Coach Poppy

In some ways Coach’s progression from its beautiful, durable, everlasting classic bags to the monogram chic bags reflects the direction of the perfume industry. Both things were once lovingly crafted objects made with fine materials have been reduced to faster, larger, and cheaper. So I found it rather funny to be reviewing Poppy, the fragrance from Coach and named in similarity to Coach’s youthful line of bags that feature vibrant colors and–of course–the Coach monogram.

Poppy

Poppy

In Bottle: Smells like a dime-a-dozen candy floral fragrance. Not bad, not too exciting. It hits me right away with the mandarin note and wastes no time digging into the marshmallow.

Applied: Mandarin up top followed quickly by the clean, crisp tones of cucumber. Freesia and the other florals are present in the first minute of the opening and the fragrance evolves more into its floral candy-coated personality near the mid-stage with that marshmallow vanilla thing they did. Poppy settles into its floral candy self for the majority of the rest of the fragrance as the wood notes make themselves known near the very end and in a very faint way.

Extra: I used to be something of a Coach fan and was ecstatic to receive a Coach Wilson bag from the 90s. These days, Coach’s bags don’t interest me too much. I don’t see the appeal of the Poppy line at all and I don’t see the appeal of the Poppy fragrance either, unfortunately. It’s probably another one of those instances where my tastes clash with the company’s aim. But Poppy is like a generic perfume for which I can name several alternatives. If you do need an actual recommendation, the perfume community likens this to Britney Spears’ Fantasy. I can see the connection between the two, especially when the fragrance hits its mid-stage. If you want a personal alternative recommendation, try smelling Bath and Body Works’ Be Enchanted that has a similar progression from refreshing to sweet.

Design: I do like the bottle and feel that scribbly the monogramed look of the Poppy line works rather well for this fragrance and what it’s trying to be. It’s cute and functional and simple. It’s clearly marketed towards girliness and people who like that sort of thing. So in terms of looks, Poppy’s got it down.

Fragrance Family: Sweet Floral

Notes: Mandarin, cucumber, freesia, jasmine, gardenia, water lily, rose, sugar, marshmallow, sandalwood, vanilla, cedar.

A big disappointment in terms of uniqueness but Poppy, like pretty much everything else similar to it works well if you’re into the sweet and flowery fragrances. You can, however, get more affordable fragrances that have a similar aim for the amount that Poppy costs if your chief concern was how it smells.

Reviewed in This Post: Poppy,  2011, Eau de Parfum.


Christina Aguilera Royal Desire

Royal Desire was apparently designed for women who feel like royalty. Though it’s an interesting thought the fragrance itself is less interesting than hoped.

In Bottle: Sugar and marshmallows, a little dusty but mostly candy-like with a little echo of flowers.

Applied: Sugar high on application though Royal Desire is a very low sillage fragrance. It won’t go very far but you will smell like a fruity marshmallow at first before the fragrance introduces its equally light floral heart. I can get a bit of rose out of the mid-stage if I really wanted but Royal Design isn’t about the florals. It’s pretty obvious this stuff is capitalizing on its sweet mallowy goodness as there’s a tremendous amount of it along with a creeping vanilla. Though with how meek the fragrance is, you’ll have to concentrate to smell it. The dry down is pretty uninteresting, the marshmallow ends up smelling a bit more like sweet and powdery vanilla during the end game.

Extra: I should make a note to just stop reading the ads that go along with these fragrances. Royal Desire’s claim is that it’s for women who want to feel seductive. Marshmallows don’t make me think of seduction. They make me think of campfires and smores.

Design: I’m not wild about the bottle design but it could have been much worse. There’s a lace motif that seems to grace a lot of Christina Aguilera fragrances and this one isn’t much different. The shape is fine, the lace design is fine, the little charm is cute. Just something about the way it was all put together doesn’t inspire me.

Fragrance Family: Gourmand

Notes: Mandarin, blackberry, marshmallow, rose, honeysuckle, lily, cedar, musk, vanilla, sandalwood.

So another fragrance goes into the slush pile of celebuscents. Royal Desire would be great for a young woman or a teenager interested in smelling sweet, but don’t want something too overpowering.

Reviewed in This Post: Royal Desire,  2010, Eau de Parfum.


Vera Wang Glam Princess

Glam Princess is the latest in what’s becoming a long line of sweet and floral designer perfume royalty. It’s about as competent as the other princess fragrances but at the same time suffers from a rather glaring problem. It smells really, really, really generic. Glam Princess

In Bottle: Indistinct sugar floral, a bit of a toasted sticky marshmallow note in the bottle. Weird because the marshmallow is supposed to be a base note but Glam Princess isn’t the kind of gal to go by steps I guess.

Applied: Super sweet and fruity top notes with a hint of florals. As the scent ages it digs deeper into the floral territory and the old familiar sweet foody floral from original Princess surfaces. The scent is smooth, creamy, very sweet fruity floral in the mid-stage. Not at all special or unique but it’s a pleasant enough fragrance. Glam Princess smells like a lightly flowery foody scent that, like the original, is reminiscent of cake batter. Only there’s a notable lack of the dark chocolate note in the original here. You get white cake batter in this time instead of dark chocolate cake batter. We also get sticky marshmallow that injects itself right into the teeth to save some time on the whole cavity-inducing thing. The dry down isn’t much more exciting as we get sweet floweriness until it disappears entirely.

Extra: If you liked the original Princess fragrance, you’ll probably like this one because the two are built on the same very familiar formula and they do sort of resemble each other in that they’re both sweet gourmand florals. If you loved that dark chocolate note in the original Princess, though, you might want to sit this one out. I really liked that chocolate note in the original. The lack of it in this flanker just makes it smell really generic.

Design: Bottled in the same heart-shaped thing as the rest of the Princess line, Glam Princess is adorned by a string of star designs on the glass. The bottle itself is a golden-yellow, the crown cap is gold with multi-colored jewels set into it. I’m still not a fan of the bottle design. I don’t think there’s anything you can do to a big glass heart to make it appeal to a woman in her mid-twenties with a penchant for simple aesthetics.

Fragrance Family: Sweet Floral

Notes: red berries, guava, pear, orange blossom, vanilla orchid, ambrette, marshmallow, cashmere wood.

Maybe this line of princess fragrances just doesn’t appeal to me. I can see how it’s cute and girly and stuff but the bottles just don’t speak to me and neither do the fragrances.

Reviewed in This Post: Glam Princess, 2010, Eau de Toilette.