an hour and a half. (7/10)
Engaging drama packed with some great comedy
posted on 20 Jun 2008Another fine film based on the writings of skid row poet Charles Bukowski. In this effort, from Euro director Bent Hamer, Matt Dillon plays Bukowski proxy Henry Chinaski, while Lili Taylor plays Henry's main squeeze Jan. The episodic narrative trails the likable Chinaski as he barely survives a day at a series of jobs involving pickle packing, brake shoe sorting, cleaning, and bicycle maintenance. Although it's obvious Chinaski isn't cut out for conventional employment, his adventures in the work force are fascinating and often humorous.Although my favorite Bukowski movie is "Tales of Ordinary Madness" -- not because it's any more "authentic" than the others, but more because it's amazing -- I liked this very much. Dillon swaggers about convincingly and makes us like a pretty difficult guy; Taylor, as his troubled main gal, turns in a superb, multi-layered performance, and earns our empathy without histrionics. Also making a worthwhile contribution is Marisa Tomei, who plays a role very similar to the one played by Faye Dunaway in Barbet Schroeder's Bukowski vehicle "Barfly"."Factotum", which means a man who has many jobs, but is a master of none (with the exception of Writer, of course), is an engaging look at life in the underbelly. Director Bent is interested in the small details of behavior and delivers a visually striking, emotionally engaging drama packed with some great comedy.
One of worse of the year
posted on 12 Jun 2008What was the point? Movie was about people who drank a lot and acted like they were blameless for their situation. Characters didn't create any interest or empathy; story would have been better without any dialog at all. The ending couldn't come fast enough. Started the new year with a new form of torture--YUK! Dillon, Taylor, Tomei, et al took a step back in their careers, in my opinion. Writers, directors, etc. should be ashamed. Hopefully this is a swing and a miss (can't win them all, to be sure). The only good part was seeing scenes of the Twin Cities scattered through the film. Oh, and that the film was not a long, long epic (though sitting through it felt like watching many movies at once).
a movie about nothing?
posted on 27 May 2008Many reviewers say they didn't "get" the movie or that it wasn't about anything. I felt the same way until I realized maybe that's the point. This film addresses the question, What is success? Is success only what our society defines success as? Or can success really be something else altogether? Something of our own making.If I had known it was about Charles Bukowski when I was watching it, I might have appreciated it a little more. I'm a fan of his blunt way of writing. Bukowski was primarily a poet and he had a terrible childhood, which obviously affected his entire life and worldview.Definitely not a film for the suicidal or depressed or alcoholic. By the end I needed a stiff drink and a bottle of sleeping pills.
Not much nice to say here
posted on 07 Jul 2009A boring movie about a miserable loser...that's Factotum in a nutshell. Matt Dillon plays Henry Chinaski, alter ego of author Charles Bukowski upon whose novel the film is based. As we meet Chinaski he may be a writer but he's certainly not a successful one. He floats through life, getting fired from one menial job after another and not caring a bit. The fact that he's always drunk may have something to do with his not caring. He meets a woman, Jan, played by Lili Taylor and a relationship ensues. Chinaski moves into Jan's apartment and now instead of getting drunk by himself he can get drunk with somebody else. Good times. Eventually he's had enough of this relationship so Chinaski strikes out on his own. Unfortunately he still can't hold down a job so soon enough he's broke. At this point Marisa Tomei shows up and for some reason her character, Laura, decides to rescue this miserable drunken loser whom she doesn't even know. We soon meet some of Laura's acquaintances and the film veers off into a sort of bizarro world with this rather eclectic bunch. Soon enough Tomei and friends are out of the picture and once again we're left with Chinaski and his drinking and his miserable little life. There's some more time spent with Jan but mostly there's just time spent being a drunk, unemployable loser. And then the movie's over and not a moment too soon. 94 minutes of absolute monotony and it seems infinitely longer as the movie drags on. Nothing happens. Nothing ever happens. If you want to spend an hour and a half of your life watching Matt Dillon drink then this is the movie for you. If you're looking for a compelling story, well developed characters or any entertainment value whatsoever then you've come to the wrong place. Dillon's performance actually isn't bad at all. Too bad the movie which surrounds him is in fact rather bad.