Sunday, July 02, 2006

BUY THE GYLLENHAAL

(click to enlarge. scan from IHJ)

Well cosmically ordering a Gyllenhaal obviously didn't work so now I guess I'll have to buy one. Actually, I can't say I agree with this. If someone took my name and applied it to some fake leatherette bag, stitched together by four year olds in some UN avoiding country and then tried to sell it to idiots in London, New York and Milan I'd be uber pissed. Fortunately for me, I don't think that will ever happen and I guess Jake can't do much about it but still, it's wrong. They are using him in their evil accessory marketing schemes and have practically taken a piece of his soul away. So, don't buy The Gyllenhaal for the reason I've just mentioned but mainly don't buy because it's not even that nice of a bag.

14 comments:

Becky Heineke said...

Why is the Gyllenhaal the cheapest one?!

Nothing Really Matters said...

Maybe the got Kelly and Gyllenhaal mixed up!

Weirdland said...

My aunt owns a "Kelly" bag, it's cute, but Clooney and Gyllenhaal bags are not.

cina said...

Anything for the sake of money right? Oh lordy. "The Gyllenhaal bag" - now it would make a little more sense if they named it after Maggie - but after Jake?? It's just ridiculous.

Anonymous said...

Maybe Jake has some kind of merchandising agreement with this company, which enables it to use his name? If not, there's probably a letter from Jake's attorneys sitting right now on the desk of the company's president & CEO, asking the bag-maker to "cease and desist." Unless Jake & his people are letting it go ... perhaps because they like the publicity that it gets our boy. Or perhaps because Gyllenhaal is, finally, just a surname, like Smith or Jones, and nearly anyone can use it.

Well, the whole "status bag" thing is amusing. It is very important to some women; it's part of their indentities. And I do think we all like well-made, beautiful things, particularly if they wear well over a long period of time. (Which is partly why we like Jake, isn't it?)

cina said...

(Which is partly why we like Jake, isn't it?)

So true, nice anon. So true...! :-)

britpopbaby said...

I guess he doesn't own the right to the name 'Gyllenhaal' but it's so obvious what they've done I'm sure they could make a case out of it if they wanted to. Where's joyce when you need her?

Nothing Really Matters said...

Yeah they must be able to make a case as they are using the name, plus you have a picture of jake in this article which kinda implies that it has something to do with Jake! I guess we will never know!

Anonymous said...

To be honest,i could think of better ways to spend £425.00.Like on an air ticket to Jake...lol

Anonymous said...

This is amazing. The world is filled with parasites. *still sobbing over "Mystery Blonde" at the goddmaned farmer's market*

Anonymous said...

It's a small compensation, in a way. Notice how they don't carry the "Philip Seymour Hoffman" or the "Paul Haggis" handbag models.

Anonymous said...

it's not nice looking at all indeed.. not Gyllenhaal at all. yet, how do this kinda things work? i mean, jake or his families must have authorized their last name to be used.. can they just take it to market whatever they like? it's highly suspicious..

Anonymous said...

its an ugly bag.
why would they evn associate that design with him?

Anonymous said...

Jla, genius! I'd pay money for a genuine Trousersnake. So I could set fire to it and hear the screams for JC and Joey in a Michael-Jackson-esque voice from miles away.

Oh, we were talking about the bag?? Insert: Evil Laugh