Filed under: Beauty
The NanoRevive beauty cream ad you see above isn’t real, but it could be. I’ve been poring through fashion and beauty magazines lately and studied ad claims found in many of the skin care products and found the following common elements:
- Scientific imagery such as DNA strands or chains of molecules are pictured swirling provocatively around the product. Nifty scientific terms such as nano, cellular and matrix give the impression the product was created by white-coat wearing Swiss scientists.
- Lots of flowers, preferably shown dappled with dew. Yes, you too can be fresh as a blossom on a Spring morn.
- Abundant use of words beginning with the letter R - regenerate, renew, refresh, revitalize, reduced, restore, resculpt, replenish, restructure, radiant, etc.
- Patent-pending “exclusive formulas” with silly names like Pro-Xylane, Matrixl 3000, Survival Molecules, Nannochloropsis oculata, (and no I did not make those up).
- An unflattering, poorly lit before photo placed next to a fresh, brightened and obviously photoshopped after photo.
I couldn’t help but laugh at some of the ingredients many of these creams claimed would “turn back the clock”. One product promised obsidian (common volcanic glass) “discovered on the legendary island of Pantelleria” would regenerate, restore and revitalize skin’s natural beauty. Hmm, I wonder if they’ll give me a refund on the $400 they charge for it. Medium: photoshop composite.
Posted by 14 ♦ February 28, 2008
At 11:54 am Claire said:
We’re one step away from injecting the sweat of the young:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=xZ9kBQrZXOI
February 28, 2008
At 12:18 pm D Slaver said:
Virgin baby fat injections all the way, darlings.
February 28, 2008
At 1:03 pm Blurgle said:
The difference between these $400 miracle creams and Keri Lotion is often nothing but fragrance. Oh, and the ‘miracle product’, which is often present in such small amounts that even a homeopath would be skeptical. The skin cream (was it Lancome?) that supposedly contained gold had on average five molecules per jar.
I don’t know what’s worse - the junk they try to sell us or the bill of goods they try to sell us about it. You don’t need moisturizer, ever, unless your skin is actually dry (and in fact using it when you don’t need it can cause flaking that looks like dryness, which I suspect makes people buy more), but every single makeup feature tells us to moisturize, moisturize, moisturize. What a waste of good money!
February 28, 2008
At 1:08 pm Thorne Smith said:
I think some of these beauty ads are hilarious. The before picture on one side is almost always an unwrapped mummy, while the other displays a supple, young thing with skin as smooth as new china.
Photoshop in a can provides the “beer-goggles” experience for us teetotalers in the group!
February 28, 2008
At 1:12 pm 14 said:
I use vitamin E oil and lots of sunscreen. The results - no one ever believes me when I tell them how old I am. I’ve been known to score free samples of La Mer at Saks though. Why pay $1200 when you can always go back and get samples at no cost? Sure, you have to listen to a bunch of hot air about how La Mer was created by NASA scientists, but it can be amusing to watch the salesperson robotically relay the story.
February 28, 2008
At 1:37 pm jeanne said:
You forgot “re-densified” from Diane Keaton’s Olay commercials. WTF - it’s not even a word! One more example of the contempt skin care manufacturers have for women. “We’ll blind them with [non-existent] science!”
It’s all BOLLOCKS.
February 28, 2008
At 1:45 pm Jane said:
Use mayonnaise, and them remove it with a slice of bread, add some cheese and lettuce, and voila, a sandwich. Your skin looks young and fresh, and you have enjoyed a nice sandwich.
February 28, 2008
At 2:11 pm Dr. L said:
Laughing all the way, Jane!
February 28, 2008
At 2:35 pm Internet Marketing Badger - Jennifer said:
14 — you HAVE to give us an illustration of “Nannochloropsis oculata.” I can just picture it emerging as some bizarro animalistic quasi-being, lit beautifully with your usual subtle shadings!
Jennifer aka “Internet Marketing Badger”
February 28, 2008
At 3:13 pm Adam Smith said:
Steven Hawkings once conjectured,that if you put Tachyons
(theoretical elementary particles that travel back in time)
into a face cream,rejuvenation would ensue.Early tests were very successful,with the initial test subjects looking up to fifteen years younger.The research had to be abandoned though,when the overzealous application of “Age Away” on one group ended up with them having giant baby heads.
Write that shit up slightly differently and the Beauty Industry would try to market it.
What we have here are examples of what Philosophers call spurious rigour.
Wrap it up with a bunch of pseudo-scientific nonsense,then watch the marks,sorry consumers,lap it up in order to be better than the next idiot,who obviously is an idiot because they can’t comprehend the marvels that these
Techno-Mages can give us.
The best one I ever read,was the claim made for a cereal brand,that eating that brand would make you twenty five percent more alert.
By what measure?
Who thinks crap like that up?
Their geniuses.
Though not in the way they would imagine.
February 28, 2008
At 3:28 pm DeAnna said:
i love disclaimmer. i too shall use with a photoediting program of choice in order to achieve the best results. i typically use the cheap salsa sauce in the jar myself. i gently apply that to the forehead and cheek area then drizzle nacho pieces on my face, wait a few minutes scrape of with a spoon into a serving dish and layout for guests. totally multipurpose and the dip is always a hit.
February 28, 2008
At 4:22 pm CPTWilly said:
Just you wait and see, 14, Fecal Facials will be ALL the rage in 2010.
February 28, 2008
At 5:12 pm Eize said:
CptWilly - I won’t be there when it’s unleashed.
Try pork. You’ll never get old, because the clogged arteries will kill you first.
February 28, 2008
At 5:21 pm trackellalouise said:
Excellent post. My favorite nowadays is a cellulite cream ad…the before picture is so obviously fake, it’s hilarious! I often wonder how these companies are allowed to advertise products that can’t possibly live up to their claims.
February 28, 2008
At 6:43 pm Demon Kitty said:
Ya’ know, earlier I read a news headline on Yahoo that they found anti-aging chemicals or some liquid in frogs. I can’t help but think about the episode of Nip/Tuck, where the women were putting jizzum on their faces to look younger.
If headlines came out saying that cow shit would reverse the aging process, you can bet that all of Hollywood and whoever would be shoving their faces in cow patties.
February 28, 2008
At 9:48 pm Jenn F. said:
“At 3:13 pm Adam Smith said:
Steven Hawkings once conjectured,that if you put Tachyons
(theoretical elementary particles that travel back in time)
into a face cream,rejuvenation would ensue.Early tests were very successful,with the initial test subjects looking up to fifteen years younger.The research had to be abandoned though,when the overzealous application of “Age Away” on one group ended up with them having giant baby heads.”
Adam, you are one of my favourite persons on the planet. You are so fucking funny.
February 28, 2008
At 5:46 am michal she said:
CPTWILLY- Fecal Facials are sooooo ancient Egytian…but I suppose they could make a comeback. They rubbed ointments with human crap into their skin lesions.
14- you do look young. I like the essential oils- Vit E of course, use Jojoba oil and lavender oil, and I got the above results.
February 29, 2008
At 6:02 am Bee Hind said:
I like the weight loss pill ads that show a before and after photo,
where it’s obvious that the ‘before’ picture was distorted in Photoshop to make the model a foot wider and a foot shorter.
February 29, 2008
At 7:48 am MMB said:
I don’t believe that all face creams are created equal. I used to work for the Estee Lauder Company, and I have gotten to try MANY MANY different brands and companies. And I also don’t think that the price determines all. Sunscreen is probably the most important thing–even in the winter–and NO TANNING. But Clinique was always my favorite of all of our brands–because the lack of frangrance makes a diff. for my sensitive skin. But Clarins is also wonderful (though it was not our company, I had a close friend who worked for them, and their products really produce results). Just my take!
February 29, 2008