Flashback Beauty Friday 47: Urban Decay Pocket Rocket Lip Gloss

Post does not contain affiliate links or PR gifted items.

Hello gang, I'm back with one of those 'oddball' makeup items today, after the delightful (though some people will likely find that one odd too), cat shaped lipstick debut from Paul & Joe last week.

Back in 2009, I bought this nude (in more ways than one) lipgloss. It's the Urban Decay Pocket Rocket Lip Gloss in shade Kirk. So called, because of the ahem, quirky packaging.

As the name suggests (though definitely a double entendre), these glosses are intended to be transportable, housed in a very flat style bottle/tube (?) that would easily fit in your pocket without looking bulky. It's very sleek and I do love the smoothness.  I'm laughing typing this and trying to avoid all the innuendos and euphemisms that would be so easy to stray into when you see what follows. The main portion is clear, so you can easily see the colour of gloss inside (if I recall correctly there were 8 to collect) and each shade had a boys name.

This is because the lid is...interesting. Featuring a lenticular hologram of a clothed man, different guy on each gloss, you tilt it to remove his clothes and see him in his undies. I have no doubt this concept has it's fans and equally, it's haters. Some will find it hilarious and want to collect all the guys (they each had bios back in the day about their jobs and interests etc), others will find it embarrassing to apply in public as if they're desperate to attract a man and of course, there's the assumption that everyone using the gloss is attracted to or wants to see men, naked.  Was there the option for a naked girl?  No.  We've spoken here before about Urban Decay and their controversial shade names and packaging ideas, so it's nothing surprising at this point. The thing I do think is really neat is that on the back of the lid, you see the guy from behind, again with and without clothes. I think that's quite cool to include the reverse image, the nakedness I can take or leave to be honest!

I picked my gloss for the shade rather than the man in the lid and I'm sure at the time I was a bit disappointed with him as he was the "hippy one" that I didn't think was my type, but now I'm seeing a Michael Ealy lookalike (phwoar, if only 😍). The gloss does get weirder though, the back reads "our juicy gloss is slick, sexy and ultra-shiny, infused with a yummy crème brulee flavor and hyaluronic spheres to keep lips looking full. Slip this rocket in your pocket. The case is super slim (no unsightly bulge), and laced with pheromones...give it a rub to unlock them" and there is indeed "rub me" written on the end of the lid. I don't recall this feature, did I block out that nonsense? Perhaps!

Product wise, it does indeed have that strong brown sugar, caramel type scent and taste, which I tend to dislike to begin with, but get used to. The gloss is more fluid or thinner than the likes of MAC lipglass, but still reasonably thick with a high-shine finish.  No sparkle in this one, just a glossy brown-nude (not overly pigmented). The wand has a small brush on the end, like, really small. I think it would take several in and outs to get the required amount of gloss on the lips, though the brush has remained perfectly shaped all these years.

Like I say, when it comes to UD, there's often something to be offended about, which the next person will find rather amusing.  I like the concept of the flatter packaging and the way the brush just pops out when you untwist the lid.  Random naked men on the lid...I don't need, though if they remade these with BTS...ooh, I'd be ALL over that (Jungkookie, get in my pocket) 😆 They don't need to be naked (though a Jungkook Fake Love shirt-lift flip would be perfection), just a face close up with a flip to a body shot.  One can dream.  Okay, do you remember this one?