Skip to main content

Jennifer Lawrence's Makeup-Free Look Was a Big Mistake

ll right. I'm gonna be brutally honest, here. After seeing Jennifer Lawrence's barely there makeup at the premiere of The Great Gatsby -- I really think choosing to go so light on the eyeliner and eye shadow this time around was a bad idea.

Yes, I know she's young and fresh-faced and has a natural vibe going on and doesn't need a whole lot of makeup to look good. But in this case, especially given the formality of the event, she probably should've gone a bit heavier on the cosmetics.

And I'll tell you why.

Jen is gorgeous, but she also has a baby-faced appearance, so when she doesn't play up her eyes, she looks much younger than she actually is. Granted, for 30- and 40-somethings, this is generally a good thing. But in her case, at 22, she actually looks more like 15 when she chooses to go the minimal makeup (or makeup-free) route. She looks so much less sophisticated -- like she really didn't put any sort of effort in at all.

Here's a photo of the smoky-eyed look she usually wears.


So much better, right?

I know putting on makeup can be a chore, and there are days when I definitely wish I didn't have to do it. But as a general rule of thumb, unless I'm headed to the beach or gym -- I never, EVER leave the house without makeup, in particular eye makeup.

Whenever I don't have it on, I look tired, washed-out, and downright plain-Jane. Even if I only have time to dab on a little mascara -- that's better than going out in public wearing nothing at all on my eyes.

Think about it for a second -- what's the first thing you look at when you go to talk to someone? Their eyes, right? And Jennifer's eyes are the first thing I noticed when I saw the pics of her at that premiere, and they jumped out immediately, though not in a good way.

She's such a beautiful girl, and she does the whole smoky-eye thing SO well. She really ought to stick to that look in the future instead of downplaying her features so much. Even if she wears the same eye makeup over and over again, sticking with what works is sometimes a better option than venturing so far off-course.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Fear of no cellphone: 9 out of 10 suffering from 'nomophobia'

Nine out of every 10 people aged under 30 admit to suffering the new age phenomenon of "nomophobia", the fear of having no mobile phone, a survey says. Telecom giant Cisco, in a survey conducted on 3800 people in Australia, found nine out of 10 in the group aged under 30 were addicted to their smartphones and became anxious when their phone went missing, the 'Courier Mail' reported. "It's happening subconsciously, and one out of five people are texting while they're driving," Cisco chief technology officer Kevin Bloch said yesterday. "It just speaks to these addictive, compulsive, behaviours that we're seeing." "For many under-30s, the smartphone has become an extension of themselves, from the moment they wake up until the second they fall asleep," said Bloch. "This love affair with the smartphone is both enabling and crippling at the same time," Dr Michael Carr-Gregg, official adviser to the Queensland Government on...

Peter Pan generation and you!

It’s called the generation that refuses to grow up—preferring to remain unmarried, childless, living with the parents, with a lifestyle of endless socialising. Are you part of the phenomenon? You’re 35 and living with your parents/in-laws, because: a.    There’s someone to have a hot meal ready on the table when you get home from work, and monitor the maid when you leave in the mornings. b.    There’s no way you can afford a house loan and still maintain your lifestyle of alternate nights out and yearly international holidays. c.    Your parents are dependent on you to manage the expenses of the home and you come home to a comfortable, clean apartment with food in the refrigerator, which you haven’t had to worry about. It’s a mutually beneficial situation. You’re 32, have been married five years, but kids aren’t on the cards. a.    Kids mean responsibility and you can’t stand the idea of 3 am feedings and your kids’ exams putt...

For first time, stem cells are produced from cloning technique

For the first time, scientists have created human embryos that are genetic copies of living people and used them to make stem cells — a feat that paves the way for treating a range of diseases with personalized body tissues but also ignites fears of human cloning. If replicated in other labs, the methods detailed Wednesday in the journal Cell would allow researchers to fashion human embryonic stem cells that are custom-made for patients with Alzheimer's disease, diabetes and other health problems. Theoretically capable of reproducing themselves indefinitely, these stem cells could be used to grow replacements for a wide variety of diseased cells — those of the blood, skin, heart, brain, muscles, nerves and more — that would not risk rejection by the patient's immune system. The report also raises the specter that, with a high-quality donor egg, a bit of skin, some careful tending in a lab and the womb of a willing surrogate, humans have cracked the biological secret to reprodu...