Tuesday, May 12, 2009

Review: Gosh Darling Lipstick

If you follow the youtuber Laura or "lollipop26"(http://www.youtube.com/lollipop26), whom incidentally is one of my fave youtuber, you will know that she gushes about a particular lipstick endlessly. The lipstick in question is, of course, Darling.

I have to completely honest, I have an attitude towards drug store makeup. I found them generally inferior in quality when compared to high-end products. Plus, their packagings are generally cheap-looking, not something I would want to take out in public. (Sorry, I am a snob) And I found that drug-store lipstick often has that overwhelming old-lady smell that I cannot stnad.

But when I saw Laura's video about this lipstick, I was intrigued. I have actually used some Gosh products before. In fact, I love their Effect powders so much that I have most of the colours available. However buying drugstore lipstick is quite another story.

So I decided to swing by my local SDM for have a look. And I have to say I am pleasantly surprised. This lipstick is what I expected MAC Creme De Nude to be: creamy, pigmented, wearable pale nude. The texture is what I expected the MAC Cremesheen to be: smooth, pigment, quietly glossy. It doesn't have the peachy understone of MAC CdN, which is good news for me as I perfer my nudes without it.

While it still requires sheering out around the edges for me (as I have very very pigmented lips), the effect is, dare I say it, better than MAC CdN. Sexy, pale lips that would look great with smokey eyes.

Price wise, it's actually surprising expensive for a drugstore product. At $15CDN per tube, it's only cheaper than MAC lipstick by $1.5CDN. I was quite shocked to find out how pricy these were. But bear in mind that SDM often has the Gosh line on sale. So you can certainly find it cheaper if you are patient. (Alas, another quality I lack...)

Overall, I would give this lipstick 4/5. It's an excellent lipstick. But it's not something I can just throw on and look good in - it does require some work.

No comments: