Montana Parfum d'Homme (original) (1989)
by Montana

Everyone loves this one to pieces, so I had to try a little. Golden, ambery cinnamon is the first thing I catch, with some clove for backup and a strong undercurrent of florals. I also find the burn of lavender if I sniff deeply, but overall the top isn't very astringent. After just testing Peterman 1903, the waxiness is also apparent in Montana, even though it's a lot brigher here and less strong. I can already tell that the honey-like shrillness of the amber, while not terribly bad, is eventually going to be too much for me. It's not quite the same note as Caron's Third Man, but the effect is the same for me. I find a little bit of the musty, fetid, decaying foliage that I remember from Tsar and other dirty, smoky green fragrances, but again not a whole lot of it. Each whiff is just so heavy overall that it gets tiresome. Finally, in the base, I'm surprised to encounter soap: specifically the type of soap with strong enough fragrance to give me that fizzy, tingly feeling up my nose. Plus, I finally just caught the rose, which I had probably been overlooking all along. It just seems over-constructed, and it doesn't make me think of Havana.

26th June, 2011.

Can I just say, this may be the ugliest looking fragrance bottle I’ve ever seen.

Now that I’ve got that off my chest, let’s talk about the oft-mentioned resemblance to Aramis Havana. Yes, there are parallels, but they’re relatively fleeting and superficial. The two scents come closest in their first ten or fifteen minutes on the skin, where both display a boozy citrus, spice, and tobacco accord. After that, the two go their separate ways – Havana ever further into spice and tobacco, while Montana emphasizes lavender, artemisia, and a huge oakmoss note that completely dominates its development. Michael Edwards classifies Montana as “crisp woody oriental scent,” alongside Jaïpur Homme, A*Men, and Héritage, but with all that oakmoss, I can only think of it as a chypre, or perhaps a badass 1980s-style mossy fougère, à la Jules or Lauder for Men.

Is it enjoyable? Absolutely – in an old school, men’s club, retro sort of way, just like Creed’s “Vintage” Tabarôme, Équipage, or Monsieur de Givenchy. In this day and age there’s a slight air of camp about a fragrance like this, but it’s still undeniably stylish and sophisticated. If your tastes run to spice, lavender, oakmoss, and powdery amber, and if you appreciate the emphatically virile fragrance aesthetic of the 1980s, this is a scent worth trying.

(Not to be confused with the bland citrus now sold as "Montana pour Homme.")

24th April, 2011. (Last Edited: 2nd May, 2011.)

I don't quite understand the comparisons here of the similarities between this scent and Aramis' Havana. (??) It would stand to reason that if they were indeed that similar, then I'd probably enjoy both scents, not so !? However that was not the case at all ! I didn't like Havana at all, whilst on the other hand, thoroughly enjoyied Montana. ~ Different enough to my nose at least.
~ Montana on me was all delicious spice at heart, subtle clove and tons of delicious cinnamon. In fact it was all about the cinnamon mostly. (My favourite cinnamon scent at the time). Then drying down to warm resiny amber and patchoulied mossy woods. Whereas Havana was all rather much more about a tobacco, but a smoky "stale cigarette" type tobacco. Not really that pleasant to my nose particularly. ~ (Or at least that is how they played out on my skin !). ... So if there were any similarities between them, maybe only in the very top opening notes perhaps ? Though, I don't even remember them being particularly that similar either quite honestly. ...

But then scent really is a very personal and individual thing after all ! Which is why I'm always amazed why we even bother trying to review them. The very same scent is always different to each individual. For different notes of a scent are picked out and sensed by different people. While the clove might stand out to one, to another the cinnamon might be much more apparent. Or even go totally unnoticed by others yet ? ~ All dependant on many different reasons. From nose, smell, experience, preference, mood, time and countless other "permutations". Even the very exact same note will smell totally different to different noses/people. So how anyone ever even manages to agrees on a specific scent at all is really quite amazing. ...
(Like, another example, many say Gaiac wood smells just like Cederwood. Whilst to my nose they are quite distinctly different. Yes both certainly woody, but still very distinct nevertheless. And on and on ... ).
... Oh, I don't know. Let me get off the soap box and back on point ........

Montana was a rich and delicious scent to my nose (if a bit "80's" maybe. Though not as loud as most.) ...
(AND, I should also stress, I'm talking here of the old one in the RED box. For the others were again "another kettle of notes" entirely ... ).

13rd April, 2011.

Not for me,unpleasant and uninspiring.I guess i can forget about Aramis Havana as well.

29th March, 2011.

Okay, so, as other reviewers before me have pointed out, Montana Parfum d'Homme is basically Aramis Havana in a different bottle. Now, there are *subtle* differences - more lavender, less tobacco, more leather, etc. However, if you've smelled Havana before then on first whiff of Montana it would be natural to make a comparison to Havana. However, Havana came out 5 years AFTER this, so I guess we could say that Havana smells like THIS! Haha.

If you've never smelled Havana before and thus can't draw a comparison, then the best way to describe these two scents is that they are very powerful, spicy green fragrances. Like Havana, the Montana has a powerful opening blast of lavender, tobacco and cumin; albeit a subtle cumin that is not overbearing for people like me who hate cumin. There's also a flurry of aldehydes and floral notes among the opening blast, giving Montana softer, more "plush" feel than Havana. As the scent dries down, it retains this character, however the middle and base unearth themselves more and more until I'm left with a subtle masculine presence of moss, patchouli, leather, and a slight hint of incense a few hours later. The lavender and spicy notes hide in the shadows quietly.

The longevity on this is superb, as expected - I get a full 12 hours tops, and the sillage is f*cking nuclear, so PLEASE don't go over three sprays!

One last thing I'll mention is the bottle - I'm glad that Somerville Metro Man mentioned Close Encounters; the bottle DOES look like the Devil's Tower mountain from that movie. The bottle also looks kinda like the Tower of Babel or the Emerald City from The Wizard of Oz. The sprayer is also awesome; it's a big sprayer button and the top of the sprayer curves to fit a finger, and it sprays the juice very generously but controlled, like a high quality Chanel atomizer.

Anyway, if you like Havana or have smelled it before, definitely try this only because of the source of inspiration for Havana, and also this is a very unique take on the spicy fougère that Havana made very brutal and harsh and Montana was a bit more conserved and classy with this idea. Don't blind buy; try it first and enjoy it from there.

I actually like this one more than Havana, and Montana Parfum d'Homme is now in my top ten.

2nd March, 2011.

i think of gary cooper when i smell this fragrance. he was a montana native. i think claude montana is french though but the fragrance itself is much suited for the coop's ruggedly handsome good looks. this frag is mostly leather and spice. discontinued but can still be had at excellent prices.

20th August, 2010.