Dot Marc Jacobs 2012 Eau de Parfum

Bottle Design Sayuri Shoji, Marc Jacobs

See Prices

More

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

See Prices

6.1 / 10 185 Ratings

A perfume by Marc Jacobs for women, released in 2012. The scent is fruity-floral. It was last marketed by Coty.

More

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

Main accords

Fruity

Floral

Sweet

Fresh

Synthetic

Fragrance Pyramid

Top Notes

Red berries

Honeysuckle

Dragon fruit

Heart Notes

Jasmine

Coconut water

Orange blossom

Base Notes

Musk

Driftwood

Vanilla

Perfumers & Creative Guidance

Annie Buzantian
Ann Gottlieb Product developer

Videos

Watch video

Ratings

Scent

6.1185 Ratings

Longevity

6.2131 Ratings

Sillage

5.5132 Ratings

Bottle

6.9192 Ratings

Value for money

6.839 Ratings

Submitted by Kankuro, last update on 12/10/2024.

Interesting Facts

The face of the advertising campaign is Australian model Codie Young, photographed by Juergen Teller.

Smells similar

What the fragrance is similar to

Dot Solid Perfume

Daze

Love Butterfly

Boss Jour pour Femme

Mis(s) Behave

The Key Eau de Parfum

Reviews

7 in-depth fragrance descriptions

08/02/2012

jtd
484 Reviews

jtd

Top Review 7

an outcome probably unanticipated by the perfume evaluators

Candy-berry sweetness. A summer mid-day sun reflected at you by a mirror made of sugar. Like a mirror, Dot reinforces two-dimensionality.
Everything, even sharpness, can be reduced to flatness in a mirror.

Not shriekingly chemical, or at least not any more so than any other girly perfume that presumes that fruit needs to be sweetened before being eaten. Dot is more noticeable to my nose for its lack than its presence. It doesn’t ultimately smell actually fruity or floral in any truly identifiable way because it has no anchor. I wouldn’t so much call it linear as I would call it purely topnotes. It’s the olfactory equivalent of a ringing in the ears.

This is the sort of fragrance I can’t enjoy as a perfume even if I were to like the way it smells. Firstly, it has no connections, congenial, antagonistic or otherwise to skin. Secondly, it’s like the berry version of a maraschino cherry. The cherry might have been fruit at one time, and although it still signifies fruit, is really just an odd bit symbolism (nature, bleached, then made better, sweeter, brighter) that I would remove and discard before I ate my sundae.

All that aside, I love this perfume, although I’d be happy never to smell it again, because it was selected by my niece today at Bloomingales as I taught her how to shop for a perfume. She was thoughtful, took her time, chose Dot and is thrilled with it. I love my niece, and consequently love Dot.

02/22/2013

7.5
Bottle 7.5
Longevity 4
Scent

Sherapop
1239 Reviews

Sherapop

7

GMO Ladybug?

Marc Jacobs used to make decent perfumes. The first three, MARC JACOBS, ESSENCE, and BLUSH are all quite respectable creations, the first two of which work around a central gardenia note, while the third offers a unique banana note along with some white flowers. After that triplet, I'm not really sure what went awry, but everything became flat and abstract and, for lack of a better term: Cotyized.

The bottle for DOT looks like a drug trip gone bad. Or perhaps a GMO ladybug? It's really quite scary to behold. I have another idea: what if a ladybug mated with her twin brother? Maybe this is what they'd produce.

The scent? Abstract fruity floral. It's not horrible, but it's certainly not good, and it's something of a joke even to attempt to have a conversation about the notes. Driftwood? Dragon fruit? Coconut Water? Whatever. I do like the scent slightly more than that of LOLA, but that is, of course, rather faint praise.

DOT reminds me a bit of the Marc Jacobs CRANBERRY splash, of which I have a jug. Somewhat synthetic and somewhat sweet and vague and nondescript. This is not a perfume which I would reach for or buy, but I had a sample, so I figured that with a bath on the horizon, I'd give it a try.

I saw that the Marc Jacobs perfumes are being sold at TJMaxx for $50 or $60. These perfumes are not worth even that modest sum, but they must be selling, since otherwise they'd be sold for the prices of Ellen Tracy perfumes: $9.95 or $14.95. Someone out there seems to like GMO ladybugs and 100% abstract juice. I imagine that it is the junior high school set.

02/18/2024

5
Pricing 9
Bottle 4
Sillage 4
Longevity 4
Scent

MrsGuerlain
365 Reviews

MrsGuerlain

2

I like what I see

…but the juice is not that interesting to me.
When sprayed it is mostly a citric berry note that meets my nose, and though a lot of notes are mentioned, they never appear. Sadly…
The bottle, however, is a delight. Cute, great colour mix and pattern. It reminds me a bit of Moschino Cheap and Chic. The pearl detail and the golden neck and sign. All together this makes a lovely impression. Is it enough with a juice that anonymous? Not for me, but maybe for others.
222/365

03/08/2018

QuercusAlbus
72 Reviews

QuercusAlbus

Grandeurless & Splendourless

2018-03-08-06-## UTC --

I quite like this; & I am well-acquainted with some of the grandest & splendidest of 'fumes.

I think the reviews of the previous reviewers are quite accurate, considered per punctis, or point-by-point (or whatever). It is indeed totally devoid of any grandeur or splendour. But one reviewer's young niece chose it - is it not that she has that certain way of simply enjoying a simple modest 'fume that has been °battered° out of many if us by exposure to seriously grand & splendid stuff? This 'fume calls to me in a certain way I had almost forgotten it was possible that I be called to in; and maugre its weakness under analysis, I simply like it! I find it pleasant & quite ~interessante~. (One of my worthy apothecaries is Italian, & I got into a habit if using this word when one time she accidentally defaulted to her native language when I was discussing a 'fume with her.) ~Interessante~ in that it teaseth one with a subtle wechselspiel of aromata beneath its sweet surface, a bit like catching inscrutable glints fræ the interior of an otherwise rather plane pink opal, or something like that.

But then I like certain childrens' toys also, & have a collection of yo-yos, Jacobs ladders, & spinning tops, & other items, that I am often frowned @ for amusing myself with in public!

I haven't forgotten, though, that this is not a particularly inexpensive 'fume, although I think it's price is a little below the middle of what most would regard as the ~standard~ price brackett; but notice I call it ~modest~, ^not^ ~poor~. The distinction between those two qualifyings is an important one, to my mind, & I broach it a great deal.

... about a month later ...
Have just given this a run-out; and I'm ^seriously^ impressed with this. I am becoming a bit concerned that it might be perceiven that I am °trying to be everyone's friend° perfume-wise, as, as it might be noticed, I tend not to write scathing reviews of perfumes. But I ^do^ have a bona-fide belief that it's nearly always possible to °bring oneself round° to a perfume, becoming ^open^ to the good that it has. Having said that, I think maybe this one is ^not^ a particularly good example of what I have just said, but is rather simply a seriously good 'fume - far far better than the admittedly somewhat bland initial impression would lead one to believe.

Throughout the wearing - many hours long - I was catching really very satisfying whyphs from it. Several times, I caught some really very rich-smelling ambry trails that I thought at first were coming from someone else, but which trsnspired to be not other than coming from myself. And yet, it wasn't just ambry trails - the particular character of this 'fume was continually present, with the perception of blandness morphing into a perception rather of precisely the kind of discreetness whereby a 'fume avoids becoming cloying through being constantly present about one's person. And that ^particular quality^ became increasingly & increasingly likeable and °interessante°. I do think there is even modest admixture of that °sweaty° musk that I praise so highly in my review of Kukdjian's ~Petit Matin~.

Definitely a hidden gem, this one!

10/14/2024

5
Pricing 6
Bottle 7
Sillage 6
Longevity 5.5
Scent

Missk
1357 Reviews

Missk

1

Basic Sweet-Fruity Concoction

Whilst browsing the department store last week, as per usual a sales assistant took one look at me, guessed my age and dragged me to the nearest Marc Jacobs display where she encouraged me to try either Dot or the new Summer inspired Daisy flankers. After a bit of a grumble, I relented and ended up spraying Dot liberally both on a card and then onto my skin.

While I must admit that I enjoy Dot far more than Daisy, Lola or Oh Lola, I can't say that I'm thoroughly impressed. To my nose it's a nice but predictable fruity floral featuring a bucket load of candied red berries and other obscure fruits.

A friend that was accompanying me at the time agreed with my observation that Marc Jacobs tends to rely on their eye-catching bottle designs to draw in consumers and to finalise a sale. Had Dot been bottled differently, I highly doubt that the scent alone would draw in such a loving crowd.

Its fruitiness reminds me of something I'd expect from Escada. It opens quite loud, almost chemical on my skin, before drying down into a basic sweet and fruity concoction, with the subtlest hint of soapy, clean jasmine.

True fans of Dot would more than likely be girls in their teens, so I would definitely recommend Dot and the current Marc Jacobs line to any parent desperate for gift ideas. I suppose it's one step up from the celebrity perfumes on offer in the discount stores.

I find the packaging rather kitsch and memorizing at the same time. I do like lady bugs, so in a weird way I kind of enjoy looking at it. Many reviewers are complaining of poor longevity, but for me this fragrance couldn't disappear fast enough.

Original review written: March 2013.

More reviews