Charlotte Tilbury Chocolate Veil & Diffused Black Matte Eyes to Mesmerise Reviews & Swatches
Chocolate Veil
Charlotte Tilbury Chocolate Veil Matte Eyes to Mesmerise ($34.00 for 0.17 oz.) is a medium-dark brown with warmer, more golden undertones and a matte finish. The texture was firm, dry, and stiff to work with, and it was a challenge to get product to pick up on a brush without realy pushing and digging at the surface. For example, an angled eyeliner brush has a stiffer brush head, so I was able to push it into the surface and dig deep to get product but flatter or fluffier brushes did not do that as well.
It dried almost instantly, which made it even harder to blend, as the texture itself did not lend itself to blending, let alone building, as the product dragged and pulled at eyelids whether I used fingertips or a brush to attempt to apply. The product applied unevenly, would not diffuse or blend around the edges, and effectively looked a mess for the entirety of its wear. If I tried to layer and build up coverage, I had flaking after eight hours of wear.
FURTHER READING: Formula Overview for details on general performance and characteristics (like scent).
Top Dupes
- Lisa Eldridge Turbulence (P, $16.00) is more shimmery, lighter, cooler (90% similar).
- Fenty Beauty Nudy Booty (PiP, ) is lighter, warmer (90% similar).
- Urban Decay Drip (PiP, $19.00) is lighter, warmer (90% similar).
- ColourPop Craft (PiP, $4.50) is lighter, warmer (85% similar).
- Marc Jacobs Beauty Daddi-O (P, $29.00) is lighter, warmer (85% similar).
- Clarins Brown Sugar #4 (PiP, ) is lighter (85% similar).
- Pat McGrath Taboo (PiP, $25.00) is lighter, warmer (85% similar).
- Too Faced Cream Puff (LE, $16.00) is lighter, warmer (80% similar).
- Marc Jacobs Beauty That's Why (PiP, ) is lighter, warmer (80% similar).
- Bad Habit Luna (PiP, ) is lighter, warmer (80% similar).
Formula Overview
$34.00/0.17 oz. - $200.00 Per Ounce
The brand said that the formula combined the "long-lasting, smoothing powers of [their] iconic Eyes to Mesmerise cream shadows" with a matte formula that is supposed to be "long-lasting" and easy to "build, blend, and wear." They actually specifically out that it should feel "smooth" to the touch and "doesn't drag the skin on the eye lid."
It's an incredibly dry, draggy formula that feels more like an old cream eyeshadow that's dried out and is on its last legs of usefulness. It was really quite at odds with how shiny/glossy the product looked in the pots, but if you looked closely at the center of each, you could see faint cracks that alluded to it being a drier product.
The texture was dry, thick, and quick to dry down, which was a recipe for uneven application that did not blend, did not build (layering was atrocious!), and really only was feasible to use as an eyeliner where sharper, precise motions were desired and no blending was wanted, but it still lacked the fluidity ideal for working around the curvature of the eye area.
I tried using fingertips and different brushes to apply, and for something all over, using a fluffy brush and diffusing during the initial application yielded less awful results but ultimately, still disappointing. They are nothing like the original Eyes to Mesmerise shades!
I found that they didn't crease or fade, but they were more prone to flaking as an eyeshadow, so the wear was more like seven to nine hours.
Browse all of our Charlotte Tilbury Matte Eyes to Mesmerise swatches.
Ingredients
ISODODECANE, CERA CARNAUBA/COPERNICIA CERIFERA (CARNAUBA) WAX/CIRE DE CARNAUBA, ETHYLENE/PROPYLENE COPOLYMER, DIMETHICONE, TRIMETHYLSILOXYSILICATE, HYDROGENATED POLYCYCLOPENTADIENE, MICA, COCO-CAPRYLATE/CAPRATE, STEAROYL INULIN, DEXTRIN PALMITATE, METHICONE, LAUROYL LYSINE, ALOE BARBADENSIS (ALOE VERA) LEAF JUICE, RICINUS COMMUNIS (CASTOR) SEED OIL, SODIUM HYALURONATE, HYDROGENATED CASTOR OIL, LAVANDULA STOECHAS EXTRACT, CITRIC ACID, SODIUM BENZOATE, POTASSIUM SORBATE, [+/- TITANIUM DIOXIDE (CI 77891), IRON OXIDES (CI 77491, CI 77492, CI 77499)].
Disclaimer: Ingredient lists are as available by the brand (or retailer) at the time of publishing. Please always check product packaging, if it exists, for the ingredient list applicable to the product you're purchasing, or the brand or retailer's website for the most up-to-date ingredient list.
Chocolate Veil
PPermanent. $34.00.
Diffused Black
Charlotte Tilbury Diffused Black Matte Eyes to Mesmerise ($34.00 for 0.17 oz.) is a medium-dark black with neutral undertones and a matte finish. It had semi-sheer color coverage, which was in part due to the texture being terrible: dry, stiff, firm, and almost impossible to blend out as it set as soon as it came into contact with my skin.
The only real function it could perform that did not look atrocious was as a thin line applied with an eyelienr brush. It did not work applied with fingertips or as a cream eyeshadow on the lid. As a sheer, uneven (visually and in actual thickness) layer, it lasted around nine hours but if I layered it up, then it flaked sooner.
FURTHER READING: Formula Overview for details on general performance and characteristics (like scent).
Top Dupes
- ColourPop Roll Around (PiP, $4.50) (100% similar).
- ColourPop Smoked Out (PiP, $4.50) is lighter (95% similar).
- Ciate Beauty (LE, ) is lighter, warmer (90% similar).
- NARS White Horse (LE, $19.00) is lighter (90% similar).
- NARS Fauna (DC, $25.00) is lighter (90% similar).
- Viseart Tuileries (PiP, ) is lighter (90% similar).
- LORAC Onyx (LE, $19.00) is more shimmery, lighter, glossier (90% similar).
- Milani Black Tie Affair (PiP, $5.99) is more shimmery, lighter (85% similar).
- Wet 'n' Wild The Night's Quad #3 (LE, ) is more shimmery, lighter (85% similar).
- Sephora Black Lace (304) (P, $9.00) is more shimmery, lighter (85% similar).
Formula Overview
$34.00/0.17 oz. - $200.00 Per Ounce
The brand said that the formula combined the "long-lasting, smoothing powers of [their] iconic Eyes to Mesmerise cream shadows" with a matte formula that is supposed to be "long-lasting" and easy to "build, blend, and wear." They actually specifically out that it should feel "smooth" to the touch and "doesn't drag the skin on the eye lid."
It's an incredibly dry, draggy formula that feels more like an old cream eyeshadow that's dried out and is on its last legs of usefulness. It was really quite at odds with how shiny/glossy the product looked in the pots, but if you looked closely at the center of each, you could see faint cracks that alluded to it being a drier product.
The texture was dry, thick, and quick to dry down, which was a recipe for uneven application that did not blend, did not build (layering was atrocious!), and really only was feasible to use as an eyeliner where sharper, precise motions were desired and no blending was wanted, but it still lacked the fluidity ideal for working around the curvature of the eye area.
I tried using fingertips and different brushes to apply, and for something all over, using a fluffy brush and diffusing during the initial application yielded less awful results but ultimately, still disappointing. They are nothing like the original Eyes to Mesmerise shades!
I found that they didn't crease or fade, but they were more prone to flaking as an eyeshadow, so the wear was more like seven to nine hours.
Browse all of our Charlotte Tilbury Matte Eyes to Mesmerise swatches.
Ingredients
ISODODECANE, CERA CARNAUBA/COPERNICIA CERIFERA (CARNAUBA) WAX/CIRE DE CARNAUBA, ETHYLENE/PROPYLENE COPOLYMER, DIMETHICONE, TRIMETHYLSILOXYSILICATE, HYDROGENATED POLYCYCLOPENTADIENE, COCO-CAPRYLATE/CAPRATE, STEAROYL INULIN, DEXTRIN PALMITATE, METHICONE, LAUROYL LYSINE, ALOE BARBADENSIS (ALOE VERA) LEAF JUICE, RICINUS COMMUNIS (CASTOR) SEED OIL, SODIUM HYALURONATE, HYDROGENATED CASTOR OIL, MICA, LAVANDULA STOECHAS EXTRACT, CITRIC ACID, SODIUM BENZOATE, POTASSIUM SORBATE, [+/- IRON OXIDES (CI 77499)].
Disclaimer: Ingredient lists are as available by the brand (or retailer) at the time of publishing. Please always check product packaging, if it exists, for the ingredient list applicable to the product you're purchasing, or the brand or retailer's website for the most up-to-date ingredient list.
Ruh roh.. yeah Christine.. thanks for the heads up 😆
These products really deserve that ‘F’ rating. I just returned them and they are as bad as review describes.
Wow. I was hoping to use one of the lighter ones as an eyeshadow base, but this formula seems atrocious. Yikes. 😬
Oh dear…F’s! Does Charlotte think (like Tom Ford) that slapping her name on a product will have buyers flocking to buy it? (well, maybe it works…I’m guessing it does; thank goodness for Temptalia for helping us make wise purchases and avoid clunkers like these). I’ve only just succumbed to the siren song of her eyeshadows (well the quads and only 2 of them) and might well have fallen for these shadows if I were looking for mattes. But you saved me, Christine!
Even though I already knew that these were utter rubbish, I was just dying to read your reviews on them! Truly the worst, most crappy product of the year. Not only for this first month, but I have quite the feeling that this “award” will actually end up being for all of 2022. These ought to be recalled by CT, refunded and reformulated…if even Maybelline could do it, well then? 🤷🏻♀️
Well that stinks, they sound like they’re a hot mess. I was hoping for a nice matte cream shadow that didn’t completely dry down into a chalky sahara desert territory like most of the matte liquid shadows. Since I’ve had such good luck with the regular ETM pots I was intrigued by these. I think I’ll pass. Drat.
It’s SO strange that they would be such a departure with respect to texture from the original range… which is pretty emollient.
Thud! I have yet to read or hear a good thing about this product. I wonder if it is just a huge bad batch because I can’t see CT putting her name on such a dud. What is the purpose of something drying immediately upon contact.
It’s likely they were all manufactured together, e.g. one shade at a time, for initial fulfillment, so it’d likely be a pretty big batch!
I find like most people who have tried it and which also is reflected in your review that this is not a very good product… And considering the usually very high quality of this brands releases I can’t help but wonder if this really is what they intended this product to be or if some mishap in the production has happened. As I have a hard time believing that Charlotte Tilbury who has been behind so many really good cream eye shadow products in the past, both in her own brand but also for brands like Tom Ford would want a matte cream eye shadow to be like this?
What do you think? Could it be that something went very wrong here?
(I have also noticed that there has been very little marketing for this product… no tutorials by CT, no banging on the drums, no super-adjectives thrown around… it must be the most silent CT release of all time…)
I could see wanting something less emollient than the original formula, but these are beyond less emollient, lol! It’s possible there was an issue in putting the lids on, so they all dried out or else were affected by that and/or colder temperatures.
I’ve been wondering the same thing. I haven’t seen a single person say anything positive about them yet! I was really looking forward to these too. I just don’t understand how the company would have launched a product that performs THIS poorly. There is no way the product development team tested these and thought it was good to go. Tara Lynn on YouTube showed how it totally ruined her brush! At this point, this should be offering refunds to customers and trashing this batch, or just reformulating.
I totally agree with you. This should be refundable…
You’ve got to see this, because I imagine Christine going through the same pain that Patty was in her video: https://youtu.be/Bv34PoCAaXk
I didn’t think I would like any of these – apart from the matte aspect, I thought the shade colours ho hum – but now I definitely would not purchase them! What an epic fail from CT.
I was tempting to buy one of these, but after reading the reviews, no thank you.
Yikes !
Wayne Goss is mighty fair and sweet about products. His YouTube video shows how absolutely impossible these are to work with. I think he used four or five different colors. It’s certainly a black eye (no pun intended) for Tilbury. My guess, and it’s been hinted that they may not repeat making this.
I also saw his video trying these. It was kind of amazing how badly they all performed.
What an epic fail!
I feel sorry for you having to try to get there to work in your eyelids.
I don’t have any knowledge on how brands do their quality control, but these should never have reached the stores.
I think Nancy is right, this will be the fail of the year, win worst makeup product awards. I mean, I can’t see any brand coming out with something as bad as this.
I haven’t seen a good review of these yet so I’m not at all surprised that you had problems with them as well. I like the original Eyes to Mesmerize formula but the shades are all so warm. I’d love a cool toned icy taupe or even a pale neutral greige. Unfortunately, it’s really rare to see true cool toned eye products from CT.