MAC x Nicopanda Stay Cute Full Face Kit Review, Photos, Swatches
Stay Cute
MAC Stay Cute Nicopanda Full Face Kit ($40.00 for 0.40 oz.) rounds out the collection’s Face Kits as the final disappointment in the trilogy. The eyeshadows were dismal, and the blush was workable but was barely decent.
Ingredients
Look Using this Product
Stay Cute
LELimited Edition. $40.00.
Cheeky Chic
Cheeky Chic is a pop of medium pink with subtle, warm undertones and flecks of gold glitter. The glittery bits did not translate onto the cheeks from what I could see after applying the color. The texture was slightly drier and firmer in the pan, but it was still quite pigmented and wasn’t too much of a challenge to blend out. It lasted for eight hours on me.
FURTHER READING: Formula Overview for details on general performance and characteristics (like scent).
Top Dupes
- Give Me Glow Sweet Cheeks (P, $14.00) is less shimmery, darker (95% similar).
- Anastasia Spoiled (LE, ) is more shimmery, darker (95% similar).
- Too Faced Strobeberry (Blush) (PiP, ) is more shimmery, cooler (95% similar).
- Tarte Flush (P, $29.00) is less shimmery (90% similar).
- MAC Sugar or Syrup (LE, $24.00) is warmer (90% similar).
- Burberry First Love (LE, $68.00) is darker, warmer (90% similar).
- ColourPop Olive (LE, $8.00) is less shimmery (90% similar).
- MAC Modest Blush (LE, $29.00) is less shimmery, warmer (90% similar).
- MAC Well Dressed (P, $24.00) is cooler (90% similar).
- Kevyn Aucoin Pink Sand #2 (PiP, ) is warmer (90% similar).
Formula Overview
$24.00/0.21 oz. - $114.29 Per Ounce
Per the brand, the formula is supposed to "provide fantastic colour with ease and consistency" that "applies evenly, adheres lightly to skin." There are five distinct finishes within the range: Frost ("iridescent, lightly shimmering color"), Matte ("flat, matte finish... builds well"), Satin ("adds subtle highlights to the skin"), Sheertone ("sheer-on micro-refined powder ... that goes on faint"), and Sheertone Shimmer ("just enough shimmer to make light dance on your cheeks"). Their permanent blushes are available in compact form as well as pan-only (the latter will be cheaper).
The following overview has been updated to reflect the most current iteration of the brand's permanent range (whether or not there's been any official change) as I repurchased the majority of the permanent shades as of June 2018. I make a point to say that because I felt that the textures of several shades, particularly the frost finish shades, was noticeably different; they were much smoother and had more slip but were less shimmery/frosted (on average) and seemed to be a bit weaker in pigmentation (but still buildable). Some of the mattes felt like I've encountered in the past (a little drier, pigmented, and fairly blendable), while some felt more velvety and finely-milled.
MAC has a solid blush range but some shades are harder than others to blend out or diffuse, and as it does for most formulas (from any brand), it really comes down to some shades falling shy of expectations. The matte finish had a tendency to darken on my skin within five minutes of application; for most shades, I would recommend applying over a powdered face and/or avoiding applying on still-drying complexion products to make blending the easiest. The matte shades seemed to be semi-opaque to opaque, buildable, and long-wearing (about eight hours).
Only a few of the shades in the permanent range seemed to be particularly frosted/metallic on the skin; most shades that had shimmer appeared more softly luminous or pearlescent on the skin to the point where there was little sheen/reflection captured by my camera (I did a double take for a few and re-did swatches only to find the same finish captured yet again!). The Sheertone Shimmer performed most consistently with this: very subtle sheen, more "my skin but better" with having a slightly more noticeable sheen than matte. There were a few shades that had a strong sheen on the skin (like Peachykeen), though. The Frost finish just seemed to have stronger, larger shimmer in it, but the effect on the skin ranged being subtle to moderate. The same was true with Satin--some were more satin-like and some seemed more like a Frost (like Modern Mandarin).
Most shades were blendable, while pigmentation varied from sheer to opaque depending on the shade, but most had decent, builable coverage. The textures were firmer than the average powder blush of current times, but they don't have excess product kicked up in the pan at all. The wear ranged between seven and nine hours with deeper, intense mattes (like Fever or Film Noir) lasted longer.
Browse all of our MAC Powder Blush swatches.
Ingredients
TALC, OCTYLDODECYL STEAROYL STEARATE, ZINC STEARATE, ISOSTEARYL NEOPENTANOATE, TOCOPHERYL ACETATE, CAPRYLYL GLYCOL, HEXYLENE GLYCOL, PHENOXYETHANOL. MAY CONTAIN: SILICA, MICA, TITANIUM DIOXIDE (CI 77891), IRON OXIDES (CI 77491, CI 77492, CI 77499), BISMUTH OXYCHLORIDE (CI 77163), BLUE 1 LAKE (CI 42090), CARMINE (CI 75470), CHROMIUM HYDROXIDE GREEN (CI 77289), CHROMIUM OXIDE GREENS (CI 77288), FERRIC FERROCYANIDE (CI 77510), MANGANESE VIOLET (CI 77742), RED 6 (CI 15850), RED 6 LAKE (CI 15850), RED 7 LAKE (CI 15850), RED 28 LAKE (CI 45410), RED 30 LAKE (CI 73360), ULTRAMARINES (CI 77007), YELLOW 5 LAKE (CI 19140), YELLOW 6 LAKE (CI 15985).
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.
Cheeky Chic
LELimited Edition. $24.00.
Snow Panda
Snow Panda is soft white with warm undertones and a pearly sheen. It had sheer coverage, which was buildable to medium coverage. The texture was powdery, but it was more substantial, and I felt that it actually gave a pretty sheen where it was applied… but the powderiness seemed to come back and haunt me 15 minutes after application where there was almost nothing left from where I had applied it. Primer seemed to just eat it for breakfast rather than help it.
FURTHER READING: Formula Overview for details on general performance and characteristics (like scent).
Top Dupes
- MAC This or That #1 (LE, $21.00) is more shimmery (95% similar).
- KVD Beauty Smoke (Highlight) (PiP, ) is less shimmery (95% similar).
- Milani Bella White (07) (P, $4.49) is more shimmery (95% similar).
- LORAC Matte-y (LE, $19.00) is less shimmery (90% similar).
- MAC Me Me Me (LE, ) is cooler (90% similar).
- Too Faced Chandelier (LE, $16.00) is more shimmery (90% similar).
- Too Faced Dessert's On Me (LE, $16.00) is less shimmery (90% similar).
- Too Faced Purr (LE, $16.00) is more shimmery, warmer (90% similar).
- MAC Captivating #2 (LE, $21.00) is more shimmery, warmer (85% similar).
Formula Overview
$17.00/0.05 oz. - $340.00 Per Ounce
The formula is supposed to be a "highly pigmented powder" that goes on "evenly and blends well." MAC eyeshadows run the gamut from total failures to long-time, cult-favorite staples. In general, the permanent line has been more consistent in performance--and higher performance at that--compared to limited edition launches, but it can really depend.
The Matte finish tends to have a firmer press and a bit of thinness compared to other matte formulas on the market, so MAC matte eyeshadows tend to build up better and have better wear-time without fallout as they're not powdery at all. Some of the newer matte finish shades have had a more velvety quality to them that gives them a softer feel but aren't powdery; these have been easier to blend and are often more pigmented in one layer.
The Lustre finish is designed to have sheerer pigmentation, and it often has more sheer to medium coverage with a drier, dustier consistency that can be hard to apply with a dry brush. Lustre finish shades can suffer from fallout during application, too. They are the old school version of an eyeshadow "topper." I would recommend applying with a fingertip or applying with a dampened brush to get smoother, more even coverage and minimize fallout.
The Satin finish is few and far in-between, but it is softer and more yielding than the Matte finish but performs similarly. They tend to have very low sheen but are quite blendable with medium to opaque coverage. It can be easy to mix the finish up with the Velvet finish, which has more of a sparkle-over-matte effect but are more powdery than the true Matte finish.
The Frost finish is more firmly-pressed into the pan but doesn't have fallout, is often pigmented, and blends out well enough. They can sometimes be a little drier to the touch depending on how much shimmer is in the shade. The Veluxe Pearl finish is one of the creamier takes within the range, and newer shades released in the finish tend to have more moderate, silicone-like slip. I've found that Veluxe Pearl finish shades tend to have more semi-opaque pigmentation and are more consistent in performance than some of the other finishes.
One thing I've found with MAC eyeshadows is that they tend to last longer without primer than the average brand (eight hours). While some eyeshadow shades don't swatch well, they often apply better in practice--as in on the eyes!--than just swatched on the skin. They can be quite hit or miss, and they have inconsistencies between releases (see Carbon and its sordid review history!).
Browse all of our MAC Eyeshadow swatches.
Look Using this Product
Snow Panda
LELimited Edition. $17.00.
Misfit
Misfit is a medium gray with a silver sheen. It had medium coverage, which did not build up, paired with a drier texture that was prone to sheering out on the lid. It was somewhat blendable, and it was somewhat better over a primer. The eyeshadow stayed on well for six hours.
FURTHER READING: Formula Overview for details on general performance and characteristics (like scent).
Top Dupes
- Giorgio Armani #22 (DC, $33.00) is more shimmery (95% similar).
- MAC Evening Grey (P, $20.00) is more shimmery, darker (90% similar).
- NARS Interstellar (P, $25.00) is brighter (90% similar).
- Too Faced Jailbird (LE, $16.00) is cooler (90% similar).
- Smashbox Rock Icon (PiP, ) is lighter, warmer (90% similar).
- Too Faced Drippin' Diamonds (LE, $16.00) is more shimmery, darker (90% similar).
- Viseart Chloe (PiP, ) is lighter (90% similar).
- NARS Underworld I (PiP, $19.00) is less shimmery, lighter (90% similar).
- Chanel Tisse Smoky #1 (PiP, ) is more shimmery, lighter (90% similar).
- Sephora Iridescent Shell (110) (LE, $13.00) is more shimmery, brighter (90% similar).
Formula Overview
$17.00/0.05 oz. - $340.00 Per Ounce
The formula is supposed to be a "highly pigmented powder" that goes on "evenly and blends well." MAC eyeshadows run the gamut from total failures to long-time, cult-favorite staples. In general, the permanent line has been more consistent in performance--and higher performance at that--compared to limited edition launches, but it can really depend.
The Matte finish tends to have a firmer press and a bit of thinness compared to other matte formulas on the market, so MAC matte eyeshadows tend to build up better and have better wear-time without fallout as they're not powdery at all. Some of the newer matte finish shades have had a more velvety quality to them that gives them a softer feel but aren't powdery; these have been easier to blend and are often more pigmented in one layer.
The Lustre finish is designed to have sheerer pigmentation, and it often has more sheer to medium coverage with a drier, dustier consistency that can be hard to apply with a dry brush. Lustre finish shades can suffer from fallout during application, too. They are the old school version of an eyeshadow "topper." I would recommend applying with a fingertip or applying with a dampened brush to get smoother, more even coverage and minimize fallout.
The Satin finish is few and far in-between, but it is softer and more yielding than the Matte finish but performs similarly. They tend to have very low sheen but are quite blendable with medium to opaque coverage. It can be easy to mix the finish up with the Velvet finish, which has more of a sparkle-over-matte effect but are more powdery than the true Matte finish.
The Frost finish is more firmly-pressed into the pan but doesn't have fallout, is often pigmented, and blends out well enough. They can sometimes be a little drier to the touch depending on how much shimmer is in the shade. The Veluxe Pearl finish is one of the creamier takes within the range, and newer shades released in the finish tend to have more moderate, silicone-like slip. I've found that Veluxe Pearl finish shades tend to have more semi-opaque pigmentation and are more consistent in performance than some of the other finishes.
One thing I've found with MAC eyeshadows is that they tend to last longer without primer than the average brand (eight hours). While some eyeshadow shades don't swatch well, they often apply better in practice--as in on the eyes!--than just swatched on the skin. They can be quite hit or miss, and they have inconsistencies between releases (see Carbon and its sordid review history!).
Browse all of our MAC Eyeshadow swatches.
Misfit
LELimited Edition. $17.00.
Cyber Goth
Cyber Goth is a soft black with a silver sparkle. It had a very dry and stiff texture, which resulted in uneven, semi-sheer coverage that looked ragged. I could not blend it, and I could barely get the color to apply to the lid without pressing quite harshly against the lid. It lasted for five and a half hours on me before fading.
FURTHER READING: Formula Overview for details on general performance and characteristics (like scent).
Top Dupes
- MAC Mindfiles (LE, $17.00) is more pigmented (95% similar).
- MAC A Waft of Grey #3 (PiP, $21.00) is more shimmery (90% similar).
- Dose of Colors Sky's the Limit (P, $20.00) is darker, cooler (90% similar).
- BH Cosmetics Foil Eyes 2 #20 (PiP, ) is more shimmery, darker (90% similar).
- Urban Decay Oil Slick (DC, $19.00) is darker (90% similar).
- MAC Smoky Black Friday #3 (LE, ) is more shimmery, darker (90% similar).
- MAC Lapisluxe #3 (LE, ) is darker (90% similar).
- KVD Beauty Filthy (LE, ) is less shimmery, lighter (85% similar).
- Dior Smoky Canvas #1 (LE, ) is less shimmery, lighter, warmer (85% similar).
- Urban Decay Gunmetal (DC, $19.00) is lighter, cooler (85% similar).
Formula Overview
$17.00/0.05 oz. - $340.00 Per Ounce
The formula is supposed to be a "highly pigmented powder" that goes on "evenly and blends well." MAC eyeshadows run the gamut from total failures to long-time, cult-favorite staples. In general, the permanent line has been more consistent in performance--and higher performance at that--compared to limited edition launches, but it can really depend.
The Matte finish tends to have a firmer press and a bit of thinness compared to other matte formulas on the market, so MAC matte eyeshadows tend to build up better and have better wear-time without fallout as they're not powdery at all. Some of the newer matte finish shades have had a more velvety quality to them that gives them a softer feel but aren't powdery; these have been easier to blend and are often more pigmented in one layer.
The Lustre finish is designed to have sheerer pigmentation, and it often has more sheer to medium coverage with a drier, dustier consistency that can be hard to apply with a dry brush. Lustre finish shades can suffer from fallout during application, too. They are the old school version of an eyeshadow "topper." I would recommend applying with a fingertip or applying with a dampened brush to get smoother, more even coverage and minimize fallout.
The Satin finish is few and far in-between, but it is softer and more yielding than the Matte finish but performs similarly. They tend to have very low sheen but are quite blendable with medium to opaque coverage. It can be easy to mix the finish up with the Velvet finish, which has more of a sparkle-over-matte effect but are more powdery than the true Matte finish.
The Frost finish is more firmly-pressed into the pan but doesn't have fallout, is often pigmented, and blends out well enough. They can sometimes be a little drier to the touch depending on how much shimmer is in the shade. The Veluxe Pearl finish is one of the creamier takes within the range, and newer shades released in the finish tend to have more moderate, silicone-like slip. I've found that Veluxe Pearl finish shades tend to have more semi-opaque pigmentation and are more consistent in performance than some of the other finishes.
One thing I've found with MAC eyeshadows is that they tend to last longer without primer than the average brand (eight hours). While some eyeshadow shades don't swatch well, they often apply better in practice--as in on the eyes!--than just swatched on the skin. They can be quite hit or miss, and they have inconsistencies between releases (see Carbon and its sordid review history!).
Browse all of our MAC Eyeshadow swatches.
Cyber Goth
LELimited Edition. $17.00.
Supah-Pink
Supah-Pink is a light-medium pink with subtle, cool undertones and a pearly sheen along with flecks of chunky sparkle. It had sheer coverage, which did not build up, even over primer, and the best I could do was pat it on with a dampened brush for medium coverage. The texture was drier and thin, and it was hard to blend it out without losing intensity. It lasted for four and a half hours at best.
FURTHER READING: Formula Overview for details on general performance and characteristics (like scent).
Top Dupes
- Too Faced Jingle All the Way Eyeshadow #5 (LE, $16.00) is more shimmery, darker (90% similar).
- Dior House of Pinks #3 (LE, ) is cooler (90% similar).
- Chanel Tisse Rhapsodie #1 (LE, ) is more shimmery (90% similar).
- Urban Decay Heartless (DC, $19.00) is lighter (90% similar).
- Urban Decay SWF (DC, $19.00) is more shimmery, lighter (90% similar).
- Too Faced Cotton Candy (PiP, $16.00) is more shimmery, warmer (85% similar).
- Makeup Geek Nostalgic (P, $9.99) is more shimmery, darker (85% similar).
- Milani Bella Rose (29) (P, $4.49) is more shimmery, lighter (85% similar).
- Urban Decay Hot Pants (LE, $19.00) is more shimmery, darker (85% similar).
- Chanel Lilas d'Or (808) (P, $36.00) is warmer (85% similar).
Formula Overview
$17.00/0.05 oz. - $340.00 Per Ounce
The formula is supposed to be a "highly pigmented powder" that goes on "evenly and blends well." MAC eyeshadows run the gamut from total failures to long-time, cult-favorite staples. In general, the permanent line has been more consistent in performance--and higher performance at that--compared to limited edition launches, but it can really depend.
The Matte finish tends to have a firmer press and a bit of thinness compared to other matte formulas on the market, so MAC matte eyeshadows tend to build up better and have better wear-time without fallout as they're not powdery at all. Some of the newer matte finish shades have had a more velvety quality to them that gives them a softer feel but aren't powdery; these have been easier to blend and are often more pigmented in one layer.
The Lustre finish is designed to have sheerer pigmentation, and it often has more sheer to medium coverage with a drier, dustier consistency that can be hard to apply with a dry brush. Lustre finish shades can suffer from fallout during application, too. They are the old school version of an eyeshadow "topper." I would recommend applying with a fingertip or applying with a dampened brush to get smoother, more even coverage and minimize fallout.
The Satin finish is few and far in-between, but it is softer and more yielding than the Matte finish but performs similarly. They tend to have very low sheen but are quite blendable with medium to opaque coverage. It can be easy to mix the finish up with the Velvet finish, which has more of a sparkle-over-matte effect but are more powdery than the true Matte finish.
The Frost finish is more firmly-pressed into the pan but doesn't have fallout, is often pigmented, and blends out well enough. They can sometimes be a little drier to the touch depending on how much shimmer is in the shade. The Veluxe Pearl finish is one of the creamier takes within the range, and newer shades released in the finish tend to have more moderate, silicone-like slip. I've found that Veluxe Pearl finish shades tend to have more semi-opaque pigmentation and are more consistent in performance than some of the other finishes.
One thing I've found with MAC eyeshadows is that they tend to last longer without primer than the average brand (eight hours). While some eyeshadow shades don't swatch well, they often apply better in practice--as in on the eyes!--than just swatched on the skin. They can be quite hit or miss, and they have inconsistencies between releases (see Carbon and its sordid review history!).
Browse all of our MAC Eyeshadow swatches.
Yikes, not a very cute score. MAC can do much better
They can. Many of my favorite products are made by MAC, so I just don’t understand how such bombs can be released. Don’t they test them properly?
I honestly don’t understand how MAC keeps putting out collaborations with such horrible grades. If I were a beauty guru, influencer or a brand, I would be embarrassed to have my name on such poorly performing products. Yes, a few people buy MAC collabs regardless of performance (they want the packaging or just love a certain collaborator) – but does MAC really think abysmal products will sell just because they slapped someone else’s name on them? Even lower-end and drugstore brands like BH Cosmetics, Colourpop, and ELF have worked with some pretty big names in the last year or two, AND they usually put out decent products! If I were a beauty guru, I would choose to work with Colourpop over MAC for sure.
What is going on with MAC these days? It’s like all they care about is “cute” packaging and pay no attention to the quality of the actual product.
Im just here for the comments! ;D
So funny!!
I am with you. Not much else to say about MAC and this release, is there? Both palettes score an F which has to be the worst overall release in MAC history. Sad.
I find their name choice “Stay Cute” to be an insult to our collective intelligence. It took a lot of gall to call this “Super Cute”, unless their idea of “cute” is looking like a hot mess.
So much makeup these days is barely usable trash. I’m actually getting burned out by it.
Wow, I can’t believe MAC would release such crap. Honesty, it is
painful seeing such a respected name go down the tubes. What are
they thinking?
Too bad. I really liked the color combo. Oh well. Monet saved. Thanks.
I agree. If you used the kit you might end up looking looking a full on Monet. Sorry, but I couldn’t resist.
? Oops. Money! Looking like a Money would be fabulous though. I tell ppl that if a word doesn’t make sense, look at the letter next to the old one on the keyboard. I often miss the letter I want.
What a complete contrast from the previous NARS palette! Seriously, why would anyone bother to buy MAC’s eyeshadows when you can have that dream one from NARS? Every single shade is rubbish.
Thankyou for the review Christine, you have once again saved people from buying a dud product.
It’s obvious that these palettes are not mean to be used in the conventional makeup sense – crease, lid, inner corner, etc. Plenty of people shared their looks on the MAC site. None I see is the conventional blend and blend. Even the promo pics, and Nicola’s use of the products in a fashion show, don’t show any ‘pretty looks’.
I think it’s insulting to say MAC don’t test their products, that Nicola just slaps his name on the prodct. They both gave enuf hints on how to use the products. Nicola himself would probably point to Erdem’s Nars collection if one is looking for a madame look.
I’m not sure what “pretty” means (I didn’t say anything about it being pretty or ugly or anything to that effect…) – that’s personal preference – but products performing as they are marketed is what I write my review on. Straight from MAC’s website under “Full Description,” emphasis mine:
MAC often includes the descriptor “sheer” in their color descriptions when they intend for a product to be sheer, particularly if it is a one-off, but they did not provide “sheer” in any of the descriptions for the shades in the palette. I can’t agree that the eyeshadows aren’t meant to be used as eye makeup – MAC literally says it contains a Powder Blush and four Eye Shadows with the latter’s “usage” being “apply over eye area.” I don’t think that it is unreasonable to expect to use eyeshadow… on the eyes, whether that’s crease or lid.
As always, I can only review based on my personal experience – if others have better luck with their products, they are always welcome to share their own experiences in the comments. They can even share their looks right on the site! Or they can leave an official review for any product! I experienced products that were poorly pigmented, hard to work with, did not go on evenly, and did not last well at all, and I did, also, try them over MAC’s 24HR primer and still did not find good results.
I did not say that they did not test their products – I said that the quality was so disappointing that it made me wonder if brands bother to test products, but I certainly didn’t state that as a fact, and I did not say anything about the collaborator at all. I’m happy to discuss but would appreciate the courtesy and respect of keeping to my actual words.
Girl, you’re a class act. <3
No excuses for bad products. Keep holding these companies accountable!??? Amen, Christine ?
I always think that if given the choice, I’d rather err on the side of the consumer vs. the brand – I’d rather be “more” critical than less!
This is just sad.
This collection makes me a sad panda.
Badaboom! The pun we were all afraid to make.
oh man! from the good reviews of the PatrickStarrr collection, to this horrible collection. some roller coaster quality control they have! what’s up with MAC and their inconsistency? Other brands like Colourpop and Nyx are offering much better products at a much lower cost, MAC really has to step up on the quality… Fast!
The formulas feel very different from each other, IMO! It’s odd since they are so close in release dates!
I love pink and gray eye shadow combos so I was looking closely at this one. Too bad it had such beat up scores. MAC is slipping on the eye shadow game lately. I saw a sneak peak of the highly anticipated Aaliyah collection and was so disappointed at the color selection. Been saving my MAC xmas gift cards to spend on the Aaliyah makeup but maybe I’ll get something else instead. 🙁
I pay attention to MAC when the quality is there, so this is a pass for me.. I’d rather see fewer releases and products that are consistently – almost predictably – high quality.
2018 MAC: Let’s make the fanciest packaging and pair them with sh*tty products to balance it out!