Urban Decay Chem Trail, Zap, Recharged, Solstice Liquid Moondust Eyeshadows Reviews, Photos, Swatches
Urban Decay Liquid Moondust Eyeshadow
Urban Decay Chem Trail Liquid Moondust Eyeshadow ($22.00 for 0.17 fl. oz.) is a light, champagne gold with warm undertones and a sparkly finish. It had sheer coverage that did not build-up well–the best I could get was semi-sheer–and as I built up the color, it became increasingly chunky and added uneven texture to my lids, making them appear extra wrinkly and raised. After a few blinks, the layers would start to crack. One layer of product wore well for nine hours with no fallout but two layers resulted in small chunks of the product, which can get into the eye and is more painful than regular eyeshadow. MAC Reflects Gold (P, $21.00) is less shimmery (95% similar). MAC Pastelluxe #1 (PiP, ) is lighter (95% similar). ColourPop Fringe (P, $6.00) is less shimmery (95% similar). Stila Follow the Sun (LE, $24.00) is less shimmery, cooler (95% similar). MAC Cool Companions #1 (LE, ) is less shimmery (95% similar). Natasha Denona Indian Gold (44M) (PiP, $29.00) is less shimmery (90% similar). Urban Decay Neon Moon (LE, $20.00) is darker (90% similar). LORAC Cashmere (LE, $19.00) is less shimmery, lighter (90% similar). Stila Stylish (LE, $24.00) is more shimmery, cooler (90% similar). MAC Plead Gilty (LE, $22.00) is lighter (90% similar). Pat McGrath Astral Gold Allure (LE, $25.00) is warmer (90% similar). MAC Greenluxe #2 (PiP, ) is more pigmented (95% similar). MAC Best Makeup (LE, $22.00) is lighter (90% similar). Urban Decay Chem Trail (DC, $20.00) is less shimmery, darker (90% similar). Kaja Gold Dust (PiP, ) is warmer (85% similar). MAC Flicker (P, $21.00) is lighter (85% similar). ColourPop El Capitan (-, $6.00) is darker (85% similar). Dior Earthy Canvas #2 (LE, ) is darker, cooler (80% similar). Dior Golden Savannah #3 (LE, ) is darker (95% similar). See comparison swatches / view dupes side-by-side.
Urban Decay Zap Liquid Moondust Eyeshadow ($22.00 for 0.17 fl. oz.) is a medium, golden bronze with warm undertones and a sprinkling of gold sparkle. This had less shift, but it had one of the strongest base colors and could actually look like you were wearing eyeshadow without having a wrinkly, crunch eyelid. The texture was fairly smooth without being too thin or watery, and it spread decently. One layer yielded semi-opaque pigmentation, while two layers made the color fully opaque but didn’t add too much texture to the lid. I did notice that it had a tendency to “crack” on the lid wherever I had lines (like my inner lid), in the same way that some matte liquid lipsticks do when I smile. It lasted for nine hours without fallout when I wore one layer, and I had some flaking when I wore two layers of product. bareMinerals Santorini (LE, ) is less shimmery (95% similar). Maybelline Downtown Brown (P, $6.99) is less shimmery (95% similar). ColourPop Blaze (PiP, $6.00) is less shimmery, darker (90% similar). LORAC Smokey Topaz (LE, $19.00) is less shimmery, darker (90% similar). Chanel Patine Bronze (840) (P, $36.00) is less shimmery, warmer (90% similar). Benefit Thanks a Latte (P, $20.00) is less shimmery (90% similar). Hello Kitty Chocolate Chip (LE, ) is less shimmery, brighter (90% similar). Urban Decay Burn (PiP, $19.00) is cooler (90% similar). Tom Ford Beauty Noir Fume #2 (PiP, ) is less shimmery, lighter, warmer (90% similar). Estee Lauder Bitter Clove (LE, $45.00) is more shimmery (90% similar). ColourPop Nillionaire (P, $6.00) is darker (90% similar). Sydney Grace Vibrant Madness (DC, $8.00) is more shimmery, lighter, warmer (90% similar). Stila Fairy Tail (P, $24.00) is more shimmery, darker (85% similar). ColourPop Body Language (LE, $4.50) is lighter, warmer (85% similar). Giorgio Armani Incognito #4 (PiP, ) is more shimmery, darker, warmer (85% similar). Giorgio Armani Cold Copper (09) (DC, $39.00) is less shimmery, lighter (85% similar). Marc Jacobs Beauty Smoked Glass (84) (P, $26.00) is more shimmery, darker (85% similar). Dior Fire (584) (P, $29.50) is more shimmery, darker, warmer (85% similar). Natasha Denona Varis (PiP, $29.00) is warmer (85% similar). MAC English Gilt (LE, $21.00) is more shimmery, brighter (90% similar). Top 20 dupes listed, see the rest. See comparison swatches / view dupes side-by-side.
Urban Decay Recharged Liquid Moondust Eyeshadow ($22.00 for 0.17 fl. oz.) is a coppery brown with iridescent pink sparkle. The difficulty in getting this product to apply with any semblance of evenness on the lid was astounding. The texture gets so chunky when I’ve attempted to layer it, and when I tried to apply it as a wash of color, it was so uneven. This shade had less base color than it did copper and pink sparkles, but they didn’t spread evenly at all. I was able to get up to semi-opaque coverage, not that it looked good or felt tolerable on the lid (it has a clingy feel when layered). One layer lasted for nine hours without fallout, while two layers resulted in large chunks of product flaking off the eye within a few hours of wear. Maybelline Inked in Pink (P, $6.99) is less shimmery, cooler (90% similar). MAC Major Win (LE, $21.00) is darker, more muted (85% similar). Urban Decay Bad Seed (P, $19.00) is less shimmery, lighter, warmer (85% similar). Natasha Denona Golden Rose (60M) (P, $29.00) is less shimmery (90% similar). Stila Dollish (LE, $24.00) is lighter, warmer (85% similar). ColourPop Emuse Me (LE, $6.00) is lighter, warmer (85% similar). MAC Rose Light (LE, $32.50) is less shimmery, lighter (85% similar). Stila Enchantress (P, $24.00) is lighter (85% similar). Marc Jacobs Beauty In Stardust (LE, ) is lighter, warmer (85% similar). MAC Sweet Acting (P, $21.00) is lighter (85% similar). Pat McGrath VR Pink (PiP, $25.00) is lighter, more pigmented, warmer (90% similar). ColourPop Kindness (LE, $6.00) is less shimmery, warmer (85% similar). Makeup Geek Wildfire (P, $12.00) is less shimmery (85% similar). MAC Glitz Please (LE, $21.00) is darker (85% similar). Dior Fusion (764) (P, $29.50) is more shimmery (85% similar). Urban Decay Saturday Stardust (P, $22.00) is lighter, cooler (80% similar). MAC Boom Boom Room (LE, $18.00) is darker, cooler (80% similar). See comparison swatches / view dupes side-by-side.
Urban Decay Solstice Liquid Moondust Eyeshadow ($22.00 for 0.17 fl. oz.) is a medium-dark, reddish copper with warm undertones and multi-colored sparkle. The consistency was thin but smoother than the other shades, so it didn’t get quite as chunky when I attempted to build-up the color. It had semi-sheer to medium coverage. On the lid, there’s a semblance of a base color, but it still had a more textured look to it, which made the eyelid appear uneven. When I wore one layer alone, the product lasted for nine hours without fallout, and when I wore two layers, I had a little bit of fall out after nine hours but no chunks that had flaked off. MAC Humoresque (LE, $18.00) is more shimmery (95% similar). Urban Decay Solstice (DC, $20.00) is more shimmery, more pigmented (90% similar). ColourPop Warrior (LE, $4.50) is more shimmery, lighter, more pigmented (90% similar). Chanel Laurier Rose (127) (LE, $34.00) is less shimmery (90% similar). MAC Reward Yourself (LE, $16.50) is darker, more muted (90% similar). ColourPop Gneiss Guy (PiP, $4.50) is cooler (90% similar). Sydney Grace Pistol (P, $6.00) is more shimmery (90% similar). Urban Decay Element (PiP, $20.00) is more shimmery, darker (90% similar). ColourPop Clan of Two (LE, $4.50) is more shimmery, warmer (90% similar). Urban Decay Fortune-Teller (LE, $19.00) is more shimmery, lighter, cooler (90% similar). Laura Mercier Copper (LE, $23.00) is warmer (90% similar). MAC Claretluxe #2 (LE, ) is more shimmery, lighter (90% similar). Pat McGrath Alien Moon (LE, $25.00) is warmer (90% similar). MAC Boom Boom Room (LE, $18.00) is more shimmery, darker, more pigmented (90% similar). MAC Let's Roll (P, $18.00) is more shimmery (90% similar). MAC Bougie (P, $23.00) is less shimmery, lighter (90% similar). ColourPop Kindness (LE, $6.00) is less shimmery (90% similar). Urban Decay Golden Hour (LE, $19.00) is lighter, warmer (85% similar). Natasha Denona Calypso Blue (05M) (PiP, $29.00) is more shimmery, darker, more pigmented (90% similar). ColourPop Fairfax (LE, $4.50) is less shimmery, lighter, warmer (85% similar). Top 20 dupes listed, see the rest. See comparison swatches / view dupes side-by-side.
Formula Overview
Urban Decay Liquid Moondust Eyeshadow ($22.00 for 0.17 fl. oz.) is supposed to be a “liquid version” of the powder-based Moondust Eyeshadow formula. The difference (besides consistency!) is that these are designed to have a buildable formula that can be used on the lash line, over other eyeshadows on the lid, or on its own, and once it dries down, it “won’t budge or crease.” I felt like it was an overly fussy product, and I think it takes extra work and very specific preference to make them “worth it.” I’d much rather use the regular Moondust eyeshadow, which is even $1.00 cheaper (it is hard to compare liquid vs. powder weights, so there could be more uses in one than the other).
For the most part, they’re sheer to semi-sheer and somewhat buildable, but the texture doesn’t support layering. I don’t think they are that usable on their own, because they dry down quickly and are hard to blend out–they look patchy and uneven–and trying to build-up color by putting additional product on the same area always resulted in a thick, chunky, and uneven disaster on the eye. I tried layering them over eyeshadow as well, and from afar, it can be pretty, but they look horrific close-up as they are the same on top of something else: uneven with poorly distributed sparkle. The tiniest dab on the inner lid that you don’t touch or blend opened up the eye, but I tried brushes (including the brand’s Moondust brush), fingertips, silicone applicators, and the included brush (on the applicator) to no avail. I only had moderate success using the included applicator and layering it over eyeliner.
The formula itself was inconsistent every time I used a shade, because the product doesn’t seem to be well mixed, which results in sheerer and thinner, more pigmented and chunkier consistencies. They don’t really mix up, but you can try to twist and maneuver the wand into the product to try and mix it that way. The highlight of the formula is that there was virtually no fall out across all the shades except for when I tried to layer or build-up color, then sometimes I’d get a big chunk that would flake off entirely, but when worn on top of liner or as a single layer of product (on top of eyeshadow or alone), I had no fall out.
I also found the included applicator is particularly disappointing; it does nothing to improve application as it is a coarser brush that’s rather stiff, which means that it is hard to get any evenness out of it. It tends to glob product on rather than give you a sense of precision. The coarser bristles hold product in them unevenly as well. It is the type of brush that when pull it across the skin in one fluid motion, the product pulls to the side and leaves almost nothing in the middle.
Chem Trail
PPermanent. $22.00.
Zap
PPermanent. $22.00.
Recharged
PPermanent. $22.00.
Solstice
PPermanent. $22.00.
Urban Decay Chem Trail Liquid Moondust Eyeshadow
Urban Decay Chem Trail Liquid Moondust Eyeshadow
Urban Decay Chem Trail Liquid Moondust Eyeshadow
Urban Decay Chem Trail Liquid Moondust Eyeshadow
Urban Decay Chem Trail Liquid Moondust Eyeshadow
Urban Decay Zap Liquid Moondust Eyeshadow
Urban Decay Zap Liquid Moondust Eyeshadow
Urban Decay Zap Liquid Moondust Eyeshadow
Urban Decay Zap Liquid Moondust Eyeshadow
Urban Decay Zap Liquid Moondust Eyeshadow
Urban Decay Recharged Liquid Moondust Eyeshadow
Urban Decay Recharged Liquid Moondust Eyeshadow
Urban Decay Recharged Liquid Moondust Eyeshadow
Urban Decay Recharged Liquid Moondust Eyeshadow
Urban Decay Recharged Liquid Moondust Eyeshadow
Urban Decay Solstice Liquid Moondust Eyeshadow
Urban Decay Solstice Liquid Moondust Eyeshadow
Urban Decay Solstice Liquid Moondust Eyeshadow
Urban Decay Solstice Liquid Moondust Eyeshadow
Urban Decay Solstice Liquid Moondust Eyeshadow
Zap, Spacetime, Zodiac, Vega (lash line)
Zap, Spacetime, Zodiac, Vega (lash line)
Chem Trail over Giorgio Armani #9 and #10 Eye Tints
Recharged, Chem Trail, Solstice, Magnetic (lower lash line)
Recharged, Chem Trail, Solstice, Magnetic (lower lash line)
Oh no, how utterly disappointing! You can SEE how bad some of them are on your eye! ?
I figured I could almost not even have to write a word with those photos…
This is why I hate glitter polishes as well… too much base and not enough glitter throughout.
I wish the base was a sticky/buildable one. The fact the glitter doesn’t bind while layer screams of a liquid liner base rather than a glitter glue. Dimethicone is at the half way maker of the ingredient list…. which is pretty much the only binder I’m seeing in this formula. Stick with the pressed version poeple. 😉
Smartypants!
Thank you for sharing that tidbit with us 😉
Assuming that the silicone ingredient should be high up for better binding?
Yes, it should be the top 3-7, and it should be the top 1-3 in terms of liquid components as a base formula. Otherwise it just a thickening agent and won’t set, it’s an issue I’ve come across in liquid concealer and liquid eyeshadow formulas as well. The first ingredient being distilled water is a bad sign for glitter products. 😉
Silicones can be used in conjunction with waxes but it too can degrade the long wear properties slightly but nowhere near as badly as other liquids.
Oh wow! I had no idea about any of that. Thank you for sharing that info, WARPAINTandUnicorns! It’s definitely going to come in handy in the future.
I kind of specialise in long wear products as much as possible because I have long days wearing full makeup and I hate it when things break down after 5 hours. lol
I am so disappointed with these. Usually colour and sparkle are two things UD does so well, but these are such a failure. I was going to buy a few sight unseen when they first came out but I’m glad I waited.
They are a total pain to use even half-decently!
Super disappointing this formula is so bad! I’m glad I held off on buying any of these. I’m still debating on getting the Moondust palette though.
I was SO bummed!!
Wow! I’m actually shocked how bad these are!
So was I!
Awwww, this makes me sad 🙁 The shades are so nice!
I wish they were better!
Oh nooooooo.
I really tried to make ’em work 🙁
I am so disappointed! These could have been wonderful, but they are clearly not. I think they should have worked more on the formula. I’m definitely not going to buy these :(.
I think maybe these should have been more as glitter eyeliner than eyeshadow based on how they worked best when I tried them!
I kind of expected this. I never have faith in glitter anything for the eye. These look really bad….
They are very fussy!
I remember swatching Chem Trail in store, wasn’t too impressed, was mostly glitter with sheer base, and it was impossible to build up evenly, but it might work as a sheer glittery topper over another eyeliner. Zap did swatch great for me, but sounds like there’s an issue with cracking. But it’s such a gorgeous color, so brightening, I might get it anyway and if it doesn’t work out, return to Sephora
Yes, as layering, that’s about all I could see these working as, though I think you have to be someone who isn’t looking for perfection up-close. Even with pure glitter, it often looks better in person vs. in a close-up photo!
This formula just seems so poorly thought-out. I did pick up Spacetime because it was the only one that looked good in the initial swatches that you posted. It remains to be seen whether I can find a way to make it work, or if I’ll be returning it to Sephora.
How have you tried using Spacetime so far, AJ?
I actually haven’t tried anything just yet because I picked it up Sat and have been super busy, but my plan is to try it with the included brush, my favorite flat eye shadow brush, and with an angled brush as a liner. It really looks to me like the product came out somewhere between a liner and a shadow — and not really successful at either — but Spacetime looked really gorgeous in the store.
Ahh, gotcha! Well, keep me posted on your results 😀
WOW I’m stunned. I have Chem Trail, Magnetic, and Zodiac and all are good. I applied them over my MAC primer and they lasted all day (in the heat and humidity). Only Chem Trail had a little bit of fallout over the course of the day but nothing that couldn’t be brushed off. I love them so much, I’m considering getting Solstice. I think maybe this is another batch issue? Even your swatches look very different than mine do.
I purchased mine directly from Sephora, right as they launched. They wore fine as long as I didn’t layer them, though, without primer. 🙂
Michele, Chem Trail didn’t swatch well for me in store, but both Magnetic and Zodiac did, was a solid wall of color, very opaque, very different from Christine’s swatches, so I think there are QC batch issues. So I will only buy these from retailers with easy return policies.
I was definitely disappointed in these. When I swatched them, I was pretty bummed (but also kind of not, because then I didn’t feel the need to purchase them all). I did pick up Solstice, which had such a neat shift when I swatched it that I wanted to try it out. Strangely, I’ve had pretty good luck with it, even though I can tell it’s a finicky product. I’m not sure whether it’s the base I use (MAC Bare Study paint pot, which I use under every single eye product without question), but I’ve actually found myself grabbing it a few times in the past week. I concentrate it on my inner lid and normally just put something darker on the outer, which covers any edges or sheerness leftover. I believe one day I used UD Darkside and stuck a bit of ColourPop Telepathy on the inner corner, and I was so impressed by how dimensional it was. The blue-ish shift makes it look like a really neat nude color. It’s weird, because I can tell it’s not a great product, but for some reason it’s working for me anyways.
I really wanted Chem Trail to be great, but I’m SO glad I didn’t pick it up before swatching it myself. That’s true about all of them, honestly.
Happy to hear Solstice is working for you, Kylee! I think if one puts a very similar-hued eyeshadow under and isn’t obsessed with how it looks close-up/eyes closed, they can be pretty.
UD Hall of Shame! Seriously. That inner eye pink looks painful. As to Michele’s comments, I think there are real qc issues everywhere. The bite gelato I got is just like the instore tester, but it is very greige, more a dupe for oblivion. Nothing like Christine’s photo. And I trust Christine’s photos implicitly and explicitly. Quite sure that the Taraji blush I received is labeled as the blush, but is really the highlighter. There’s nothing burnt peppery about it. Now, I’m pleased about the gelato, but wtf? Not so pleased about the Taraji. More wtf? My favorite batch issue? I have 5 slightly different shades of orgasm, that look VERY different in the pan, esp when depotted in the same Z. Total wtf?
Gelato might be one of those where the tones and lighting can play a role in how it is perceived – it’s one of those more neutral shades, IMO.
Oh my god, those are horrible! I can see Solstice cracking up on your eye, Christine!
Yeppp! That’s why they were impossible to layer for me 🙁
I swatched some of these a few days ago and was really disappointed. I love the Moondust powder shadows and these were a huge letdown. I think I’m going to get the new palette instead.
I’m a fan of the regular Moondusts, too, so I was hoping for more from these, too.
These are 100% HORRID. I will stick to the regular Moondust formula for when I want mega wattage iridescent glitter effects, or Colourpop glitter and/or duochrome eyeshadows. UD never, ever ought to have had this particular applicator either. It only makes these even worse. A sponge-tipped doe-foot type applicator may have made a difference, possibly.
The regular Moondust is just so much better and easier to use… I’d rather spend $20 on a glitter primer or adhesive (and you can spend less!) for extra hold on the powder formula than the liquid.
This stuff is SO, SO disappointing. Thank you for writing this up! I know it is hard to write reviews on products like this. The colors in the tubes look great. I really hope UD reformulates these.
No difficulty to write a negative review vs. positive review – all the same to me 🙂
Good grief.
The last photo was just…I have no words. Solstice looks like it’s actually blistering on your eyelids!
I’m impressed you got them to perform at all, given the swatches.
Haha! As they say, a picture’s worth a 1,000 words.
Every review I’ve seen mentions the same issues, and that these only work for layering over a regular eyeshadow. That crackling issue is horrible. Did you try these as an eyeliner?
Yes, I did – see the photos where I am showing two of them used as eyeliner!
How did I miss that? Sorry. Thanks for replying; sorry you had to.
No worries!! ::)
Wow, I am stunned. This is so disappointing, especially since Recharged is such a cool color! Thanks for all the work you do on these reviews and for testing these new products out. I always check here before buying the new launches and I am definitely glad I did this time!
My pleasure, Casey! 🙂
Thank you!
Aw, darn! Even with the often problematic nature of having so much sparkle, I expected a better performance from Urban Decay.
Me too 🙁
ah man! im so glad I saw this but sad i really wanted some of these!
I wanted these to work so much!
Ouch, those cracks look almost painful!
They looked worse than they felt, lol!
It’s a specific feeling of disappointment when a product looks sooo gorgeous in the tube and then appears & performs this poorly.
Not only that but why would they even release these? Obviously they don’t work for the suggested uses! Urban Decay has some stellar products but this is so bad you can see it at a glance. How could it get through the development and testing? Plus it casts doubt over the quality of other products bringing the whole brand down.
It’s an odd release, because it seems fussy and inconsistent – and even the applicator seems like a miss.
Allow me to introduce Christine, the woman who CAN indeed make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear! Seeing the low ratings and the pretty dreadful swatches, I was amazed to see the beautiful look you still managed to create…pretty enough that I almost want to buy ZAP!
Haha! You’re too kind 😉
Sooo, the Armani shadows look nice in the 3rd photo. That’s about all I can say that’s positive. Yikes!
LOL!
Oh geez, that looks atrocious! How sad. 🙁
I knowww!
When I saw the sneak peeks, I thought the shades were ‘off’ – but now I know how ‘off’ they really are. Didn’t UD release some pencils a few years ago that made your ‘worst of’ list? Because this is another contender.
Christine, you can make any eyeshadow, tint, pencil look great on your eyes, regardless of the ratings and yet on this one we can really see how awful the the products are.
I think they had another major miss or two!
I bought chem trail a week ago and I was really disappointed by it. Wish I would have saw this review first before I made my purchase. Btw temptalia I’ve been looking at your reviews for yearssssss now. Actually, since I was in high school sophomore year (16 years old). I’m 25 now (:
Thank you so much 😀 Wow! I think you have been reading for just about as long as we’ve been going! It’ll be 10 years this October 😉
Wow I had a totally different experience with Recharged. I’ve worn it several times and no fallout , smooth even application . But I applied over other eye shadows in the center of my eye for some pop. I really like it. And got a couple compliments when wearing it. I’m probably going to buy the Moondust palette this week. I’m loving glitter eye shadows lately.
Not sure if you saw it in the review, but I didn’t have issues with fall out if I only wore it as a single layer (or layered) – it was when I attempted to use it as a more opaque color that I had issues with it flaking off.
Shame on UD for releasing garbage! Who in their right mind thought “oh sure these are ready for release”? On a sort of related note, has there been any word on when the Vintage Vice Lipsticks will be coming out? I’m like “hot under the collar” for those!
They are out now! 🙂 Ulta and Sephora have ’em!
Disappointing. Both the formula and packaging but not unsurprising. Glitter is not an easy formula to work with. I have couple of the original Moondust shadows and they are just sooooo difficult to apply, even with a wet brush and glitter glue.
Sorry to hear that even the regular Moondusts are hard to use for you 🙁
The applicator seems so strange to me, because it looks like my favored style of lip gloss applicator, but that’s not so great for eye products…
It is such a weird choice… I don’t know why they didn’t go for a doe foot applicator? Maybe even a squeeze tube, LOL.
I knew this new line was gonna be a fail from the first time I saw/heard about it. But dang, what an EPIC FAIL. Welp, these are all gonna be a hard pass. Why spend money and time trying to make something like this work when I can just use some glitter or glittery eyeshadow over a glitter primer if I want glitter. Ridic.
Exactly 🙁 I just feel like use a glitter primer + regular glitter is better!!
I feel like UD have been slacking a lot lately.. Especially with their shadows.
I am not very convinced in buying any singles or palettes that they release these days 🙁
Thank god that their lipsticks are still THAT good 🙂
They had some good stuff this year, but they had some misses too!