The Lego Look: the mass production of identical faces

For branding and marketing professionals, the mass production of identical faces presents an intriguing challenge. In a world where everyone looks the same, how do you stand out?

If you scroll through Instagram, binge-watch a popular TV show, or flip through the pages of a fashion magazine, something might strike you as oddly familiar. It’s not just the makeup, the outfits, or the curated poses—it’s the?faces. Everyone looks... well, the same. Perfectly arched brows, full lips, chiseled cheekbones, and noses so sharp they could slice through air. Welcome to the age of?The Lego Look, where individuality seems to have been swapped out for mass production, and every face is built from the same assembly line.

But how did we get here? And why does everyone suddenly look like a Kardashian doll? For branding and marketing professionals, this is a paradox. After all, differentiation is the golden rule. Yet, in today's social media-obsessed culture, it feels like individuality has taken a back seat to an assembly-line aesthetic. Let’s explore who’s shaping this standardization of beauty, and why we’re all willingly marching to its rhythm.

The rise of the copy-paste face

To understand where today’s aesthetic trends come from, we need to look at the influential forces at play. Celebrities, influencers, and reality TV stars are often seen as the architects of modern beauty standards. In the same way that Twiggy influenced the waif look in the ‘60s and Kate Moss popularized grunge chic in the ‘90s, today’s beauty queens—think the Kardashians and Hadids—are setting the tone for millions of people around the world. However, the aesthetic being pushed is one of near perfection, creating a rigid template that many follow.

Thanks to the ubiquity of filters, photo editing apps, and cosmetic procedures, these aspirational looks aren’t limited to the rich and famous. Everyday individuals can now craft their appearance to fit this mold, often opting for cosmetic surgeries and injectables that make them look like someone else. In effect, we’re witnessing the Lego-fication of faces: beauty ideals snapped into place, one standardized nose job at a time.

Instagram: the global factory of faces

Instagram plays a pivotal role in this phenomenon. With over a billion active users, the platform serves as a beauty incubator, where certain looks become viral trends. The “Instagram face” has become its own genre—defined by plump lips, flawless skin, almond eyes, and a contour so sharp it could cut glass. These looks are often created with the help of makeup tricks, filters, and, increasingly, surgery. But the danger is in how Instagram perpetuates the idea of a singular, universal beauty ideal.

With algorithmic reinforcement, the faces that get the most likes and shares rise to the top of the feed. The result? Everyone begins to look like everyone else. Individuality gets drowned in a sea of symmetry, and uniqueness is considered a flaw rather than a strength.

The look has become so recognizable that the artist Sara Shakeel coined the term “Instagram Face” to describe this new aesthetic. In a way, it’s like building your face out of a kit: pick the lips, eyes, and cheekbones that are most popular and slap them on. The result is an eerie uniformity.

The influence of Reality TV and cosmetic surgery

It’s hard to talk about the mass production of identical faces without acknowledging the role of reality TV. Shows like?Keeping Up with the Kardashians,?Love Island, and?The Bachelor?have mainstreamed not just specific fashion trends but also physical alterations. The Kardashian family, in particular, has been at the forefront of this aesthetic revolution. Kim, Kylie, and Khloe have spent years perfecting and selling their curated look, turning it into an industry unto itself. It’s now not just about imitating their makeup routines or fashion sense—it’s about physically reshaping yourself to look like them.

According to the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, the demand for cosmetic procedures has skyrocketed in the last decade, with people opting for lip fillers, Botox, and rhinoplasties in search of their “ideal” face. And the kicker? Many patients bring in photos of celebrities or their own filtered selfies as reference points. Filters that smooth skin, enlarge lips, and narrow noses have become a key influence on how people envision themselves. The line between virtual and real beauty is blurring, and the desire to look like our filtered selves is driving more and more people to the plastic surgeon’s office.

The economic engine of standardized beauty

Brands and marketers haven’t been slow to cash in on this trend. The beauty industry is raking in billions thanks to this standardized look, pumping out products designed to help everyone achieve their own Lego face. Whether it's the contour kits that carve out cheekbones, lip kits that puff up pouts, or skincare serums promising flawless, pore-free skin, there’s a product for every step of the transformation.

Celebrity-backed brands like Fenty Beauty, Kylie Cosmetics, and Huda Beauty have leveraged this aesthetic frenzy to build empires. They package the illusion of perfection and sell it to the masses—feeding into the very standardization they helped create. These brands aren’t just selling makeup; they’re selling an identity. And the message is clear: If you want to be beautiful, you have to look like?this.

The same goes for fashion and wellness brands. Activewear companies tout the idea of the “perfect” body, while fitness influencers flood social media with hyper-sculpted physiques, each more identical than the last. In the quest to differentiate their brands, many companies have paradoxically contributed to the homogenization of aesthetics, encouraging a pursuit of perfection that leads us all down the same rabbit hole.

What does this mean for Branding?

For branding and marketing professionals, the mass production of identical faces presents an intriguing challenge. In a world where everyone looks the same, how do you stand out? Traditional branding wisdom tells us that differentiation is the key to success. Brands are supposed to find what makes them unique and amplify it. So why is that logic seemingly inverted in today’s beauty world?

The answer lies in the psychology of conformity. Humans are social creatures who seek approval and belonging. In a culture that values “likes” and shares, looking the same as everyone else feels like a safe bet. It provides a sense of security in an otherwise chaotic world. This is why we see consumers flocking toward brands that promise not just beauty, but?belonging.

However, the brands that will truly thrive are the ones that find a way to celebrate individuality within this sea of sameness. Think of brands like Dove, which has consistently challenged the traditional beauty norms with its “Real Beauty” campaign. While they still operate within the beauty industry, their focus on diversity of appearance—celebrating wrinkles, curves, and everything in between—sets them apart.

Breaking free from the mold

The Lego Look might reign supreme for now, but trends in beauty are cyclical. Just as the waif-like supermodels of the ‘90s gave way to the curvier aesthetics of today, we may see a backlash to this era of mass-produced beauty. Already, we’re seeing hints of change as more voices rise up to challenge the pressure to conform.

For the branding world, this presents an opportunity. The companies that can capture the growing desire for authenticity, diversity, and individual expression will be the ones to shape the next era of beauty. After all, humans weren’t made to fit into molds—or look like plastic dolls. Maybe it’s time for a new standard, one where faces are celebrated for being different, not identical.

Enjoyed this read? Dive deeper into my world of ideas and stories—discover my books on Amazon. Explore insights, strategies, and a dash of wit that’ll keep you coming back for more. Check them out here: https://www.amazon.com/stores/Marcos-G-Figueira/author/B0DHY4P8L1

References

1. Anker, E. S. (2017). "The Face of Affect in Aesthetic Theory."?New Literary History, 48(3), 519-541. doi:10.1353/nlh.2017.0024 This paper explores the cultural fascination with faces in aesthetic discourse and how beauty standards shape societal perceptions.
2. Negrin, L. (2002). "Cosmetic Surgery and the Eclipse of Identity."?Body & Society, 8(4), 21-42. doi:10.1177/1357034X02008004002 This article critically examines how cosmetic surgery contributes to the homogenization of appearances, blurring individual identity.
3. Holliday, R., & Cairnie, A. (2007). "Man Made Plastic: Investigating Men’s Use of Aesthetic Surgery."?Journal of Consumer Culture, 7(1), 57-78. doi:10.1177/1469540507073508 Focusing on male consumers, this paper discusses the rise of cosmetic procedures as a form of identity management and its impact on individualism.
4. Orbach, S. (2009).?Bodies. Picador. Susie Orbach’s book is a critical analysis of how modern beauty culture and media create a damaging obsession with physical appearance, leading to uniformity in bodies and faces.
5. Twigg, J. (2013). "Fashion and Age: Dress, the Body and Later Life."?Journal of Aging Studies, 27(4), 313-322. doi:10.1016/j.jaging.2013.05.002This paper explores fashion trends and body aesthetics, touching on how consumer trends create widespread replication of certain "ideal" looks across generations.
6. Pitts-Taylor, V. (2009). "Becoming/Being a Cosmetic Surgery Patient: Semantic Instability and the Normative Work of 'Recovery' Talk."?Feminist Studies, 35(3), 503-530. doi:10.1353/fem.0.0094 This academic article examines the role of recovery narratives in cosmetic surgery, and how it frames appearance changes within societal norms.