Fragrance Reviews by Uzkalnis

Fantastic citrusy opening, much more sophisticated than Aramis Life, and a very dignified drydown. Average staying power. I think I am going to get it.

Bought Pure Blend because it seemed special. When I realized it was just the cinnamon and it was too similar to that Diesel in red bottle, what's it's name, it was too late. Poor lasting power and unimaginative drydown. Neither exclusive nor otherwise special. AND ON TOP OF THIS silver foil started peeling off from the bottle neck on the third day! Advice: when you sell a perfume for $65, can you not perhaps try spend a few extra pennies on a bottle? Look to Gucci Pour Homme for inspiration in that area, if you must.

I bought Ungaro III "blind", based on reviews found here - and then I ordered Ungaro I. It is now very expensive to buy, if you can find it at all. I found it extraordinarily enigmatic - I cannot put my finger on it in any way except I would say it is a classic oriental fragrance. If I say it is citrusy on top and the drydown is musky, I would not do it any justice. There is that hint of rose and jam (maybe rosehip jam?) on top, and as it dries down, it is sweet - yet sweet not in a syrupy, but rather in an expensive, sophisticated way. That sugarcane sweetness (rum, maybe? but very very subtle note of it) lends a certain guilty decadence, a sense of privilege, to the classic musty drydown. Is it autumn fragrance? I'm not sure. Maybe Indian summer. It is so sad that this fragrance is now firmly history.

Oh dear oh dear. While I have seen other fragrances attracting similar degree of conflicting "love-hate" opinion, what other smell symbolizes social affiliation so distinctly?

Just read the reviews. It is amazing. Not only it is loved by those who loved the eighties, it is also actively reviled by those who hated the era (maybe because it was one brief period where money was more sexy than dirty hair and rebellion and poetry). It is amazing how a scent symbolizes that. It is, emotionally, like the 'glacier green' color of a BMW (now quite dated and available as special order only), which is essentially the same hue as the front of a dollar note. You either love it or hate it.

(Andrius Užkalnis)

1992 produced few exciting fragrances and practically no "classics", unless of course you consider Nautica a classic...

Safari IS a classic, but I can see the point of those who argue that it is not too exciting or unusual. This is because it has been imitated so often and so widely that it is easy to overlook the trend that it set.

Quite simply, Safari did not put citrus on top, and therefore the fragrance starts with spicy notes which are more habitually seen in the middle or in the base of the olfactory pyramid.

A complex and very solid base (esp. oakmoss and leather) achieve that distinct feeling of "grown up" fragrance and yes, it gets you thinking of leather armchairs, colonial verandas and plush carpets. This is a nice 'capitalist' fragrance: this is what Business Class feels like.

The bottle is one of the best in business, although one may argue that it looks slightly dated today.

Overall, it would be on my top 20 list if there ever was one.

(Andrius Užkalnis)

Let me start with what's not impressive: it's the bottle. I find it pretentious, even if it is eye catching. The fragrance itself is refreshingly original. The opening sharp and pungent grapefruit note is SO unlike the run-of-the-mill citrusy opening. Mint? I'm not sure about that. Maybe I need to smell it some more. But I am generally not very good at detecting mint in fragrances (save for Black by Kenneth Cole). Moccha is there alright. Now I have no idea what hazelnut wood smells like, but I would say that there is a complex composition of aromatic woods and sandalwood is not among them. Which is just as well - because it is present all too often these days. Overall, big thumbs up Givenchy on this original, stand-out creation. And of course, since Liv Tyler is on the ads, it gets extra two stars from me.
(Andrius Uzkalnis)

I think the comparison with Gucci PH is accurate inasmuch that the design aims to make the same statement (unashamedly "old money" shape and message of unapologetic elitism and general arrival in life), and also because of the woody-sweet tones. The similarity probably stops here: Gucci PH is very bold, unforgettable, trend-setting, and the smoky tone in the topnote, melting into whiskey-brandy hints, is a very unusual solution. This CD, meanwhile, is classy, it is well-balanced, but it lacks a hook which separates monumental scents from merely very good ones. This one is merely a very good scent.
(Andrius Uzkalnis)

1992 - a year of many releases but sadly few ground-breaking ones. I bought it, paying some serious money, after being completely stunned by both Ungaro I and Ungaro III, and now I am under-impressed. Too powdery, too old-lady-ish for my taste; yes it is distinct, but so is Lagerfeld; you have to be larger than life in self-confidence to wear it. It does smell of "old times", but not in a sense of old Montblanc pen or old good quality paper - the imagery evoked is more of artificial teeth and worn-out granny's slippers. The opening top note is quite nice, bitter orange bite of quite unusual dimension, but then it evolves into powder which just does not go away. Superb staying power, though.

I cannot believe THIS is still in production and the stuff like Aramis Havana has been discontinued. There is nothing impressive, although you may say that drydown has a delicate raisin and/or Christmas pudding notes, but they are too subtle and too weak to be noticed. Overall - yes, an unsuccessful, half-hearted marine fragrance. Better luck next time.

Green botanics? I thought it was cucumber. The top note is good, the drydown is quite distinct even to an untrained nose. It must be that hint of rosewood. The fragrance is simple and comforting, but I am not sure whether it is because I loved the year when it was born or because the fragrance itself is distinguished. It was certainly marketed well, and at that time the consumers were not yet tired of Calvin Klein going through the entire dictionary of nouns. One thing it lacks is statement. It is not a fragrance of presence and confidence - but as such, it may be acceptable for someone who is a bit reluctant to make a statement.

I bought it mostly because of nostalgia. Hey, I thought, late eighties, must be good. But I find that although it starts off very ambitiously (yes, the mint note is good), very soon the drydown becomes uninsipiring, soapy in a "free-hotel-soap-bar" kind of way. Cedarwood? Maybe, but too sharp and too synthetic, and a warm hint beyond that is barely noticeable. Yes, it is a reflection of the era, but not the best reflection of it. If you want late eighties in style, try Ungaro. Jazz, however, is decidedly time travel in Economy Class.

This fragrance is SO early 90s - don't touch it if you have objections to the imagery of red BMWs and if the pale green color of money does not connect with your heart. The combination of citrus on top and sandalwood in the base has been tried by many since, and the worst thing that can be said that, unfortunately, it has been imitated by supermarket brands in the nineties (think Black Denim perhaps). But those who know the difference will be aware that it's REAL stuff very quickly. The complexity of Ungaro III is amazing, and it is indeed best suited for evening wear and for refined surroundings.

Its only fault is that it is omnipresent and inexpensive to buy, and to many people it smells of their dads and grandads (not necessarily the most romantic connotation in the world). A fine fragrance, which in 1964 was well ahead of its time. Beautiful herby concoction, very well balanced. It is still selling - for a reason! (Andrius Uzkalnis)

Phoenix does not smell of anything connected with a desert or for that matter anything connected with Phoenix, AZ... but it still is a nicely structured, very masculine fragrance, with good earthy/salty tones and a brilliant leather base. Do not worry that it comes from a supermarket. It is an interesting, memorable smell.

Lynx is, essentially, a line of unremarkable supermarket toiletries, but Africa does stand out with its distinctly sweet/fruity and spicy tone, balanced by sweet-smelling woods (I think). In Britain, it does define the end of nineties very well.

Come to think of it, the name is probably the best and the most innovative thing about this fragrance. Packaging is nice, and the fresh grassy notes are agreeable. But overall, it is a true symbol of the Year That Imagination Died. I am not aware of any launch year more completely deprived of imagination than 1999.

Today, it may seem simplistic and those who don't like 80s would not like Drakkar Noir either, but no-one should underestimate its influence in the structure of modern men's fragrance of late 20th century. And if imitation is the surest form of flattery, oh boy has THIS been flattered!

Gillette may be thought of as a very common brand - almost like McDonald's - but they pull no punches when working out their scents. Not sure why it is called Pacific Light (sure sounds good), but the structure here is very assured and it has enough zing to be memorable.

I said this before and I'll say it again: 1994 was the year of giants and everyone - EVERYONE - seemed to have scored. Listen to this: D&G Pour Homme, Havana, Roma Uomo, Insense Ultramarine, L'Eau D'Issey pour Homme, even Adidas Sport, for crying out loud! It is as if floodgates of creativity, boldness, imagination have been opened. It's a shame that the inspiration eventually ran dry. Wild Rain is fresh in a salty-sweety way. Think of a sweet ripe apple that you pick up on a cold autumn day, lying in cold rainy grass, with drops of water all over it.

The drydown is more interesting and sublime than the top notes which are, well if not common, then definitely not unique or ground-breaking. Yes, this is all about summer. This is a good stuff, but it lacked proper marketing and self-belief.

I disagree that it is simplistic. Yes, it is sweet and I agree that mint note is very tipical for the year of it's launch, but I would argue that it is quite distinct too. The bottle is nothing to write home about (I, for one, always want to keep it upside down); and the association with MontBlanc... I don't know. I could name a few fragrances that I much, much closer spiritually to all that MontBlanc stands for: Louis Azzaro, Gucci pour Homme, Quorum, Obsession. Come on, if BMW would launch a fragrance, you wouldn't expect it to smell like Aqua di Gio or Tommy?

Not for everyone, and the sweetness and fruitiness, despite the finely crafted balance with oriental spice, will not please those yearning for 'freshness'. No fragrance is further from marine scents than this one. Disctinct and confident, whether you like it or not.

I'm not a specialist in female fragrances, but this is so bold and daring that I must say I admire it. It has a fantastic lasting power, and the top note of blackberry lasts forever and you then understand it's not even a top note - it lingers on with dry-down in a remarkably accomplished way. It takes a lot of skill to achieve this degree of elegance with fruity notes which are more often associated with 'cheap' and 'mass market'. A masterpiece.

I tried it and I liked the sweet sharp note of cinnamon. I thought it was unusual. I would have stayed clear of this purely because of 'groovy' packaging and I am pleased I tried it nevertheless (lesson: do not pre-judge something on the basis of packaging or advertising. Except for iPod, which has its entire campaign structured in such a way so as to ensure I would rather be dead than seen wearing this soapbox). As for dry-down, it is much more common and I am still not convinced this has a place in my collection. A few more tries at airport Duty Frees, perhaps? Will update when I eventually decide what I'm doing with this one.

In a way, it continues the fine job started by Aqua di Gio: killing of any imagination and creativity in perfumes. The most interesting thing? Possibly that mint in top note. It's gone before you know it. Insense smoke? Sounds interesting, but it's not there. Rather cheesy bottle with cheesy "artistique" script. As fake as any pretentious 'fusion' restaurant in London with 'contemporary' cuisine, designer interior and no soul.

It is very distinct and the smoky woody notes are heavy and unforgiving. It will NOT grow on you if you don't like it the first time. But if you DO like it the first time, you will like it more and more each day. For the simpler ones among us (including myself) - yes, it is the smell of pencil shavings, and uniquely that distinct memorable note sits in the dry-down, not on top. It is the papyrus wood: it reminds us of pencil shavings because sharpened pencils smell of soft warm wood and also the glossy soft paint that covers them. Someone asked here what to do if they discontinue this? I know. I will buy probably ten or twenty bottles to last me till the day I die. I honestly don't know of anything else quite SO accomplished. (Andrius Uzkalnis)

It is very warm, very old-smelling; not in a bad way, but in the way of an old house or an old theatre smells; a smell of faded beauty and gentler times. This is talcum powder galore. This is the smell of a world without mobile phones and definitely no internet. Not everyone will like it and not many people will dare wearing it (I don't think I would dare, for that matter), but it is a distinct, powerful classic fragrance, bold and expertly structured.

I think IPaidForThisName captured the essence very well: yes, just as video killed a radio star, AdG lowered expectations of the buyers seemingly forever. There is nothing wrong with Aqua di Gio, nothing at all - except now there are dozens of similar ones on the market. There is nothing daring in it, for there are toilet air fresheners on the market that cost a couple of dollars or pounds and are more memorable. What a celebration of bland and generic!

Yes it IS very much like pipe tobacco with those jammy, fruity tones, but it does not stop it from being distinctly feminine. I fail to make a connection here with the whole jeans thing, but maybe it is just me. Andrius Uzkalnis.

Like many fine fragrances, it does gain complexity with drydown. It may not be the most accomplished of tobacco fragrances (personally, I think that tobacco note is overstated here), and works of tobacco genius like Armani Havana or Dolce & Gabbana Pour Homme eclipse it no doubt, but this is still a true classic. This is about unashamed, old-style masculinity; no political correctness or inclusivity here.

As with most Aramis scents, it is very distinct and bold, and it's no surprise that some people hate it - it is one of those love or hate things. If there is a classic post-war Western fragrance, this is it.

This is a good proof how a simple combination can feel accomplished and elegant. Now that I think about it, Aramis seems to pick winner - Havana (sadly discontinued), New West (also sadly discontinued) and Life are all distinct, memorable, bold fragrances that do not attempt to be all things to all people.

There is a reason why everything coming from Gant is discontinued very quickly. It is all generic, and the people who shop at Gant and easily spend $100 on a pair of trousers just don't buy a bottle of fragrance on a whim, like they buy a pair of socks. They have enough money and common sense to get what they like. The new Gant Adventure is, for a change, advertised quite heavily (well, WAS in summer 2005), but it's success is at best modest, too.

It is too generic to be interesting. Same old story - starts citrusy, dries down into oakmoss. How many times have we seen this one before?

I bought it largely on the strength of in-magazine tester. I thought it was a relatively new marine scent. The real thing turned out to be much more lacklustre than I thought. The top note is so weak that the alcohol kills it off with no trace, and by the time the alcohol dries, you have arrived into dry-down, which is unremarkable except for a nice hint of old clean paper - not library dust, but expensive German paper in a draughtsman's workshop. It is just a hint, though. I would not buy another bottle.

I tried it a few times after reading TheCologneGuy's review site (admittedly, quite subjective and not always reasoned well enough, but still one of the best fragrance reads). I would say that Egoiste Platinum oozes quality and expensiveness (expensivity?), but I do not find it distinct enough. Yet another "lemony drying down to warm woods" thing, high quality, but little else.

Ten years after I bought it for the first time, I am going to buy it again. Who could have thought it would develop into a classic? Juniper lends it a distinct, sharp defining characteristic. Great achievement from otherwise unremarkable launch year.

Floral scent has never been so masculine. Givenchy does not boast many classics (at least in my opinion), but 1994 was the scoring year for almost everyone, and they scored too. Yes, it's fresh - but not 'like everyone else' fresh; it is complex and interesting. Terribly underrated, in my opinion. (Andrius Uzkalnis)

1994 was the Year of Giants, when inspiration fell like a Niagara on perfumers. Almost every house scored a hit that year: Havana, L'Eau D'Issey pour Homme, Insensé Ultramarine, Adidas Sport, Tommy - these are all distinct, memorable, love-them-or-hate-them-never-forget-them scents, and among this Dream Team the D&G Pour Homme manages to stand out. Never before has tobacco been elevated higher.

The longer I have it, the more I love it! It was given to me as a gift by my wife who is neutral, at best, about by passion for scents, and it was a brilliant choice made by someone who says she is not interested in 'this stuff'. Complexity of bold but well-rounded spice is remarkable.(Andrius Uzkalnis)

Too neutral, too inoffensive. It never grew on me, and it is one of the fragrances that I regret having bought. 1999 was the year of massive numbers of new scents being released, but very little of note and hardly any classics, with notable exception of Hugo Boss Dark Blue, which can hardly be any further from Romance. This fragrance is the point where RL became dangerously generic. (Andrius Uzkalnis)

One of the few fragrances where the top note is as interesting as the base. I was surprised to see lime, because I always thought of a sour orange. Definitely a summer scent, grown-up and quite distinct, not 'another fresh smell'. I am going through my second bottle.

It does belong to a simpler and more honest time when perfumers actually tried to think of something new instead of tinkering with the existing winners and churning out 'limited editions', 'light', 'summer' and such like. The year of its release was the year of giants like Eternity and Cool Water. They were bold and trying back then, and thanks to this that era produced unashamed statements, not inoffensive mediocrities. Even those who hate Fahrenheit admit that it is distinct and impossible to confuse with anything. Since then, we had to wait for more a decade to be able to buy gems of a similar weight category - like Gucci Pour Homme.

Among fragrances you find at a drugstore, this is remarkably accomplished. One could say it is one-dimensional and that the pine and cold top note citrus is nothing new, but few fragrances manage to capture a cold, wintery mood without resorting to heavy-duty spice like Aspen. Deodorant is among the best in the business. Will bring you more joy than its low price suggests.

I assume they are talking here about Luciano Soprani Uomo. It is extremely difficult to find. I have heard of it being available from selected department stores in the US. In UK, no-one heard about it. For the past few years, it could be reliably sourced from Tokyo Narita Airport Terminal 2 Duty Free, but only one shop, which has a "world scents" (or something like that) shelf. If you ask them, they would not have heard about it even there. Bizarre. Well, it is one of the most accomplished citrusy smells and quite distinct. The lucianosoprani(dot)it site says: "blending the sparkling citrus notes of bergamot and lemon from Calabria with fruity notes of apple and pineapple, enhanced by (...) nutmeg, delicate white pepper and sensual cinnamon and cloves (...) middle note blends lavender, jasmine and orange blossom with violet and lily. These give way to a base of woods, the pure and long-lasting Atlas Cedar (...) ebony and (...) vetiver, all accompanied by (...) amber and musk." The opening peppery, spicy lemon is remarkably well-balanced. Note how elegantly the smell evolves in warmer, woodier and sweeter base. Amazing complexity and distinctness - not "another lemony fragrance".

I spotted it at the pharmacy literally 200 metres from where I live. Was languishing in the corner of cologne cabinet (yes, an old-fashioned type where they lock cologne cabinet...). They said this bottle was there for years and were surprised to hear it's generally unavailable in UK. They even gave me £5.00 discount off £35.00 sticker price.
What a fantastic product. The complexity, the unashamed sheer richness and spices played against tobacco base is a good proof that you can do miracles even in tried-and-tested combinations, such as "tobacco & spices & citrus". It has a certain sound of the 'good ol' days', something in it is distinctly pre-internet, pre-email, and in a good way. It smells of Wall Street; it smells of a good hotel in Chicago, it smells of an expensive top-floor bar in one of Tokyo skyscrapers.

Not everybody remembers this today, but fourteen years ago this was possibly the first launch of a major MALE fragrance by a FEMALE-NAMED design house. It was a big and daring marketing decision for its time. Scent-wise, the original polka-dot item has never been eclipsed, and the legend of this product still leds the marketing push to less exciting and more generic producs by Herrera.

This Chic is disappointinlgly non-chic. Yes, it's sophisticated, but the result is too much like a toned-down XS. You want to know the meaning of chic? How about Gucci Pour Homme or Dolce & Gabbana - not everyone's cup of tea but it sparkles and impresses. One thing the market does not need is another derivative of known combinations.

At first, a sensed aniseed (the review makes no mention of it, but then I'm not a professional, maybe I was wrong). Then it evolved into warmth and wood, like entering a really good hotel room, with well-polished antiquee furniture and expensive, clean carpets. Woody tones are dominant but they remain subtle at all times, and there is just a hint of expensive leather, perhaps a soft tan bag next to you in a business-class cabin. Very, very distinctive and unlike most other scents on the market; will make you stand out and perhaps requires a minimum age of 30 to wear (would not go with jeans and sneakers, I am afraid).

It was sharper, more interesting than the green Polo, with fir needles which lingered on and on.

A warm and woody, and very autumn-type fragrance, it was given to me by someone about 12 years ago for my birthday.
Caractere used to have a beautiful ad - all about yellow and red leaves (that's as much as I can remember). The design of the box - part Art Deco, part African cloth, is also dominated by the tones of falling leaves.
The fragrance is truly accomplished and, given the right marketing, could have been something as popular as Farenheit - it has a similar strong distinctive characteristic and, along with the best compositions, it is timeless.
In UK, it is still available from specialist retailers.