Outside the actual interpretation of Charles Bukowski's novel, it's still fun watch, with generally good performances, and a phenomenal story to have been based on. But believe it or not though, I still think it's a good movie. The movie missed this entirely, in my opinion. But also, it has a very artful heart to it. Factotum is a masterfully vivid evocation of slow-paced, low-life urbanity and alcoholism, and an excellent introduction to the fictional world of Charles Bukowski. His writing captures this great sense of adventure, danger, and a frequent raw vulgarity. The whole film just seemed a lot more tame than the literature. fac totum udlej ve, i voln peloeno dve pro vechno) naznauje, e se Bukowski retrospektivn vrací ke svým nesitatelným povoláním, kterými proel ve zhruba desetiletém období mezi svým 20.

The movie version of Factotum features Matt Dillon in a strong performance as Henry Chinaski (who was previously played, also impressively, by. As a whole the film just didn't capture the feel of the Bukowski novel. Ji název novely Charlese Bukowského Faktótum (z lat. The Charles Bukowski novel Factotum, centered around the trials and tribulations of working stiff and struggling writer Henry Chinaski, was adapted into a film of the same name in 2005. He just didn't click with me as Bukow.*ahem*, Chinaski, anyway. It's just not very natural or convincing or something. He looks a decent bit Like Buk, but his actual performance seems almost too much like a mediocre impression. I almost can't quite put my finger on it. But I thought Dillon's role as Bukowski was just okay. I've never thought of Matt Dillon as a 'great' actor. And they're just because I'm a huge fan of Charles Bukowski. First, my only gripes with the film are about authenticity.

Faktotum bukowski