We like Hilary Rhoda as the face of Estee Lauder, but her new ads with Carolyn Murphy strike us as lacking.
Why?
Because Hilary and Carolyn are twelve years apart (she’s 20, Carolyn is 32). And yet, they look exactly the same – the matte skin, the cloudy expression, the plasticine smile.
It’s true that makeup should bring out your best, but we’re not sure women in their 30s want to look like a blank slate… and we are sure that women in their 20s don’t want to look like they’re 32.
We can see the advantages in smoothing out your youth – for job interviews, for court hearings, for dates with 40-year-old hedge funders.
But we’re still a little confused -
Shouldn’t Hilary and Carolyn’s ads show the different kinds of beauty that Estee can help you find, and not just… shiny skin?
Tags: Carolyn Murphy, Hilary Rhoda
Most Popular Stories
Comments [8]
Leave a comment
Popular Stories
The 10 Best YouTube Hair Tutorials
The 10 Best YouTube Makeup Tutorials 
Fashion's Most Stylish Guys Give Mark Zuckerberg an (Almost!) Hoodie-Free Makeover for Facebook's IPO
The Best Photobombs From the 2012 Met Gala
one looks like a horse and one looks like a duck. there are some differences..
My comment is somewhat unrelated but I think Hilary Rhoda looks like a horse. I’m glad she was absent from the runways this season.
yeah but hillary rhoda already looks like a wholesome-mother-in-the-making! ala Katie Holmes.
Hmmmm interesting. I think the trouble with this and other makeup ads is the photoshopped fine tuning that takes place and not so much with looking one’s age.
The excessive airbrushing that occurs in these ads is ridiculous to the point of making the women look un-human. No makeup on the planet is capable of those results and frankly, who would want to look like an android? I have the same issue with mascara ads that promise super length and fullness when it’s patently obvious the model is wearing false lashes in the ad.
This advertising trickery has little to do with age per se and everything to do with unattainable ideals.
With respect to the age issue there isn’t enough of a difference in the appearance of women in their 20′s versus women in their 30′s to make an argument for segregated or age specific advertising. When you consider lifestyle choices, genetics, diet and other factors these two decades can be very difficult to distinguish from one another on the basis of appearance.
Perhaps if we were discussing 20 year olds versus 50 year olds the age-based argument would have more appeal.
I agree and am not the biggest fan of these current ads, both women look too vacant for me. But regardless I still am a HUGE Hilary fan. I just feel like she is so normal and relatable. She went to high school with a friend of mine and was just a normal teenager from the suburbs. I think she’s gorgeous.
I’m pretty sure Carolyn is 34. She said in a Vogue article last year, the one with Evangelista on the cover, that she was 33. Just sayin. Hilary always looks ih er 30s
For the record, if you’re a 20-something, don’t bother making yourself look older for a date with a 40 year old hedge funder. If anything, he’ll find you less attractive.
Hilary’s gorgeous, but she really reminds me of this girl at my school. Carolyn’s picture does look kinda like a duck.