<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1" ?>




































































  <rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
    <channel>
      <title>Comments On: What&apos;s Old: Ulmer at Doc
    
      by Pat Graham</title>
      <link>http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/10/15/whats-old-ulmer-doc</link>
      <atom:link href="http://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/Rss.xml?oid=941964&amp;id=comments" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />      <description>Comments On: What&apos;s Old: Ulmer at Doc
    
      by Pat Graham</description>
      <language>en-us</language>
      <copyright>Copyright 2009 Chicago Reader. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, Chicago Reader readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact Chicago Reader.</copyright>
      <webMaster>wil@desert.net (Chicago Reader Webmaster)</webMaster>
      <pubDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 00:00:01 -0600</pubDate>
      <lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 05:15:00 -0600</lastBuildDate>
      <generator>Foundation</generator>
      <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
      
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: What's Old: Ulmer at Doc]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/10/15/whats-old-ulmer-doc/#972123]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/10/15/whats-old-ulmer-doc/#972123]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Pat H.]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[Pat, your criticisms of the book seem to me to be a lot more "exhausted" than anything Erickson wrote. What I meant by bringing up the aforementioned quote and character is that we finally get to hear all of this come out through some sort of "layman's talk." Not everyone who loves the movies and have valuable things to say about them feel it necessary to get all Andrew Sarris about it on the internet. I, thankfully, didn't learn how to watch movies by way of Jonathan Rosenbaum. The "man" at the end of the Cagney/Bogart line is thus more important than the actual content. And while I agree the street dude's character requires a big leap of faith in principle, I do not think an informed interest in Ford requires a label such as "educated white man stuff."
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Pat H.]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2008 20:36:33 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: What's Old: Ulmer at Doc]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/10/15/whats-old-ulmer-doc/#964627]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/10/15/whats-old-ulmer-doc/#964627]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[pat g.]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[DAN--not that i blame you ... sometimes i wonder that too
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by pat g.]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2008 20:09:33 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: What's Old: Ulmer at Doc]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/10/15/whats-old-ulmer-doc/#956804]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/10/15/whats-old-ulmer-doc/#956804]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Dan]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[I didn't mean it as a bad thing. I'm just wondering if you're that into film noir. But hear, hear, bravo to Corliss's capacity!
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Dan]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2008 19:16:25 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: What's Old: Ulmer at Doc]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/10/15/whats-old-ulmer-doc/#954658]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/10/15/whats-old-ulmer-doc/#954658]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[pat g.]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[PAT--"cagney was complicated ...," etc, seems pretty exhausted--or at least the conventional wisdom re both of the actors involved * and the "street dude ranting" relies on some pretty dubious stereotyping to achieve its effects: "o look, a black guy spouting all this educated white guy stuff," while performing racial obsequies to white paranoia about black criminal propensities * kind of a push-me/pull-you hydraulic there, yes?--don't see it going over with the readership colors reversed
    
    MATT--same stereotyping friction in DETOUR: painted china doll ornament versus castrating harpy ... except it's all so commonplace in movies now (post-john waters, the high school "heather"s, the apatow comedies, etc) we hardly give it a thought * as why would we, since all the invidious gender divisions (the china doll, the harpy, etc) are officially obsolete ... unless of course they aren't
    
    DAN--bravo for corliss's capacity! ... i'm sure i should be impressed
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by pat g.]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2008 19:09:27 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: What's Old: Ulmer at Doc]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/10/15/whats-old-ulmer-doc/#966947]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/10/15/whats-old-ulmer-doc/#966947]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Dan]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[Richard Corliss on Detour: "No film is noirer." Maybe your capacity isn't as large as Corliss's.
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Dan]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2008 13:21:31 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: What's Old: Ulmer at Doc]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/10/15/whats-old-ulmer-doc/#969052]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/10/15/whats-old-ulmer-doc/#969052]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Matt M.]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[Who, in all of noir, is a nastier bitch than Anne Savage in Detour? She's so unlikable. So plain and nasty in a way that makes you contemptuous of her. I think that's why people tend to praise her performance. It's awesome.
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Matt M.]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Sat, 18 Oct 2008 19:48:09 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: What's Old: Ulmer at Doc]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/10/15/whats-old-ulmer-doc/#951702]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/10/15/whats-old-ulmer-doc/#951702]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Pat H.]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[Sure, and I wish I'd hear that argument for Wood more often. But the fact that the one shot you took at "Detour" was questioning whether or not it was "inspired" makes me hungry for elaboration. "Inspired" is a word that is most often followed by "by", which tells me that you've alloted a definition to that term that might not match mine. Not that I want to (or will) deter you any--I've never really heard anyone pick a fight with "Detour."
    
    If I can break the rules and back-track a little, I'd like to comment on your old post regarding Steve Erickson's "Zeroville." Sorry, but I just recently finally got a chance to read it. The pleasure of that book to me was not derived from any sort of "fresh" perspective, but from the fact that said perspective isn't condensed into exhausted prose. I like lines like "Cagney was complicated, but Bogart was neurotic man," or the idea of a starving black street dude ranting and raving about the myth vs. the anti-myth. I will say that the narrative side of it lags until the last forty or so pages as it devolves into Forrest Gump-y appropriations of its main character far too often. But it worked overall because it didn't want to tell stories nor did it want to criticize movies--it just wanted to talk about them. Just two cents--figure it wouldn't be a problem, for the original post was met with but a single comment.
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Pat H.]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Oct 2008 18:59:07 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: What's Old: Ulmer at Doc]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/10/15/whats-old-ulmer-doc/#959387]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/10/15/whats-old-ulmer-doc/#959387]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[pat g.]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[PAT--the professional polish of DETOUR tends to subvert the very things it's praised for, something that obviously can't be said of wood's BRIDE, which plays around the nocturnal edges of awareness like a proto-ERASERHEAD
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by pat g.]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Oct 2008 12:32:24 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: What's Old: Ulmer at Doc]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/10/15/whats-old-ulmer-doc/#973164]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/10/15/whats-old-ulmer-doc/#973164]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Pat H.]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[Good post. The one thing I don't get though is how you preferring "Bride of the Monster" discredits the reputation of "Detour" any. You basically made a great case for it.
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Pat H.]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Oct 2008 01:34:11 -0500</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
      
    </channel>
  </rss>




