Skip to main content

making faces :: summertime blues? nars has the cure!

i keep mentioning how my infatuation with nars took hold because of their product names. not just the ubiquitous "orgasm", but the fact that they have products named after classic low-brow films ["night breed" and, of course, "deep throat"], marlene dietrich ["scarlet empress", "lola lola", "blonde venus", etc.], under-appreciated cinematic classics ["night porter", "blade runner"] and some of my musical icons ["blondie", "heart of glass", "new order", transeurope express"]. so when i heard that nars was releasing a blush called "boys don't cry", it was pretty much a done deal. i knew it was coming home with me and it didn't matter if the blush turned out to be green. because it's called "boys don't cry".

it's released as part of a collaborative collection with french designer pierre hardy of two super-sized blushes and a half a dozen nail polish duos. one of the associates at murale described them as being sets "one for the fingers, one for the toes", which i hadn't thought of, but which actually makes perfect sense. thus far, i've limited myself to the one blush, but there's nothing to say that's final.

emblazoned with hardy's geometric cube pattern, "boys don't cry" is an intense red-coral that reads very warm in the pan, but that looks more neutral on application. it's a matte finish [the gold pattern is an overspray that disappears almost immediately, but doesn't look like a heavy or dead-seeming matte. in fact, it brightens the cheeks quite noticeably.

it is a colour that pale ladies [like me] will want to use lightly. there's a ton of pigment, which means that it's a little too easy to overdo it and end up with the sunburnt/ drunk look. not what you want. even lightly applied, it's going to be a fairly intense blush, but i like the fact that it blends so nicely and evenly, allowing for quite a natural flushed look.

boys don't cry
by way of comparison, mac "salsarose" is a bit pinker, but the two are definitely in the same ballpark. rouge bunny rouge "florita" is much softer- which should give you an idea of the intensity we're talking about.

l to r :: mac salsarose, boys don't cry, rbr florita
the only drawback to this blush is that it's more expensive- a lot more expensive- than a regular nars blush; $48cad compared to $30. that's a big jump, but the compact is a lot larger and the intensity of the colour basically means that you're not ever going to run out. it also means that "boys don't cry" is the same price as a chanel "joues contraste" blush, which is a lot smaller.

it's a limited edition piece, but it's still widely available wherever nars is sold, along with the other elements of the pierre hardy collection. nars are generally excellent about making sure that everyone gets a fair shot at finding their limited items before they're discontinued, which is just one more reason to love them.

here's the blush in action. [for those of you following my sci-art adventures, i'd call this one a bright spring look, although it's not nearly as intense as one could get with a bright spring colour palette.]



products used ::

the base ::
marcelle beauty balm "light/ medium"
mac paint pot "painterly"
nars radiant tinted moisturiser "terre neuve"
nars radiant creamy concealer "vanilla"

the eyes ::
chanel e/s "sable emouvante" [shimmery peach. warm brown]
chanel e/s "tiger lily" [soft tangerine with white shimmer]
nars e/s "mekong" [espresso brown with gold shimmer]
stila e/l "lionfish" [shimmery bronze brown]
urban decay 24/7 e/l "underground" [shimmery taupe]
korres volcanic lash mascra "black"
givenchy noir couture mascara "brun satin"

the cheeks ::
nars blush "boys don't cry" [bright coral red]
chanel poudre signe [white-gold highlight]

the lips ::
chanel rouge coco shine "antigone" [strawberry red]

and of course, i can't let this post go without posting...

Comments

as long as you're here, why not read more?

i agree, smedley [or, smokers totally saved our planet in 1983]

so this conversation happened [via text, so i have evidence and possibly so does the canadian government and the nsa].

dom and i were trying to settle our mutual nerves about tomorrow night's conversion screening, remembering that we've made a fine little film that people should see. which is just about exactly what dom had said when i responded thusly:

me :: i agree smedley. [pauses for a moment] did you get that here?

dom :: no?

me :: the aliens who were looking at earth and then decided it wasn't worth bothering with because people smoked even though it was bad for them?
come to think of it, that might mean that smokers prevented an alien invasion in the seventies.

dom :: what ?!?!?

me :: i've had wine and very little food. [pause] but the alien thing was real. [pause.] well, real on tv.

dom :: please eat something.

of course, i was wrong. the ad in question ran in 1983. this is the part where i would triumphantly embed the ad from youtube, except that the governmen…

making faces :: bette davis lips

the inscription on bette davis' grave reads "she did it the hard way", which should tell you something about the kind of life she led. indeed, she was known as a fighter, taking on studio executives at a time when that simply wasn't done, unless you "never wanted to work in this town again". even when she lost a legal battle against warner brothers that forced her to see out her contract, she was able to parlay her return to the screen into better roles that secured her legacy as one of the greatest icons of the screen. she was the first woman ever to garner ten nominations for best actress at the academy awards and the first woman ever to be president of the academy of motion picture arts and sciences [the people who give out the awards].

that bette davis ever became a movie star, let alone one of the biggest movie stars in the world, is kind of remarkable. after all, she wasn't conventionally beautiful, although her face was certainly unforgettable. …

making faces :: eyes without a face

these are indeed strange times, my friends. no one living has ever seen anything like this because there has never been anything close to the current set of circumstances in the modern world. sure, people will make the comparison with the spanish flu epidemic of 1918-20 but the fact is that things were very different then and those differences are not limited to the technology we now have available. that has an effect, of course, but consider the other factors: the world had just been through the most destructive war in its history. aside from the fact that millions had died, millions returned home injured in body and mind and there was little in the way of a social safety net to protect any of them. in many countries, "peace" was hardly peaceful because the political fallout of the great war plunged many nations into civil wars. so in that way, we're in a better position now because we don't have an entire generation of people walking around who are already severel…