In the last post on my latest great discovery of Poundland 'everything for a quid' make up, I said I would come back and update it with the results of my eyeshadow testing. Then I remembered I had also bought a mascara there as well (doh!!), so I figured that my verdict on two products might merit a post of its own.
So yes, I have tested both eyeshadows now, on consecutive days, and having tried them on skin can give a more accurate description of their colour. The brown one, Mocha 8, isn't like any of the shades in the original NAKED palette when actually applied. Yes, it comes up quite bronze in tone, and reminds me very much of a MAC pot I used to own called Sable.
|Despite appearances, I am not reviewing the phone|
It is not too metallic-looking to be age-inappropriate (a worrying topic to which I plan to devote a whole post sometime!), and unlike the blusher, does not suffer so dramatically from the fall-out problem, though there is still a bit, if I am honest. That is my only quibble really - it's a good colour, stays put on my lids without primer (an adjunct to eyeshadow of which I am but dimly aware), and did I say it only cost a quid? Yes indeedy! Inquiring minds may also be wondering whatever happened to Mochas 1-7, but I am afraid I have no information on that.
|Yes, that is an upside down map of the Czech Republic|
So that was the brown eyeshadow, and then I tried the mauve one, Vintage Rose 6. I have long been on a quest to find a pink eyeshadow that might complement my hazel eyes without making me look like a hungover hamster, and so far I have only managed to find a good choice in mauve - MAC Shale. In the pan I thought the two looked quite similar, but on skin the difference is more marked. For Vintage Rose 6 comes up a very vivid pinky colour on my skin, veering to magenta(!), and looking like a hungover hamster would have been a distinct improvement. No, I looked much more like I've been in a fight, and not come off very well. I couldn't bear the sight of myself and promptly slapped some NAKED Dark Horse over the top - a darkish browny taupe I wouldn't normally wear on its own, as it is a bit too dark for my small, shallowly set eyes. Applied on top of this violent pinky mauve, however, I believe I created a new colour that - though I say it myself - was very sophisticated and could perhaps be mistaken for one of those wonderfully subtle shades from Dior or Chanel. I still looked like I'd been in a fight, mind, but in a sort of cool Goth kind of a way. I preferred the effect to Shale on its own in fact, because of the sheen factor again. I might also mention that the Vintage Rose 6 did not have much fall out, so maybe it is the luck of the draw there and YMMV too.
I also bought a mascara, as I say. Turns out it is the black volumising one, NOT the red lengthening one, though the choice was purely arbitrary on my part. From reading other reviews on the Net, it seems I picked the better of the two, and I must say I am beyond delighted with the mascara - I feel as strongly about it as the lipsticks in fact. I have tried dozens of mascaras in my time, and many of them - even high end brands like Chanel and Clarins - can be annoyingly clumpy right from the off. Then one brand I had been very pleased with until recently was Benefit 'They're Real!', precisedly because it didn't do that claggy thing, but lifted and separated the eyelashes in a startlingly natural and impressive way. I have been disappointed with my latest Benefit purchase - possibly a dodgy batch, I don't know - because it is as clumpy as the worst of the rest, and I may have to chuck it.
Enter Poundland mascara, which pretty much does what the Benefit one does - there isn't a whole lot of product on the wand when you take it out - a bit like a mascara you have owned for a while, say! - but it delivers just the right amount with zero mess and good separation and lengthening of lashes. Even if the whole thing ends up not lasting very long - because they haven't put much actual mascara in it in the first place - I would happily rebuy on a frequent basis, which is, after all, what we are encouraged to do for hygiene reasons, not that I have historically paid a blind bit of attention to that.
Also well worth a look is this photo of two (non-identical) twins of a certain age, one of whom is made up with Poundland cosmetics valued at £10 the lot, while the other is sporting £400's worth of high end slap! For copyright reasons, I shall just post a link to the whole article rather than the photo itself. Now I can actually tell which is which, but the difference is not worth £390, that's for sure. Think how many hero serums etc I could buy with what I'd saved...;)
|Me, attempting to show off the mascara while looking like a loon|