Monday, March 7, 2011

Bottom Lash Mascara

Really Lex? Bottom lash mascara? Seriously?

Yes, I am. Please meet Clinique's Bottom Lash Mascara:

It's roughly 4 inches long and the brush itself is tiny - perfect for delicate bottom lashes.
It's also supposed to be long wearing so I guess that would mean it should be water repellant and sweat proof. I guess I'll have to sit through a spin class with this on to really test that theory.
Clinique Bottom Lash Mascara to your right - DiorShow/Iconic Deluxe Sample to your left for size comparison. Also note the Diorshow Iconic sample contains 4ml/.013 oz whereas the Clinique Bottom Lash mascara contains 2ml/.07 oz.

Here's a wand size comparison - Clinique's is closest to you but I know you were smart enough to figure that one out.
Did I also mention it costs $10? Well think of it this way - this is a better buy than seeing the movie Hall Pass (my sister told me that it was horrible movie).

Here it is on a rather bare eye:

It is very subtle and it did pull my inner lashes upward nicely.

And here's just a bare, boring eye:

Yeah not much to say there.

Just to be on the safe side, I did blot the wand just a little to really control the amount going on my lashes. I did like the definition it gave me and I didn't get an intense Twiggy like effect:

That is a pretty fabulous picture of her though, isn't it?

Am I going to tell you to run out and buy this? Not really?

Is it a fail? No, not really.

I'm feeling pretty meh about this - it's really your choice. If you love to have that bottom lash definition - then by all means pick this up. If you like your bottom lashes bare or you are comfortable using a regular sized mascara wand then save your $10


  1. Awww its so cute and little. Perhaps it would be better as a doubled ended mascara with a normal side brush at the other end? on its own it is a wee bit unnecessary! :)

  2. Hi Rachael,
    I agree - I still don't know where I stand on this thing. It's a bit of an unnecessary indulgence, right?