Photo: Temptalia
Lorac has released a new, limited edition pro palette, entitled I Love Brunch.
And I won't be buying.
To be petty, I really don't like the name of this palette. I think the idea behind a brunch-themed palette can be potentially interesting in theory, especially if the marketing hook is that it's a palette to wear to brunch. (I don't know what most people wear to brunch as I don't know much about brunch culture, but I certainly wouldn't think that would be a pastel palette. I would think it would be a really basic, effortless palette.) But calling this palette "I Love Brunch" feels really juvenile to me and like Lorac is taking a page out of Too Faced's gimmicky playbook.
Apart from the shadow names, which aren't my favorite (I know everyone is just clamoring to tell people their eyeshadow is called "Gluten Free"), I don't really understand the theme in relation to the colors. A more appropriate name for this palette would be "Easter basket" or "Sidewalk Chalk."
Seeing this palette actually made me channel my inner Miranda from The Devil Wears Prada.
"Pastels for spring? Groundbreaking."
In all seriousness, I think it's great that brands are branching out from the same tired neutral aesthetic, but this palette feels really disjointed and confused to me. I think it would be challenging to create several diverse and complete looks with it, and I don't have an easy time seeing the cohesion.
This palette reminds me a lot of the Sephora and Pantone Universe Modern Watercolors palette:
Photo: Temptalia
And of course reminds me of the newly released Kat Von D Pastel Goth:
Photo: Temptalia
I have an entire blog post on why I was not going to buy Pastel Goth. And I stand by a lot of the comments I made in that post. But for the first time ever, I bought a palette I declared that I wasn't going to buy.
In short, I bought Pastel Goth for the lone reason that Kat Von D made an Instagram post that said:
"#NotMyPresident
#NoMiPresidente"
It was the day after the Women's March, and I was still in DC. I saw that Kat made that post, and as I was swelling with pride, I read countless disgusting comments on her page from people swearing that they would never again buy any of her products.
So, I bought Pastel Goth. I very much respect the courage it takes to put yourself and your business on the line to stand up for what you know is right. And since so many were declaring to boycott her, I showed my support and bought her newest release.
With that said, I now have this palette full of pastel colors. And I have to say that while I know brands plan new releases very far in advance, I can't help but wonder if Lorac released this as a response to Pastel Goth. Kat Von D famously teases product releases a ridiculous amount of time in advance, so it was on everyone's radar that her brand was coming out with a pastel palette. But then, there's always the argument of:
"Pastels for spring? Groundbreaking."
In thinking of a pastel palette as a companion palette, I think Pastel Goth is the winner. The I Love Brunch palette seems like it wants to be a complete palette, but when I look at it, I see a companion palette at best. But then I also don't think most people will find an everyday use for a ton of pastel shadows. Yes, it's certainly fun to play with pastels, but I can't see most people wanting a full pastel shadow look as their "everyday look." And because of this, I think it makes a lot more sense for people who really want to try some pastel shadows to just buy a few select singles.
I know we all get sucked into the idea of value in palettes, but there is not a lot of value in I Love Brunch. It is $44 for 0.48 ounces of product. In comparison, Pastel Goth (which is arguably of superior quality) is $38 for the same amount of product. The difference is that Pastel Goth contains eight shadows and I Love Brunch has 16. One can make the argument that I Love Brunch is more expensive because it has more shadows, but each shadow is half the size of ones in Pastel Goth.
From what I have seen, the shadows in I Love Brunch are not great quality. They are marketed as the Lorac "Pro" formula, but I don't know if that's the original Pro formula or the reformulated one used in the Pro 3 that is pretty widely acknowledged as inferior. Since I Love Brunch has 16 shadows, it really perpetuates this fallacy that it holds this tremendous value, but several shadows are similar to others in the palette, and I personally think the amount is overkill. I highly doubt that the targeted audience for this palette will find regular use for all 16 shadows.
And that brings me to my last point, which is, who is the audience for this palette? The obvious answer is brunch pastel lovers, but then that begs the question of why this one Pro palette jumps the shark from all others. Lorac Pro palettes are known for their stripped down aesthetic since they are marketed as "professional" palettes. As in, they are palettes for working makeup artists. Shade names in the permanent Pro palettes are very basic, like, "Deep purple," "Slate," "Mauve," and "Light Gold." So coming out with a "Pro" palette called "I Love Brunch" with names like "Gluten Free" (cringe), "Avocado Toast," "Pancakes," "Hot Sauce," "Valet" (in the context of a "brunch" palette, cringe), and "Eggs Benny" (again, cringe) doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Instead of coming out with a quality pastel palette and letting the shadows speak for themselves, Lorac has jumped on the Too Faced train (perhaps in anticipation of a buyout?) and made a subpar quality product with a theme meant to draw in people who love brunch and can't resist the hype of a gimmick.
I had brunch this morning in New York City. And do you know what makeup I wore? Nothing! Because I had just gotten up, it was sleeting, and I was hungry and didn't want to wait an additional half hour so that I could apply my themed pastel eyeshadows. It's cheap, it's gimmicky, and it doesn't impress me. And I won't be buying.
