Our piece yesterday on L'Oreal giving Rachel Weisz a intensive age-defying makeover prompted several readers to point us in the direction of this remarkable product: Superb. We contacted Jesse Rosten to see if he'd be marketing his miracle lotion on this side of the Pond, where pockets aren't as deep as James Bond's missus and …
Set the reality forcefield to maxiumum warp!
In that ad, I think the flushed, freckled girl on the left is prettier than the plasticised one on the right. Anyone else?
Call me brainwashed, but sorry, no.
Pretty either way, but different
But the real one on the left looks more real, and the one of the right I wouldn't look at twice because its too fake. But truthfully, I suspect that probably varies from person to person, like all other attractiveness related things.
On a purely aesthetic perspective I find the 'before' more attractive. That, however, is a moot point as the make up wearing part of the population aren't doing it for me. They are doing for the women who put them down at every available opportunity and the flirty comments being over made up attracts.
I also find the adverts that say hair should be 'shiny' a bit annoying I think it looks like barbie doll nylon hair.
you're all wrong
they're both not pretty.
now i am going back to my troll cave to resume trolling.
Model size reduction
That was great. Better than some things that I've paid to watch!
I also like this video I should've posted this the other day when there was the other fotoshop article: Youtube
lol. nice vid!
What about the 11th sign of aging?
If you take a look at the actual copy in those ads, it's remarkable how little they say - and how demonstrably and obviously false what they *do* say is. I'm really not sure how they get away with it, given that, say, ISPs get bonked on the head for showing misleading speed ratings. If they were as blatant as cosmetics companies, they'd be saying you could travel through the line yourself and meet your friends on the other side.
pro-pixel intensifying fauxtanical hydro-jargon microbead extract
(featuring nutritive volumizing technology)
That was my favourite bit !
To the sceptics
You really should not underestimate the significant rejuvenating effects that can be achieved by the regular application of fauxtanical hydro-jargon.
US doesn't enforce thruth in advertising
@David W., I guessed from the article that this was being marketed in the US given the statement wondering if it'll make it to his side of the pond or not.
False advertising is nominally illegal here but it's not enforced. I think the FTC relies on customers filing complaints before they do a thing, and customers here have gotten used to ads straying further and further from the truth so they simply don't file. You've got ads claiming "3x more" when they mean "3x as much", you've got ads saying "20mbps" when they can't provide the speeds, you've got ads with some truck literally skiing down the side of a mountain and doing backflips (not even a blown shock!)*, continuing ads for mobile broadband showing people watching movie after movie, when the carriers have gone from unlimited data to cripplingly low data caps (they don't mention watching that movie would cost at least $20!), it's normal now for companies to list "$20 a month for 6 months", without even listing *in the small print* what the real price will be. The Enzyte guy (Enzyte is an alleged wang-enhancement pill) was thrown in jail for fraud, but he wasn't required to pull his ads so they are still airing like a year later!
That said, I've never heard of this product.
*The joke of it is, the "realistic" truck or SUV ads will claim how rugged it is, while showing them driving down the nicest, smoothest bit of manicured sand or gravel I've ever seen, you could seriously drive down them in a golf cart.
Or for an excuse to look at porn...
Feel free to google "zoo real girls red pen" (without quotes) to see what lengths a certain jazz-mag will go to to solve the problem that a topless model has big tits. No, seriously, that is a problem nowdays.