Top Notes 
Heart Notes 
Base Notes 
Rate
Collection
Classify
Notes07/14/2020
Rene72
Translated
Show original
Rene72
Very helpful Review
14
Born 1972 - matured with dignity
It's the first time I've ever wanted to know a fragrance just because it's from the year I was born.
Who doesn't care which fragrance was fashionable when the parents were young and thinking about having children. You could also ask what kind of fragrance was worn when an attractive young woman and an equally attractive young man came to the passionate cause of which you might be the product in 1972.
Pour Monsieur is definitely a fragrance of its time. But one of those that survived in the hearts, though not available on every corner.
But I was able to purchase the fragrance at a reasonable price and not only the packaging and the bottle immediately put me in the shape and colouring of the 1970s, especially in the 240 ml edition. Was the phallus allusion conscious? One could also think about a depiction of a television tower or the design of long-stemmed ball vases or ball clocks, which were also products of the early 1970s.
The scent also provides a time travel. And what a.
The start is not very similar to the fragrance pyramid shown above, it quickly becomes very spicy, there is nothing fruity-citric about it. Bergamot, lemon, orange are dimmed down strongly. And already while one seems to perceive lavender and basil, this one is already powered by 1972. Especially patchouli and leather I perceive. I love the carnation in this combination. Not obtrusive, but balancing. I can't smell rose geranium and iris myself, but perhaps the floral triad is so finely woven that I rather subordinate the notes to the carnation The sandalwood belongs of course in these 1972s. I even smell a little more spice cabinet: Cinnamon, cloves, cardamom. But these are supposedly not included at all. The pour monsieur becomes leathery, slightly animal. Even gets a little sweetness. The soapiness described in some of the comments I have received is very early on in my life and is not felt to be disturbing at any stage.
H/S testify to the potency of good 1970s men's fragrances. They didn't spill it, they scooped it. I also feel a proximity to Habit Rouge EdC (like FabianO).
I tend to see or smell the fragrance on men over 40, perhaps from birth year 1972 and earlier. But if you like spice and leather, you'll be well served here. But the wearer should have a certain charisma. Because the environment will perceive him as an announcement If the fragrance and the bottle had been shown separately during the test, I wouldn't have assigned it to this bottle, which almost looks a bit futuristic. I see the Sputnik bottle as a design of the Space Age era The leathery-spicy fragrance fits more into a more classic form. It's a rescue of a classic fragrance pour monsieur into a design that was highly modern at the time.
Both delights the retro lover's heart.
And what does that have to do with me? I am once again proud to be born in 1972. The pour monsieur is worn on each of my birthdays and certainly in between.
Who doesn't care which fragrance was fashionable when the parents were young and thinking about having children. You could also ask what kind of fragrance was worn when an attractive young woman and an equally attractive young man came to the passionate cause of which you might be the product in 1972.
Pour Monsieur is definitely a fragrance of its time. But one of those that survived in the hearts, though not available on every corner.
But I was able to purchase the fragrance at a reasonable price and not only the packaging and the bottle immediately put me in the shape and colouring of the 1970s, especially in the 240 ml edition. Was the phallus allusion conscious? One could also think about a depiction of a television tower or the design of long-stemmed ball vases or ball clocks, which were also products of the early 1970s.
The scent also provides a time travel. And what a.
The start is not very similar to the fragrance pyramid shown above, it quickly becomes very spicy, there is nothing fruity-citric about it. Bergamot, lemon, orange are dimmed down strongly. And already while one seems to perceive lavender and basil, this one is already powered by 1972. Especially patchouli and leather I perceive. I love the carnation in this combination. Not obtrusive, but balancing. I can't smell rose geranium and iris myself, but perhaps the floral triad is so finely woven that I rather subordinate the notes to the carnation The sandalwood belongs of course in these 1972s. I even smell a little more spice cabinet: Cinnamon, cloves, cardamom. But these are supposedly not included at all. The pour monsieur becomes leathery, slightly animal. Even gets a little sweetness. The soapiness described in some of the comments I have received is very early on in my life and is not felt to be disturbing at any stage.
H/S testify to the potency of good 1970s men's fragrances. They didn't spill it, they scooped it. I also feel a proximity to Habit Rouge EdC (like FabianO).
I tend to see or smell the fragrance on men over 40, perhaps from birth year 1972 and earlier. But if you like spice and leather, you'll be well served here. But the wearer should have a certain charisma. Because the environment will perceive him as an announcement If the fragrance and the bottle had been shown separately during the test, I wouldn't have assigned it to this bottle, which almost looks a bit futuristic. I see the Sputnik bottle as a design of the Space Age era The leathery-spicy fragrance fits more into a more classic form. It's a rescue of a classic fragrance pour monsieur into a design that was highly modern at the time.
Both delights the retro lover's heart.
And what does that have to do with me? I am once again proud to be born in 1972. The pour monsieur is worn on each of my birthdays and certainly in between.
5 Replies
Charilaos77
ChicoRoch1
Tso
RobbieX
