NARS Kuala Lumpur Duo Eyeshadow Review & Swatches
Kuala Lumpur
NARS Kuala Lumpur Duo Eyeshadow (2018) ($35.00 for 0.08 oz.) includes a shimmery peach and a mid-tone, satiny plum. This particular duo could have been quite cohesive for a two-shade look, but the quality was lacking in both shades–just too dry and dusty to perform well on its own. It was somewhat better over eyeshadow primer but still not impressive even then.
Look Using this Product
Kuala Lumpur
PPermanent. $35.00.
Kuala Lumpur I
Kuala Lumpur I is a soft peach with warm undertones and a golden sheen. It had semi-sheer coverage, which did not build up that well as the texture was dusty and prone to sheering out. Applied over eyeshadow primer, the coverage improved to medium but was still hard to build up. It lasted for seven hours on me before fading noticeably.
FURTHER READING: Formula Overview for details on general performance and characteristics (like scent).
Top Dupes
- Wet 'n' Wild Fit for a Queen #2 (LE, ) is darker, brighter (95% similar).
- Chanel Melody (98) (P, $32.00) is more shimmery, darker, cooler (90% similar).
- MAC Forward March (LE, $23.00) is more shimmery, darker, warmer (90% similar).
- bareMinerals Debutante (LE, ) is darker, cooler (90% similar).
- Sephora Girl Talk (232) (P, $9.00) is more shimmery, darker (90% similar).
- Viseart Darling (LE, ) is more shimmery, darker (85% similar).
- Too Faced Rise and Shine (LE, $16.00) is more shimmery, darker, warmer (85% similar).
- Dior Sienna #1 (LE, ) is more shimmery, warmer (85% similar).
- Pretty Vulgar Chirp (PiP, ) is more shimmery, darker, cooler (85% similar).
- Chanel Jardins Eclatants #1 (LE, ) is more shimmery, darker, cooler (85% similar).
Formula Overview
$19.00/0.04 oz. - $475.00 Per Ounce
The formula is supposed to have "rich, high-impact color" that is "lightweight" and has "increased blendability." Like most larger ranges, there are winners and losers, and some of how they perform can be related to the type of finish. The mattes are soft, slightly dusty in the pans (or not at all) with medium to opaque, often buildable, color coverage. The satin and metallics tend to be smoother, more blendable, and more pigmented with less effort; NARS does the these lower shimmer finishes particularly well, which just looks "melted" on the skin as they lay down so smoothly and have a great shine.
Most shades applied better on my lid than swatched on my arm, which has been something seen across NARS' eyeshadows for years and didn't change with the recent update to their powder eyeshadow formula. On average, they lasted between seven and nine hours on me without primer. They did apply well over primer and stayed on well for 14 hours with minimal fading.
Worth noting: the updated formula and packaging resulted in a product decrease from 0.07 oz. per pan to 0.04 oz. The single eyeshadows received a more noticeable price drop (from $24 to $19) but the duo eyeshadows could be priced better (from $36 to $35).
Browse all of our NARS Eyeshadow (2018) swatches.
Look Using this Product
Kuala Lumpur I
PiPPermanent in Palette. $19.00.
Kuala Lumpur II
Kuala Lumpur II is a medium plum with strong, warm undertones and a satin sheen. The texture was rather dry with a firmness in the pan that made it harder to pick up product and harder to get the coverage to even out, especially along the edges. It had semi-opaque pigmentation but appeared substantially lighter applied than it did in the pan. It wore well for seven hours before there was noticeable fading.
FURTHER READING: Formula Overview for details on general performance and characteristics (like scent).
Top Dupes
- MAC Vacation Speed Zone (LE, $17.00) is more shimmery, darker (90% similar).
- Ciate Renegade (LE, ) is more shimmery, warmer (90% similar).
- Sephora Be Chic (329) (P, $9.00) is more shimmery, darker, warmer (90% similar).
- Tom Ford Beauty Soleil d'Ambre #4 (Eye Color) (LE, ) is more shimmery (90% similar).
- MAC Callisto (LE, $21.00) is more shimmery, lighter, cooler (85% similar).
- NARS China Seas #2 (DC, $25.00) is more shimmery, darker, cooler (85% similar).
- Gucci Beauty Autumn Fire #3 (DC, ) is more shimmery, darker, more pigmented (85% similar).
- Too Faced Temper Temper (LE, $16.00) is more shimmery, darker, more pigmented (85% similar).
- MAC Plummed (LE, $17.00) is more shimmery, darker, more pigmented (85% similar).
- Too Faced Berried Treasure (PiP, $16.00) is more shimmery, darker, brighter (85% similar).
Formula Overview
$19.00/0.04 oz. - $475.00 Per Ounce
The formula is supposed to have "rich, high-impact color" that is "lightweight" and has "increased blendability." Like most larger ranges, there are winners and losers, and some of how they perform can be related to the type of finish. The mattes are soft, slightly dusty in the pans (or not at all) with medium to opaque, often buildable, color coverage. The satin and metallics tend to be smoother, more blendable, and more pigmented with less effort; NARS does the these lower shimmer finishes particularly well, which just looks "melted" on the skin as they lay down so smoothly and have a great shine.
Most shades applied better on my lid than swatched on my arm, which has been something seen across NARS' eyeshadows for years and didn't change with the recent update to their powder eyeshadow formula. On average, they lasted between seven and nine hours on me without primer. They did apply well over primer and stayed on well for 14 hours with minimal fading.
Worth noting: the updated formula and packaging resulted in a product decrease from 0.07 oz. per pan to 0.04 oz. The single eyeshadows received a more noticeable price drop (from $24 to $19) but the duo eyeshadows could be priced better (from $36 to $35).
Browse all of our NARS Eyeshadow (2018) swatches.
Oh nars…. Why oh why did you break consistency in these duos…
I have the old duo and It is one of my allà time favourites. Sad todo see the new formula does not work well
Why am I not surprised. When they put this on the model in their video, I couldn’t even see it on camera. I was hoping that it would be creamier and have more visibility than its first incarnation.
Isn’t it crazy that they did a fabulous job on the not very exciting Portobello, yet totally dropped the ball on this more interesting color pairing? I don’t get it. Was hoping Kuala Lumpur would be better.
This is an average effort from NARS – two lovely shades that could have complemented each other very well for a quick look, but no – the pigmentation is just not there.
Thank you Christine for your review.
Pity. I had hope for this particular duo.
Of course, OF COURSE, the one duo that wouldn’t work HAD to be named after my city!
Too bad, I think this is a pretty color pairing. I don’t understand why NARS reformulated, if their eyeshadows are just as inconsistent as before.
This duo never really did it for me – just not my sort of colours (especially for a duo) but as I recall, even the original of this wasn’t very good and having just checked the ratings on Makeupalley, that recollection seems to have been accurate. So it seems with these duos, that those that were good the first time around are still pretty good and the mediocre ones continue to hover in the mediocre area.
I have the original one and I will say the pigmentation isn’t that strong, but I actually like that. The swatches don’t look any different on the new ones, from what I can tell.
What I’ve found makes THE most amazing look is to use MAC’s Rubenesque paint pot as a base and then the pinkish color as a lid color over the paint pot, followed by the purple as a light outer corner and crease color. It’s amazing! I get SO many compliments on it each time I wear this combo.
Something that I also really like is that it’s impossible to overdo.
Tati posted a video that NARS reformulated shadows were a must-have and the “best eye shadows of the year.” She did get a huge PR package, so maybe if you don’t have to shell out $17 a piece for them, yeah.
Hi Jenny,
I received all of the NARS eyeshadows as press samples as well. This is one duo out of over a dozen, and two shades out of 96? ish shades total – there are lots of winners in the range but definitely some misses! It’s also important to note that reviewers may hold products to different standards/expectations (like I don’t test with primer).