Dolce & Gabbana are introducing a “fine-tuning” of their 1992 Dolce & Gabbana Pour Femme fragrance, and relaunching 1994′s Dolce & Gabbana Pour Homme. Both fragrances are expected to launch in the UK next month, elsewhere by September.
Dolce & Gabbana Pour Femme ~ featuring neroli, raspberry, tangerine, jasmine, orange blossom, marshmallow, vanilla, heliotrope and sandalwood. In 25, 50 and 100 ml Eau de Parfum.
Dolce & Gabbana Pour Homme ~ with neroli, citrus, tangerine, bergamot, lavender, sage, pepper, tobacco, cedarwood and tonka bean. In 40, 75 and 125 ml Eau de Toilette.
(via wwd)
Update: see a review of Dolce & Gabbana Pour Femme.
20 Comments
Read more about commenting at Now Smell This.
So now, “fine-tuning” means turning a perfume pink?
And adding marshmallow.
Hmm..”fine-tuning”, probably means a way different scent :/
Probably. But I’m not familiar with the original myself.
You’d never guess from the bottle but it was a big va-va-voomy floral, very late-eighties (although it was launched in 1992). Really nice. There is no way that the new list of notes constitutes a “fine-tuning”, not with raspberry and marshmallow added to the mix. I have no doubt it will be a completely new scent in the modern sugared-fruit-and-flower style.
The men’s was too boring for me to ever bother with.
Interesting that they didn’t update the men’s, then!
Marshmallow? I used to wear and love the original and was thinking I would have to check this out and then I read marshmallow. Wth? It was fine before, if very much a product of its time and of Dolce and Gabbana’s design ethos. So, now apparently it will be of its time and very sweet. Humph .
It really doesn’t seem like D&G brand takes fragrance very seriously other than as a money-maker.
I smelled the original D&G on a test strip as a tween and thought it too grown up for me at the time, though quite glamourous and nothing like the unisex aquatics flooding the market. Remembering how it intrigued me however, I decided to buy a bottle a couple years back and love it. It’s definitely of a much different perfume era, and to read that they’re changing it for a more fruity sweet demographic really irritates me. Perhaps I’d better go buy another bottle as a backup before the “new and improved” option is all that’s available.
Robin, it is a soapy floral with woods if I had to describe it offhand. There’s also a bit of amber in there too, and Pyramus nailed it by saying it has a bit of an 80′s feel to it. But I do love it when I want to really wear a Perfume and not something quiet and sheer.
Thanks for the description. Don’t know how it is that I never tried it. But sounds like you’d better stock up!
Ok… This is BLATANT SACRILEGE!!!! the Original Pour Femme is a MASTERPIECE! Really it is! OH MY WORD! this sickens me to my very Core… Kinda like what Dior did to MDC… I HATED the original MDC, I mean like a sugar induced toothache in a bottle, but at least it was Courageous enough to wear it’s Syrupy Sweetness Proudly… Now it’s just some generic Kinda Sweety-Fruity thing… This sounds Utterly ATROCIOUS for such a Magnificent scent like the original Pour Femme… DAMN THEM!
The men’s is one of my favourites, clean and sexy at the same time. Citric soap+peppery lavender, long lasting and decent sillage. I’m glad they didn’t change it!!
Agreed. I used to wear it and still have a soft spot for it. It doesn’t get a lot of attention among perfumistas, because it is not ‘strange’. Nevertheless, it is sexy and classy.
OMG … what awful, awful news … better stock up on the original, and add a couple of Sicily flacons just to be sure.
Pour Femme is really a WOMANLY perfume … I’ve always compared it to Femme de Rochas, not that they are anything alike but they target the same demographic, a grownup woman, totally unapologetic about her sophisticated charm and magnetism. It’s like comparing Monica Bellucci / Kim Basinger to Kristen Stewart / Emma Watson. Dolce & Gabbana Pour Femme is not just about how a woman looks, but also about how a real woman feels inside – no immature sex kitten but all grown up and more attractive for it.
Seriously, what’s wrong with being a WOMAN these days?
Damn! I’m off to stock up. Excuse my French.
I don’t know if it’s just me, but seems like since Sicily, D&G has been all about churning perfume out strictly based on what demographic brings in the most cash. Most of what I’ve smelled is pretty insipid. The One was ok, but nothing Hilary Duff and a bunch of others weren’t doing at the same time (peachy ambery oriental).
I will note that I would like to see more fragrances in 25 ml or thereabouts. Just maybe not *this* fragrance.
The new version of Pour Femme is a horrid, sugary mess. It’s a powdery floral with the sugar-o-meter dialed up to 11. I actually had to scrub it off (to no avail) and consider then that I actually like powdery florals in general. The original Pour Femme stands out as a masterpiece compared to this new concoction.
I was so disappointed with this, the old Pour Femme was one of my all time favourites. I think what I liked about the old one was the “soapy” smell – does anyone know any similar fragrances?
Hey, does that mean that the old Pour Femme is still available out there? I tried to search for it everywhere (or so I thought) – without success, so far…
krankeh, have you tried Chanel’s Eau Premiere? Even though not at all as unapologetic and über-sexy as the old Pour Femme, Eau Premiere develops into a warm, powderish-clean and very womanly scent (at least on my skin, that is;).
this is what happens with perfumes owned by the horror company P&G……cheap flankers!