Pretty Pretty Pretty

We read it so you don’t have to: Madison August 2008 August 21, 2008

Straight off, I bought Madison because I was in the mood for a trashy weekend/holiday read. and while it was $8.95, it offered a free Napoleon Chocolate Kiss lipgloss valued at $25. In fact, I got two of them, and you can win one simply by posting a video of you pretending to be America’s Next Top Model. And I really like this stuff, so I recommend that you do enter. Anyways, so to the magazine. I think it’s aiming to be Marie Claire rather than Cosmo or Vogue, but its intellectual stories fall far from the mark. Their pieces on identity theft are boring – although they get to do the traditional “IT COULD HAPPEN TO YOU!!! OMG!!!” sidebar, the piece about the New Jersey rich man who OD’d on cocaine has no relevance to their Australian audience – he’s not even hot – and their cover story on Madonna I have read before on the internet. Oh yeah, and by the way, the answer to their cover question “Is your salary affecting your sex life?” is “yes, rich people get more sex” apparently, but they don’t rank it according to the salary of women themselves. After all, you’re living off your partner’s income, right? And he’d like you to buy some more Louis Vuitton (FYI Microsoft Spellcheck totally gives you the correct spelling for that, while Linux, which is what I’m running, suggests “Louis Spittoon”. Open Source FOR THE WIN!) luggage, right? And maybe have a facelift so you’re pretty enough for him.

There’s a piece on how Sally from Home and Away is now on the radio now with two larrikans, and they’ve photographed her in this white floaty ball dress. However, you see the thing is, I’ve grown up with Sally, and whilst I’ve been spreading rumours she starred in a porno, I’ve also noticed that she has somewhat of a chest on her. The model in this flat white ball dress? Not so much. They have airbrushed her waist down to nothingness, and have given her a Gwyneth Paltrow chest while her head is larger than her body. If they hadn’t put her in a lowcut stripey dress in another photo, with her waist tucked behind her arm, and if it hadn’t been for those pesky kids, they would have gotten away with it!

As for fashion shoots, they do a Homer-age to Brooke Shields in Calvin Klein with a brunette model wearing tight faded jeans. Please please please tell me that bleached denim is not coming back in fashion. I do not want to believe it. Also they have a shoot called ‘Jump To It’ which looks like an ANTM shoot (blonde girl jumping in the air in front of a bunch of hot guys/distractions) who looks like Kristen Johnston playing Betty Grable. I like the bright colours of the dresses, but there are too many puff balls for me.

To summarise, don’t buy. It doesn’t have the trashiness of Cosmo, or the “well, at least I am learning about the women of the world” like Marie Claire. Just win my lip gloss, and we’ll all be winners.

PS: Check out Glossed Over’s live-blogging of the big thick Vogue

Review: Beauty tubes August 17, 2008

Beauty tube, wtf??? Well beauty tubes were first developed by Kevyn Aucoin, writer of the Making Faces make-up books- that is if you believe the lady at Mecca Cosmetica who told me so. And since being developed, the idea has spread to many cosmetics brands. And here I’ll review L’oreal’s version.

But first, ‘tubes’ in the world of mascara refers to the effect this new range of products has on each lash - it surrounds each lash with a latex-like substance, which thickens, lengthens, and awesome-ifies lashes. The tubes are apparent when you remove your mascara, at which time the tubes slide off the lashes using only water!

Check out the advertising and product claims here.

The above photo shows the L’oreal mascara (on the right) benchmarked against one of my favourite mascaras - YSL’s Everlong (on the left).

Good points about the L’oreal beauty tubes:

• It really does lengthen and fatten lashes.
• Leaves a ‘false eyelash look’, great for going out.
• Washes out in water cleanly, leaving no smudgey black panda-ing (if you are under the shower).
• Reasonable price (approx. $NZ30).

Bad points:

• It’s really heavy, and does clump lashes together.
• Not a natural look - I wouldn’t wear it for ‘everyday’.
• It takes 30 secs to remove if you’re using a cotton pad - that’s a long time. In fact it is quite difficult to remove using a cotton pad, and blobs of black remain all around the eyes. BUT if you shower to wash it off, it removes entirely.

Verdict: On balance, I still prefer my YSL for most mascara wear. The L’oreal is great for going out, when you can spend the extra time to apply (you need to apply primer & black) and to remove. But it is fussy to apply - I recommend having a lash brush handy to brush out the clumps. And it looks a bit ott for everyday.

For more info on new mascaras see this herald article about mascara.

Review: Aesop hair moisture masque August 13, 2008

On my recent excursion to the land of Auck, I picked up these six, yes count them - six!, free samples of Aesop rose hair & scalp moisturising masque from the World Beauty Store on Vulcan Lane. (By the way the lady at World was way knowledgeable about fragrances and awesome.)

I don’t know much about this brand, but if they stock it in World I’m guessing it’s expensive, and perhaps even good.

You’re supposed to apply one sachet (I needed two because I have long hair) after washing and leave for a while, and do this once a week. That’s the pain with hair masques though - so time consuming.

I’ve used it twice now, and I don’t really notice much difference, except that maybe (but I’m not sure) my hair is a bit softer. There is certainly no instant and dramatic change though.

Still, it smells nice and is great for a free treat! It won’t hurt to ask World for some for yourself…

Review: OPI nail lacquer July 22, 2008

I bought OPI nail lacquer in “St Pertersburgundy” from the Kirk’s Sale recently - for only $12!!

I hadn’t tried OPI before, but it is the brand a lot of professional nail technicians use, if that counts for anything.

The colour on my nails was a lot better than I expected from the bottle. It’s far more blood red than the burgundy I expected - which is good because I only chose the burgundy because they didn’t have any reds in the sale.

It’s quite easy to apply. The consistency is smooth and doesn’t glug up quickly like others I’ve used. And it’s been a full 24 hours since application and no chips!

Review: Nad’s wax strips July 16, 2008

A few weeks ago I tried Nad’s. I’d been intrigued by this product since I saw an item on some current affairs show years ago about the lady who set up the hair removal business in Oz. And I’ve finally gotten around to trying their wax strips - wax already applied to strips, so you just warm them in your hands a tear away.

Now I think I’ve only tried waxing one other time in my life - I have a vague memory of me and a friend waxing our legs when I was a teen. Which is why I wanted Nad’s easy version of their waxing products. And winter is a perfect time to start waxing as you need to have a bit of hair growth before removing. I’m not ashamed to say I had been cultivating a good crop of leg hair for some time this winter.

They say:

A quick and easy way to remove unwanted hair, Nad’s provides 24 strips for longer lasting smoothness. The innovative new contour weave paper technology is softer and more flexible to conform better to your body’s curves. Nad’s Hair Removal Strips, are the quick and easy way to keep your skin hair free for weeks. We also include the NEW Desensitizing Kava Wipes to help relax, calm and reduce the “ouch” factor of waxing. Suitable for legs, arms, underarms and bikini. With regular use, hair growth is progressively slowed down.

It took me about 20mins for 2 legs. Compared to shaving, which takes me about 5mins three times a week, this isn’t so bad, as you should only have to wax every few weeks.  

Don’t be fooled by the Desensitizing Kava Wipes though. It’s still very painful. I swore lots and lots. Though going through the pain is strangely satisfying.

I wouldn’t wax before a going out - I had lots of little red dots form over my legs (not quite the streams of blood I was expecting with this kind of pain). The lotion that comes with the strips is real nice and calming and cooling though.

 I don’t think it keeps your skin hair free for weeks either. I started to notice hair coming through after about four days - not very visible but still there. Stubble is much softer and less noticeable than following shaving though. I did have a day of itchiness a few days after too, that I thought was probably caused by regrowth. And now, about three weeks down the track I’m in desperate need of another waxing.

Over time waxing does enough damage to hair folicils to stop hair ever growing again. So with continued use you can expect forever bald legs.

I’m definitely gonna use this product again, since it’s been long enough for me to forget how really painful it is. The Nad’s site has lots of tips to reduce the pain, which I’ve only just read. So maybe next time it won’t be so bad. 

Review: Clinique Moisture Tint June 27, 2008

OMG, Pursebuzz uses the same foundation as me!! Here is her review of Clinique Moisture Tint.

At first I felt the same way as Pursebuzz - it’s a lovely product to use and very natural, dewy looking . BUT it is a very light coverage foundation, and sometimes I feel like I just need a bit more. Good for everyday but not when you wanna glam-up. I did get some free gifts from Clinique with this purchase which is one thing I (perhaps stupidly) love about Clinique.

I used to use Estee Lauder something or other, and I loved that too. And just recently I tried a sample of Revlon Color Stay foundation which I’m liking (and I’ll review that properly later).

Mineral Make-up June 24, 2008

I little while ago I posted about my BareMinerals make-over. I’ve just found this site on mineral make-up. It gives heaps of info about brands and reviews.

Just about every cosmetic brand has a minerals range now, including Revlon and Maybelline (not reviewed on the site) so it’s worth shopping around.

Battle of the brands: eye make-up remover June 10, 2008

At the end of my bottle of Clarins eye make-up remover, I bought a Simple version and compared the two to see if I’d made a good replacement. Both products are similar - watery, as opposed to the milky or oily kinds you can buy. And both felt and performed pretty similarly.

Below is a pic of two cotton pads, one for each eye. The left is using the Clarins and the right is using the Simple.

Both removed all my eye make-up in a couple of swipes, though the Simple appeared to get rid of more of the foundation/concealer I was wearing - you can kinda see the skin-coloured smudge on the cotton pad in the picture. If I had to pick a winner it’d be the Simple. and given it’s cheaper and less chemically (perhaps) than the Simple, it’s a better bet.

But neither of these is the best remover I’ve used - that would probably be a Christian Dior milky remover I had ages ago but sadly can’t afford…

Pore minimiser June 8, 2008

I have tried and tried to take some photos of my pores before and after using Clinique’s Pore Minimizer Instant Perfecter. But my camera doesn’t pick up the required detail, so you’ll just have to take my word for the results.

I got the Instant Perfecter as a free-gift-with-purchase from Clinique a while ago, along with their Pore Minimizer Refining Lotion.

They say:

Camouflages the look of enlarged pores to immediately create a smooth, perfected look. Long wearing, oil-free formula is water and sweat resistant.

I have to say I was surprised to see a difference in the look of my pores, especially around the creases of my nose and on my chin. If only my camera would pick up the difference too so I could show you. The feel of the Instant Perfecter is lovely on the skin - soft, kinda powdery, giving a smooth finish. It’s a good replacement for foundation (if you don’t worry about ‘coverage’) as it’s tinted too.

The Refining Lotion I got to try is more of a long term thing so difficult to tell if it makes any difference to pore size at all. It’s the kind of product you’d need faith in, so I’m not gonna recommend it.

I reckon the Instant Perfecter is well worth a try though - the results are instant so you can see for yourself in store before buying it. Maybe you could ask for a sample to take home…

You can read other reviews of this product here at totalbeauty.com

Review: Aveeno Daily Moisturising Lotion June 4, 2008

I was browsing NZgirl.co.nz the other day, because while every single word on the site is advertorial, they do have a lot of competitions that just require a click to enter, and so I managed to get myself sent a free sample of Aveeno Daily Moisturiser. They sent me some vouchers and a 25ml bottle, which is great, because I am a handcream addict and always have to carry some moisturiser around in my bag, so this is a good size for that.

As far as the product itself goes though, I’m a little less convinced. It claims to last for 24 hours, which I think is ridiculous, because surely you’ll be washing your hands a couple of times during that time. It does a good job of coating your hands in what feels like protective gloves though, and definitely lasts a couple of hours, which is much longer than any most other products. It feels a little greasy going on, and the grease feeling intensifies if your hands heat up. Also, it’s apparently fragrance-free (which is another reason why I don’t like it), but smells kind of vaguely hospital-ish. Oh, and it’s a Johnson & Johnson product, and I prefer to buy from smaller companies, because I have an innate distrust of large chemical corporations claiming to be all about the natural oatmeal properties, when neither the sample nor their website will list the ingredients of the product.

But, you know, if you’re in the market for a really thick hand cream and you don’t want it to smell like cocoa butter or coconut, this could be the product for you. The guy and girl I was with at the pub who tried it with me didn’t have whole lot to say about it, except that it was okay. I’ll keep the bottle around for dry hand emergencies, but won’t be purchasing it.