Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Sims vs. Sims on Buses | Curious Cat Gets Stuck in Maso... »

Wednesday, July 23, 2008

Because Thousands of Clueless Sarah Jessica Parker Fans Inadvertently Demanded It

posted by on July 23 at 14:00 PM

That imaginary book that Sarah Jessica Parker was reading in the Sex and the City movie? The one that confounded thousands of booksellers and Amazon.com’s search engine because it didn’t actually exist and yet thousands of SatC fans insisted that it did because they saw it in the SatC movie?

It’s getting published.

One New York minute after word spread that fans of the Sex and the City movie were logging onto Amazon.com in hopes of purchasing Love Letters of Great Men the fake book highlighted in the film publisher Pan MacMillan announced that on Aug. 15, they’re planning to release a book with the same title in the U.K., to include “all of the letters referenced in the film.”

I find it especially annoying that the one thing in the entire goddamned movie that wasn’t a product placement is now officially a product.

RSS icon Comments

1

Any fan of Sex in the City at this piont needs to be fed to starving Pit Bulls. They are acting more freaky than a bunch of Trekkies. GET A FUCKING LIFE!!!

Posted by Andrew | July 23, 2008 2:07 PM
2

Didn't several people say this would happen when you first posted about the sheeple* asking for the book after the movie came out? I'd say "I told you so" but I can't actually remember what I said in that post.

*Do I get bonus annoyance points for using that word?

Posted by PopTart in Denver | July 23, 2008 2:07 PM
3

i like another kokomo.

Posted by infrequent | July 23, 2008 2:13 PM
4

Snobs. Especially you, Poptart.

Posted by blank12357 | July 23, 2008 2:19 PM
5

2 - Oh, yes: You totally get bonus points from me.

Posted by MEC | July 23, 2008 2:20 PM
6

infrequent, fuck your Royal Caribbean island.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | July 23, 2008 2:21 PM
7

Until I read this story, I thought the most annoying side-effect of SATC was the gaggles of grown women discussing which character each of them was most like. Now, I think the most annoying side-effect of SATC is the gaggles of grown women discussing which character each of them is most like and whether they can get that incredibly romantic book Carrie was reading in the movie.

Plus, Kim Cattrall sucks.

Posted by LDP | July 23, 2008 2:21 PM
8

go home make a batch of cosmo's and the world will look alot better

Posted by Jiberish | July 23, 2008 2:22 PM
9

And it's bad that people want to read a book -- and have now been given that book to read -- because why?

It doesn't hurt you, it broadens the fans' horizons, and it makes the readers and the booksellers happy. I don't see the problem.

Posted by whatevernevermind | July 23, 2008 2:22 PM
10

Why would this annoy you? The fact that a product that was NOT placed front and center is requested is annoying? I don't get it....why is that annoying? Placed-products being requested would be an example of "sheeple syndrome" because people are doing what they were led to do.

Don't get the annoyance--I am serious here.

Posted by Hartiepie | July 23, 2008 2:36 PM
11

Eh. Where there's money to be made...

Posted by Greg | July 23, 2008 2:37 PM
12

If this show were unpopular, hipsters would love it. But since it is popular, they aren't allowed to like it, and that vexes them. Once they are vexed, Sex and the City can never do right by them.

Posted by elenchos | July 23, 2008 2:41 PM
13

I'm just sad I didn't crank one out, working in collaboration with Fnarf, so we could both be stinking rich ...

Maybe we could have had Charles write the cover blurbs ...

Posted by Will in Seattle | July 23, 2008 2:43 PM
14

Paul, I told you then to compile the damn book and make millions. Now you've lost out.

Posted by arduous | July 23, 2008 2:48 PM
15

I'm sure it'll be a really high quality book, too. Ugh.

Posted by bearseatbeats | July 23, 2008 2:51 PM
16

@10, @9 It is annoying because it emphasizes how consumerist and literal people are. SATC is a work of fiction so why not allow the characters to read fictional books? Does anyone remember the fake commercials for "Log" in the "Ren and Stympie Show" years ago? Children wanted it, even though it was a fictitious cartoon commercial advertising what was nothing more than an actual log and their parents begged manufacturers to make it so that they could quiet the infantile demands of their children. Same case scenario.

Posted by inkweary | July 23, 2008 2:52 PM
17

hartiepie, your annoyance is even more curious than paul's. why are YOU so annoyed?

Posted by brandon | July 23, 2008 2:56 PM
18

or naming an island after a place in a movie and a song...

Posted by infrequent | July 23, 2008 3:09 PM
19

@12, i can just imagine a bunch of hipsters saying things like "MR. BENNET, YOU VEX ME SO!"

Posted by Bellevue Ave | July 23, 2008 3:11 PM
20

@16: What really surprises me is that the producers and marketers dropped the ball on this one. Something like 85% of the movie is product placement; clearly they intend for you to hear of these products used in a fiction movie and then go out and buy them in real life, so why couldn't that also apply to a fictional book which they would then sell you for the low, low price of $24.95?

Posted by Greg | July 23, 2008 3:12 PM
21

@17 I am not annoyed -- Paul is (he said so). I am curious.

At least he didn't say fuck this time --THAT is annoying.

Posted by Hartiepie | July 23, 2008 3:23 PM
22

the people. so clueless.

us: so smart. so hip. so avant garde. so different, so special.

[bask in the soft glow of superiority; aesthetic taste, moral, intellectual, etc.]

Posted by PC | July 23, 2008 3:32 PM
23

I HATED that movie! And not just because it was so nihilistic ... it was just so lame.

Posted by OR Matt | July 23, 2008 3:35 PM
24

OR Matt,

of course it was. You expected more from the 3 hookers and their mom?

Posted by yucca flower | July 23, 2008 5:05 PM
25

Hey Paul,
It turns out 'a' book does exist; whether it was referenced by the writers (who then got the title wrong), or coincidence--who knows? It's published by that crappy Kessinger Publications, whose books all look like print-on-demand with bland yellow covers, and they specialize in printing obscure books on the occult, among other things... for more:http://www.biblio.com/isbn/1432576100%20.html

Posted by vladimir | July 23, 2008 5:24 PM
26

Speaking of books that don't exist, maybe I should start work on a new edition of "My Pet Goat".

Posted by RainMan | July 23, 2008 6:23 PM
27

Why does everyone assume that women are completely obsessed with SATC? I watched the show, I watched the movie, and if they make another movie I'll watch that too. That does not mean I'm a driveling idiot. That does not mean I spend every waking moment thinking and talking about it. It merely means that I like to watch a little fashion porn now and again.

People need to get their hate off for this franchise. Don't you have better things to do?

With regard to this book...yawn...don't care. Didn't this site post a miniature star-wars R2D2 robot as "the coolest thing ever"? Where's the hate for that consumerism? Have you checked out the lord of the rings product catalogue lately?

Posted by ams | July 24, 2008 1:44 AM

Comments Closed

Comments are closed on this post.