Natalie Portman’s New Dior Ads Banned

Take a good long look at Natalie Portman‘s new Dior ad, UK readers, because you won’t be seeing it in magazines, on billboards or in subways: someone has filed a complaint with UK watchdog group the Advertising Standards Authority, slayer of makeup spots starring Taylor Swift and Julia Roberts, destroyer of oversexed teenagers in Marc Jacobs campaigns and conquerers of extreme thinness in online sales materials.

Although Natalie’s sporting the brand’s beloved Diorshow mascara, she’s also sporting some pretty obvious false eyelashes, in addition to a heaping helping of Photoshop (unless Natalie Portman is a beautiful space alien that comes from a planet without pores, which seems pretty plausible to us). Also, the campaign was shot by Mert & Marcus.

Following the complaint, Dior has apparently agreed to withdraw the ad without a fight–namely a formal investigation requiring Dior to argue that they didn’t Photoshop the hell out of Portman, potentially allowing for the undoctored originals to surface.

As is always the argument with the ASA banning yet another inoffensive but obviously doctored ad, people tend to feel that 1) the ASA should pick its battles and this isn’t near bad enough or 2) bless the ASA because this much Photoshop in a mascara ad (or any ad) is straight-up unethical. Where do you fall?

(via Design Scene, HuffPo)

Share This Post:
    • Kate Carter Hickey

      I think that Diorshow is overpriced having purchased it in the past and having it just gunk up my eyes and dry out quickly. That being said, I wouldn’t mind turning a page to have Portman’s gorgeous face staring back at me. It’s a pretty simple ad. I think we’d all probably kill to look like that.

      • Lilac

        But I think the point is she doesn’t really look like that. They airbrushed her pores away and any redness. Possibly sculpted her cheeks and chin to be a little sharper.

      • Trish

        I understand that idea, but I also think even starting with the little stuff of Photoshop misleads is important in creating a media world that is honest, and doesn’t make little girls hate their faces and bodies and hair, etc, because it doesn’t look like the pages of a magazine.

    • Lilac

      I wish we had this in the USA. That we could complain about add that lie to us. I would like to see more not air brushed models. Men and being so mean to women because they think all girls should naturally look like this.

    • samwise

      I think if it’s a fashion ad or a perfum ad, or I don’t know, a contacts ad. Sure! But if it is a mascarra add, booo. I agree that if you are selling mascarra, SHOW THE MASCARRA in actuality, like if you were showing a car to sell, maybe try to show the actual car.

    • kj

      I think it’s beautiful, but yeah, probably false advertising. I don’t mind these guys getting the occasional reality check from the ASA being like, dude, there are real people that gotta live with the, uh, consequences of your photos

    • Amy

      This is really good – mascara ads are just flat out fucking ridiculous. They put huge false lashes on the models PLUS they photoshop them to look even bigger. I want to see a normal person’s eyelashes with just the mascara on them. Otherwise it’s misrepresentation.
      Also, would it be so bad to see pretty women with pores and normal skin in magazines? Why do we need all this fakery?

    • Corey Melton

      i hate Advertising Standards Authority

    • Alchemical

      Yey! Great news!