Run Wild Davidoff 2019

See Prices

We may earn a commission when you buy from links on our site, including the eBay Partner Network and Amazon.

See Prices

5.5 / 10 216 Ratings

Run Wild is a perfume by Davidoff for men and was released in 2019. The scent is synthetic-sweet. It is being marketed by Coty.

We may earn a commission when you buy from links on our site, including the eBay Partner Network and Amazon.

Main accords

Synthetic

Sweet

Fresh

Green

Spicy

Fragrance Pyramid

Top Notes

American lavender

Heart Notes

Madagascan cinnamon

Base Notes

Fir balsam

Perfumers

Alexandra Carlin, Pierre-Constantin Guéros

Videos

Watch video

Ratings

Scent

5.5216 Ratings

Longevity

6.3184 Ratings

Sillage

6.3180 Ratings

Bottle

6.7191 Ratings

Value for money

6.876 Ratings

Submitted by multiple users, last update on 08.04.2024.

Interesting Facts

The face of the advertising campaign is Danish model Tobias Sorensen.

Reviews

13 in-depth fragrance descriptions

06/06/2019

6
Bottle 7
Sillage 6
Longevity 3.5
Scent

Leimbacher
421 Reviews

Translated Show original

Leimbacher

Top Review 18

I ran against the wall!

The new Davidoff "Run Wild". Hardly tested yet, rarely commented, from the expectations fragrance pyramid associations in the direction of the legend "Relax". For 66€ the 100ml shine on me. He has to go to Cyprus! Nothing can go wrong, can it?! Even if it should only be mediocre, the few alternatives at the Düsseldorf Duty Free area can never keep up with it?!?!... Think! Because then the top note comes and the shock is written all over my face. A terrible scent that would have stayed there even for 20€. Despite rather bad Davidoff fragrances in the last years I had not expected DAS... "Run Wild" reminds me astonishingly of another new release from the last years, I just can't think which boy perfume it was. But he must have received a miserable criticism from me as well. Maybe some Invictus or one of Diesel's fists. Either way, Run Wild doesn't smell good. To describe it emotionlessly. Which is hard because the disappointment is deep.

"Run Wild is a chemically stinging lavender monster. Unnatural, pushy, annoying. Just not a pleasant composition. Also no creative or interesting. Simply a bewildering mix - as if Cola, Fanta, Sprite and red wine were tipped equally into a glass of plastic and stirred well. Horrible and nothing half and nothing whole. That's when "Relax" turns in the grave. In between there are no worlds but universes. "Run Wild is neither agile nor fresh, neither masculine nor modern. It's a tough cream scent with no recognizability. Floating and chewing gum-like. That's currently the order of the day, but in the end he also gets more grip - but all in all it's a testimony of poverty. I'm afraid so. Davidoff needs a U-turn almost more than the SPD...

Flacon: simple but quite valuable... measured at least by content.
Sillage: in its stabbing synthetics already something heavy
Shelf life: 7 hours would be solid... if the scent would fit.

Conclusion: a new low for Davidoff. At least as far as "new" fragrances and names are concerned. But even with the many miserable flankers it becomes difficult to find anything worse. Not wild, not a good run. "Run Wild" is a GAU. Artificial, ugly, cheap and boring on top. Like a spat bubblegum stuck in the street. A lavender disaster that hopefully doesn't suggest the upcoming "Cool Water Intense"..

05/07/2019

7
Bottle 6
Sillage 6
Longevity 4
Scent

Konsalik
81 Reviews

Translated Show original

Konsalik

Top Review 22

You notice the intention and you're out of tune

A green bottle by Davidoff: This does, of course, convey associations with the first, the large, the primeval green Davidoff. Especially since his green is much richer on the illuminated shelf of the local miller than on the Parfumo search photo. The reduced pyramid (quickly looked up) also sounds interesting in theory if one were not accustomed to seeing it as part of the marketing strategy rather than as an actual indication of the scent character. The adjective and localization overkill is also being introduced here: What makes "Madagascar cinnamon" and "American lavender" so special that their origin must be explicitly mentioned? One inevitably feels reminded of advertising icons such as the "Byzantine king nut", "original Kabua cocoa" or the immortal "Piedmont cherry".

Between tender hope and sober skepticism the first nose on the back of the hand:

Coked chewing gum like Invictus and the like. Oh, great! Is that the cinnamon?! You're trying to... All right, okay, next sniff. And where's my lavender? Ah, there it is, but it doesn't come up against the penetrating chewing gum note and even bites itself with it; I suspect here the cause for the plastic fire smell, which I could already determine with some modern Candy smells with listed lavender. After an hour, the cute One Million caramel joins the chewing gum and together the two bumper cars really don't let anything get through what was lined up in the pyramid in such a cardboard-cuddly manner. Durability and Sillage are not worth mentioning, thank God.

In my profile I declare the army of smoke thrower scents to be my scent nemesis. This one's part of it: He blurs and glues everything that could make him interesting to a random Pampe and thus behaves to a real perfume marrying his ingredients with each other, like a fresh salad to a "green" smoothie: Here "food" instead of food, there "project" instead of fragrance. So it fits well into our time - which would also be a makeshift answer to the question of "why"; for it is indeed not quite clear why a brand like Davidoff is still betting in 2019 on this horse that has been shamefully ridden for years.

My 50th comment was supposed to be something special, now it became a spontaneous tear. The hundredth will be more pleasant, I promise.

05/17/2019

6
Bottle 3
Sillage 4
Longevity 3
Scent

RobinM10
15 Reviews

Translated Show original

RobinM10

Top Review 12

Run Wild - but backwards and in a circle

Here again one finds an absolutely wrong staging of a product, which almost borders on excessive audacity.

Of all the fragrances mentioned, lavender is palpable with all love and a little imagination... albeit subliminal and rather weak.

What remains is a musty, spicy-sweet "experience" that is far away from wild freshness. Here you can find a synthetic scent, which you have already smelled and cursed everywhere.

Uninspired and only designed for unsuspecting buyers, this fragrance comes along.

Tastes are different, but please. Get your hands off me!

05/10/2019

7
Bottle 4.5
Scent

Benlives
17 Reviews

Translated Show original

Benlives

Top Review 10

Nobody runs here. And it's not gonna get wild at all...

You secretly hope for a miracle. Another firecracker, one that goes through the ceiling. Yeah, okay, it's illusory. Then something solid, well crafted with a difference. You don't? Oh, yeah. ok but what's halfway sensible is a brand like Davidoff will probably come into being again, right???
Think so. The name "Run Wild" alone is the worst mockery. What's so wild about that? Who runs amok with the uninspired plastic stuff, except maybe the perfumer, out of remorse? Whereby one also finds the meaning "neglect" under "run wild". Okay, that kind of fits. Olfactory neglect. Plastic - hazardous waste dump in the forest. It's really got notes with refractive potential in it. At least that's how I feel. A strange synthetic stuffness. With a perfume that should actually spray a certain freshness (from the "claim" to the fragrance, if you can really call it a claim...). Even the new "The Man" series by Otto Kern (Becky Lynch-Edition?) can convince me more. Au wei.

I can't judge durability and Sillage, I have given him sometime no more attention on the arm.

This could really be a new Low Light from Davidoff. Sad at the "competition" on the market.

05/11/2019

7
Bottle 4
Sillage 5
Longevity 5
Scent

Olfakto
4 Reviews

Translated Show original

Olfakto

Top Review 6

Not fresh, not wild, only extremely boring

Is that consumer deception already? Nothing of the scents is recognizable and the name suggests energy and something extraordinary. Instead a synthetic sweet-fruity mix comes along, which cannot be surpassed in arbitrariness.

The fragrance is not bad per se, but the best thing about it is the bottle - and we all know how much this contributes to the fragrance. I do not understand the decision makers behind this publication. But I strongly doubt their professionalism. To expect that an absolutely boring synthetic smell arrives, with which the buyer smells a few hours after a completely 0815 shower gel, is not comprehensible for me
When I meet someone with this scent, I just think they don't know anything about perfume. I'll be the one running away from Run Wild then
I then took the trouble to mix in the three fragrances. Of course I don't know the undeclared notes and the mixing ratio. But I wanted to know in which direction the scent would go, if the empathy really lies on the indicated scents.

And what a "surprise", it came out so completely different fragrance, without any coincidence. Nothing of the cinnamon can be felt in the original. The freshness of lavender is also not present, the light soapiness of Run Wild appears after a while, but is unlikely to come from lavender, because this occurs a little later and relatively weakly in lavender.

I search in vain for the fir balm in Run Wild, because the fragrance drifts from Ambroxan / Benzyl Mix to Calone in the heart phase and the fir balm, if at all in the fragrance, is completely overdriven. The sweetness in the fragrance comes from something else, no idea of what.

Funnily enough, Run Wild turns into a musty-sweet weakling, despite all the chemistry.
Tastes are different, so Run Wild is sure to find a few buyers. However, I would strongly recommend them not to buy the fragrance at the release price, but to wait a few months until it is offered at a discount price.

More reviews