I smelled this in the latest issue of Glamour magazine and thought, "Great, another Fracas / Michael Kors cologne". I think I've had the wrong idea all along by working at a boring job for a paycheck - I should simply slap my name on a bottle of tuberose scent and sit back and rake in the dough. I'm getting tired of all the tuberose fragrances everywhere these days.
Although I'm not into celebrity fragrances and am not a fan of Paris Hilton, I just smelled this in an ad for Macy's, and I like it. It smelled pleasant enough on the paper scent strip, but even better after being rubbed onto my skin, which is unusual for me. Unlike her other fragrances, I find this one distinctive and more my style. The ad shows Paris all done up in a turquoise fairy costume and the bottle's sprayer is turquoise. And it does give off kind of a turquoisey mood, IMO. (some fragrances don't smell like the color of bottle or liquid that they come in; i.e. Guerlain's Insolence doesn't smell pinky or Chloe's Narcisse doesn't smell greeny) It's light, fresh and crisp and somewhat lasting. It reminds me vaguely of Love's Rain Scent or a bit of Ralph Lauren's Pure Turquoise. I will buy it someday soon.
Let me first say that I tend to ignore celebrity fragrances and that I'm not a fan of Mariah Carey's musical style. But I smelled it in a magazine foldout ad and found it pleasant, so I asked for it for an early Christmas gift. I got it as part of a set with 2 mini bottles of the Mariah Carey M and a mini bottle of this one. The Mariah M scent was okay for me, but nothing special and a bit heavy. But I like Luscious Pink. It does make me think of the color pink, and not just because of the pretty bottle. It is a light and cool floral. It vaguely reminds me of Halo by Victoria's Secret, which has been discontinued. For me, it's sweet and flower and good enough to use this mini bottle up, but it's not distinctive enough to have as a signature scent. But as I said, I really love the bottle design.
I agree with tvlampboy about it smelling similar to Ombre Rose. I tried Lutece in 1993 and it smelled great and I got compliments. I tried it again in 1999 and either my body chemistry had changed or maybe the formula was tweaked because it turned stale on me. I also got in trouble at my job at the time because my boss accused me of drinking beer and I don't even like beer. But she was right...it did have kind of a beerlike quality.
I just smelled this one from a magazine scent strip. Unlike the original Beautiful, I can actually smell this one. The first whiff I took, I liked it. I am a fan of fresh florals anyway. What I noticed after that - and what sets it apart from the original- is the tuberose. I wouldn't buy it because I think there are too many fragrances with tuberose that are popular right now and that note is a bit cloying for my tastes. But I would recommend that other try it.
I tried this one on in the store one time and I just had to buy it because it was the epitome of a fresh springy floral. So beautiful! It totally drew me in. The problem was that after I began wearing it regularly, it made me sneeze and sniffle - and I'm not a very allergic person. I can wear many other scents heavily and no problem. If it wasn't for that, it would've been perfect.
I loved how it smelled in the scent strip and on other women. It's too bad that it doesn't work with my body chemistry. I don't have body odor issues, but when I've tried to wear this, I get a fishy odor.
I hated this one the second I got a whiff of a scented strip in a magazine. To me, it smelled just like Lady Stetson. It is very heavy and gave me nausea and dizzyness, not to mention it put me in a bad mood.
I can't be the only one who can't smell this one. And my sense of smell usually works quite well, thanks. But maybe it's like a dogwhistle effect - some sounds are there, but inaudible to my ears - there must be something in Beautiful (yes, the original formula) that my nose is 'deaf' to. I barely smell it on someone else, on the scented magazine strips or even sprayed directly onto my skin. It's floral, but very, very light and SHEER. Not too distinctive to me either. I feel very neutral about this one but gave it a thumbs down only because it makes me feel as if my normally keen sense of smell is failing me. I would never buy it as I would find it akin to spraying myself with plain soapy water.
PEE-UWW! LOL at the comment about trying it on and wanting to run away from yourself! I had the same impression and it smells like Tabu. There is nothing 'youth'ful at all about this anachronistic heavy headache-inducing cologne. This is something I can only imagine on matronly dowagers with blue rinses in their hair who are stuck in a time warp.
I fell in love with this drugstore cologne when I was 18 ('89) and it was my signature scent for several years, until some pesky woman I didn't like who always tried to copy me started wearing this all the time. That ruined it for me, but I still keep a bottle in my fragrance wardrobe to wear when I need to cheer myself up. It's a perky floral, very distinctive, but it's more relevant for the teens to early 20's set.
My boyfriend bought this for my 18th birthday, many years ago. I liked it well enough. I didn't find it too distinctive, but then the aldehydic fragrances aren't really my thing. It definitely seemed old-school to me, as many of the older scents are big on the aldehyde notes. But it got compliments and had sex appeal to it. I agree with the earlier comments about the EDP vs. the EDT, because the gift I got back then was the EDP. And although it isn't my dream scent, it smelled warm and comforting (along with the sex appeal). One day browsing through a Sephora, I spritzed Chanel 5 EDT on to try to remind me of it, but it did not smell the way I remembered it. In fact, I didn't like it at all. Not on the paper strips nor on my skin. I don't know if the formula was changed in the past decade or so, or if the EDT is in fact that different in character (not just strength) from the EDP.
I didn't realize that CH came out in '88. I didn't discover it until '93, just casually walking past a dept. store counter and I sampled it, fell in love with it immediately and bought it. At that time, I lived in a dry climate and it was autumn, so the notes I noticed first were the lily of the valley and the gardenia. The scent was fresh, crisp, floral and original. Just what I was wishing for amid a sea of mostly cloying Orientals and smell-alike aldehydics. It seemed green and summery, yet had a depth to it as well. CH became my signature scent and I applied it quite liberally, yet it didn't sicken me. It made me feel sophisticated, sexy and unique - that is, until a few years later when I noticed that a number of women began wearing it as well. That ruined it for me, so I seeked out other scents. Five years ago, I missed wearing CH, so I bought another bottle. The bottle is designed differently now. I think the scent is the same, but now that I live in a humid climate and my body chemistry may have changed with age, I notice the tuberose notes more and the scent seems heavier on me than I remember it being before. Although it's not a mainstay for me anymore, I still keep it in my fragrance wardrobe to recall a good period of my life.
I'm not sure if this one has been discontinued, but I can't find it anymore. I discovered it in the mid or late 90's in a magazine fragrance ad. When I smelled it, I got aroused and had to buy some. It is indeed very light and sheer and casual. The part that turned me on was a musky warm aftersmell which I can't quite describe.