(EXPANDED FROM 2/18/2022)
The automotive media tend to treat even the ugliest styling trends like the courtiers who ignore when the emperor has no clothes. I thus found it refreshing to see Sajeev Mehta critique the “crying-eyes” look a few years ago. Let’s check in to see how this fad has been doing lately.
For those new to this topic, the crying-eyes look refers to front and rear fascias which have downward streaks that can remind one of tears.
Mehta (2022) described the fake portals that jutted below the taillights of the sixth-generation Toyota Camry SE/SXE as looking like “mascara stains.” This illustrated how “exaggeration is the norm” in contemporary automotive styling. Note below how the previous Camry had relatively clean styling.
Are some vertical streaks better than others?
Mehta (2022) did not completely dismiss the crying-eyes look. “I just wish the mascara stain was detached from the taillights and handled a bit more like the W205 C-Class,” he lamented.
On the other hand, Mehta (2022) liked the way Cadillac has given the front end of its recent models a functional vertical light bar that makes “the leading edge stand out much like the chrome trim of the slab-sided 1961–69 Lincoln Continental.”
The Camry dries its eyes while other cars go for it
A more recent facelift of the Camry ditched the crying eyes while reworking the C-pillar and deck to make them less odd looking. But then designers gave the front vertical gills and a gaping lower grille that looks like it could devour a large school of fish in one gulp.
Perhaps Toyota’s research told them that corn-fed Camry customers wanted their cars to look menacing coming but not going.
Toyota hasn’t given up on on crying eyes. As a case in point, the 2025 BZ4X includes such a dramatic diagonal shape to its taillights that they look like real tear jerkers.
Other brands are now more comfortable crying
Toyota designers apparently loosened the inhibitions of its competitors, because crying eyes have spread throughout the industry. Even so, they have increasingly been integrated into the taillights themselves.
A case in point is the Chevrolet Blazer EV, whose taillights have a T-shape that wraps around the rear corners of the car. Meanwhile, the front has a large streak that carries down from the headlights to almost the base of the fascia.
Kia has also adopted streaks as a styling theme for both the front and rear of its sedans — and accentuated them with lighting. The next two photos show the mid-sized K4 while the banner photo at the top of this story is the larger K5.
Whatever happened to practical considerations?
While this survey of new cars is hardly exhaustive, it does show that the crying-eyes look is still going strong.
That said, automakers have also become fixated with stand-alone vertical streaks or scoops. The 2025 Honda Civic’s are quite small whereas the Lexus UX has a larger gash that seems to end in a visual puddle of sorts. Weird.
Sometimes the vertical cutouts include lights, such as with the 2025 Hyundai Palisade. I may be showing my age, but I am not enthusiastic about designs that put lighting that stretches down to what used to be bumper level, where they can be easily damaged.
Wherein we bid goodbye to the bumper
This brings us back to a previous discussion about how contemporary automobiles lack basic bumper protection. Jason Torchinsky (2018) went so far as to argue that “the bumper, as it once was known, is effectively gone.” This is doubly problematic because today’s vehicles often have an extensive number of sensors and cameras located near bumper level.
Design trends tend to go in cycles, so I hope that at some point the pendulum swings back toward greater functionality. If automakers aren’t careful, they may find that the government once again steps in with stricter bumper regulations. A parking lot fender bender shouldn’t cost thousands of dollars to repair.
It would also be great to see more diversity in design approaches. If vertical streaks and scoops are going to be used purely for decoration, then how about moderating their usage so that automobiles stop looking so similar to each other?
NOTES:
This story was originally posted on Feb. 18, 2022 and expanded on July 31, 2025.
Share your reactions to this post with a comment below or a note to the editor.
RE:SOURCES
- Mehta, Sajeev; 2022. “Vellum Venom Vignette: These crying eyes of mine.” Hagerty. Jan. 21.
- Torchinsky, Jason; 2018. “Reminder: Cars Don’t Have Bumpers Anymore and That Sucks.” Jalopnik. Posted November 25; accessed August 30, 2020.
This essay brings to mind the oft told tale of a major auto maker’s design studio in the late ‘90’s or early ‘00’s parking their midsize sedan in a large room with the competition’s midsize sedans all painted the same color and all emblems removed for review by upper management. There was difficulty naming which car was which. All of the cars resembled the same metallic potato.
The root vegetable character of cars was driven at first by aerodynamics to improve fuel economy, then the proportions got increasingly chunky to address crash survival against the monstrous trucks and SUVs that are all the rage. The slots slashes, and grooves in the body and fascias ( not bumpers) are an attempt at individuality carved into the potato. In this mode of design, more attention is given to the lights that stretch across the hood or deck to the greenhouse than the overall form itself.
Luxury cars used to be stately. Sports cars were svelte…think the E Type, or muscular like a Corvette. No more. All are chunky and gimmicky. There are portions of cars that are appealing, the rear of a 2022 Mazda MX5 has the pinched and upswept tail character of a sports car, but it is rare. Most are cartoons.
Ugly, stupid and unremarkable. Nobody with a sense of classic automotive design would ruin a good style with such unnecessary bits and markings, in my opinion.
“Nobody with a sense of classic automotive design would ruin a good style with such unnecessary bits and markings, in my opinion.”
I agree, James. Even at his worst, Bill Mitchell who could trowel on the gingerbread with the best of them, valued proportion and overall shape better than the current generation of transformer-influenced designers. Off the top of my head, it is difficult to think of a contemporary car that has a graceful yet exciting shape combined with great proportions and a face that doesn’t look like it belongs on a monster truck. That said, the original Audi A5 coupe did remind me in some ways of Mitchell’s 1st gen Riviera.
To my mind, the running mascara look is a stylistic dead end, which can’t end soon enough. Good design is simple, and doesn’t need extra adornment, whether it be fifty more pounds of chrome (a la Harley Earl) or a plethora of fake vents (a la Toyota-kun). 🙂
By all means have nicely faceted detailing in the headlamp and taillamp assemblies, but vertical lines running down from them are a detraction. The eye reads them as a visual distraction, a needless vertical bracketing the design and breaking up the coherence of the overall shape. And they’re glaringly obvious on a Camry, which sure doesn’t need vents behind the wheels in any production form!
l would welcome “speed lines” a la 1941 if done tastefully but the crying eye “mascara lines” l hope only last as long as “sore thumb” and “bull’s nuts” tail lights did.
OK, I’m old. But I don’t like modern automotive styling. Angry eyes, threatening mouths, phony brake ducts. And yes, I’d like more prominent bumpers, those lights cost hundreds of dollars. Why can’t we have generic lighting like the old $2 sealed beam? With glass, so it doesn’t cloud up! Today’s light put more effort into looking good than lighting well. Another area where an LED bulb in a round reflector provides consistent results.
Although there is some crash protection hardware under the surface, there isn’t anything that looks like a bumper sticking out of the front of most anything anymore. If there was, would it protect the lights and sensors effectively enough? Lots of cash out there. My question is: are a larger % of crashed vehicles simply “totaled” by insurance companies rather than being repaired? Have both industries just given up on the high cost of repair labor, etc.? One could also get into a “chicken or egg” argument here about the disappearance of meaningful bumper protection and costs.
Did the 5 & 2 1/2 mph bumper laws of the early ’70s get repealed, modified, or are they still in effect being satisfied by the modern covers & internal structures?
Mike, here’s what I have written so far about bumper standards. I suspect that at some point the pendulum against regulation will swing the other way and we will see the return of some type of bumper standards. The costs have simply gotten to high to continue ignoring this problem — and the auto industry is clearly not willing to self police.
Why did Jaguar sell less and less and less cars in the US for the last 20 years? Because they looked like Toyotas. All cars do. No one can tell the difference. A couple winking eyes doesn’t make a difference. Bill Lyons has been spinning in his grave.
The Japanese and other Asian makes have dominated the U.S. market, and along with that, their ideas of what is good design.
Hello, kitty!