Friday, January 20, 2012

Chanel Le Vernis in June review, swatch and rant

Chanel polishes are a cruel mistress. They look so alluring in their neat little bottle, so glossy, so pretty, so different. But as soon as I try to slick them on, they turn on me, pointing out all my nail insecurities,  shimmer glinting sacastically. "You have manky cuticles!" they snigger. "There's weird ridges everywhere! How do you even get polish in your ear, you klutz?!" They pick up on every bump and dip on my poor nails and cling to them in the most unflattering way possible. Then being their bad smudgey selves, they refuse to dry, leave bald patches even after three coats and chip more than the Gobbledegook (bonus points if you were scared of that thing). Admitedly I'm not the sharpest crayon in the cookie jar with nailpolish, and my handiwork is shaky, but I think Chanel needs to work on their thin formulas and match performance to the otherwise fab in-the-bottle palettes.
Ignore the scrungy nails, just look at what technically should be a good colour

I wanted to love June so hard, but June didn't love me. It's a creamy orange, quite sheer and surprisingly without much of that shimmer previous Chanel pastels have boasted. Sucks to pay $39 for a shade that honestly was done better by Sportsgirl last year. I've been wearing it for less than 24 hours and it's worn off the tips and edges.

The only thing keeping my faith in the Le Vernis line is the amazing Black Pearl, Graphite, Dragon and my favourite, Peridot shades, all dark and some metallic. I'll be avoiding pale colours from the interlocked Cs from now on, after the disappointing June and earlier, Mimosa (flooded my cuticles, zero staying-power) and Minstrel (boring shade and streaky). I love everything else you do, Chanel, so why can't you get this right? Don't make me set Tom Ford on you!

7 comments:

  1. Oh I am never sure about the application of Chanel polishes so have hesitated to buy them. The metallics do seem to get better reviews though, so I might go for them instead. Sportsgirl polishes rock ;P

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I love me some Sportsgirl polish too. Chanel excel at metallics, but I wouldn't waste that much on their lighter shades.

      Delete
  2. i picked up all 3 spring 2012 edition Chanel polishes... lol... I want them to work for me so bad. I'm not so much worried about staying power because after day 2 I'm already itching to change the shade... but the formula can be a bummer sometimes.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What did you think of the other shades? I thought about April (good winter shade,no?), but wanted to see if the formula had improved first.

      Delete
  3. I'm glad you posted about this, now it's confirmed that I won't be purchasing Chanel polish anytime soon! I have enough trouble getting polish from cheapo brands to go on smoothly and stay looking perfect for longer than a day, so I would be really bummed if I'd paid that much and it did the same thing :(

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's a shame given the exxy cost, right? Peridot was a unique shade that I'm happy to splurge on, but I think Rimmel or Revlon have much better formulas for lighter shades like June, especially with Sally Hansen's base/top coats.

      Delete
  4. I had no idea Chanel bottles sniggered... rather classless of them!

    I have to agree that Chanel's pale shades have terrible formula. I went very slowly and patiently with this one, sort of expecting that. Chanel's precision in colour doesn't always translate to quality of product, unfortunately. Still, I think the colour looks lovely on you and better try next time with a good base/top coat? :)

    ReplyDelete

Got a brain bubble? Pop it here. I try to reply to every comment (except for the super spammy ones) and am happy to answer any questions.