And you? What would you do for love?
This commercial is so obnoxious. It's already bad enough that they changed Miss Dior from the original leather chypre fragrance it was, to this sweet crap. Now we have to see Smuggy too. Ugh.
by Anonymous | reply 1 | February 11, 2020 8:42 PM |
We all know what she did for love and that's what makes this commercial so insufferable.
by Anonymous | reply 2 | February 12, 2020 7:27 AM |
Just DIE ALREADY!
by Anonymous | reply 3 | February 12, 2020 7:35 AM |
Only bland basic grasping middle-class girls who become housewives or work in offices actually wear Miss Dior, as far as I gather.
Why then is Padamay advertising it? Doesn’t she hold herself higher?
by Anonymous | reply 4 | February 12, 2020 7:47 AM |
She should have stayed with Devendra Banhart.
by Anonymous | reply 5 | February 12, 2020 7:52 AM |
I like the overwrought dramatics:
H: I love you! She:: PROVE IT!
by Anonymous | reply 6 | February 12, 2020 7:55 AM |
she,, a fug, is the reason I quit buying anything Dior...
by Anonymous | reply 7 | February 12, 2020 8:19 AM |
Didn’t this come out in 2017, as a reformulated re-release of the 2005 EdP? I don’t understand why this is news.
Last I checked this scent is a boring timid spring Rose with fruity strawberry shampoo accords, hardly worth discussing.
The flaçon is hideous, too. Piss-colored juice in a fussy frou-frou Barbie bottle.
by Anonymous | reply 8 | February 12, 2020 9:13 AM |
It’s all garbage. I’m disgusted with the state of contemporary mainstream fragrances.
by Anonymous | reply 9 | February 12, 2020 10:37 AM |
Ah, my mistake. I posted the wrong link & description in my post at R8, which isn’t the exact EdP Portman is shilling.
The EdP in question is a peppery citrusy rosewood with vanillic notes, which is only marginally less twee and linear than the Cherie variant. Even fans of the house & line are saying this new one pales in comparison to the original and earlier juices, and that it smells like a packet of macaroons (that would be the Ethyl Maltol...), hairspray, or a faded Lidl-brand imitation of a lesser Guerlain/YSL.
Most of my point still stands, and wholeheartedly concur with R9 that the big houses today are milking customers with derivative watered-down product (and I have no doubt Nat knows that - actresses need to eat). For anyone looking to get into scent, I would always suggest they seek out niche houses, oils & vintages, or go home. Macy’s has nothing for you or for me.
[quote] bad enough that they changed Miss Dior from the original leather chypre fragrance it was, to this..
R1 the best part is that they insistently call it a “carnal chypre” in all marketing now. Hilarious.
I’ve never had the privilege of testing the OG. How did it smell?
by Anonymous | reply 10 | February 12, 2020 11:06 AM |
So stupid. This makes me not want to buy the perfume. This ad is about as exciting 😴😴😴 as her movies.
by Anonymous | reply 11 | February 12, 2020 11:10 AM |
“For anyone looking to get into scent, I would always suggest they seek out niche houses, oils & vintages, or go home. Macy’s has nothing for you or for me.”
Solid advice. The synthetic, mass-produced stuff in department stores is never going to be complex because that won’t get 100 million in sales.
by Anonymous | reply 12 | February 12, 2020 11:52 AM |
[quote]I’ve never had the privilege of testing the OG. How did it smell?
Oh, it was glorious, R9. My first sniff was at at May-D&F in 1986; I fell in love and that was it for my mainstays Paris, Madame Rochas, Mitsouko, and Ivoire. As R1 noted, it was a leather chypre, very oakmossy. Started out citrusy, but not sweet citrus--more bergamot and galbanum with a hint of floral. The heart was elegant but not sweet floral, with a dark rose and carnation. But those base notes? OMG, pure heaven. Oakmoss, patchouli (not a dirty patch, though), rock rose, real civet, and vetiver.
It was elegant, sophisticated, never fusty/old ladyish. It was NOT a girly perfume.
I've said this dozens of times on DL, but I believe fragrance houses should simply retire the names of those old fragrances, because reformulations NEVER come close to the original juice. If European Union regs prohibit use of oakmoss, castoreum, and certain other perfumes ingredients, don't just substitute in some random others, slap a label on it and try passing it off as the real deal. Even if you acknowledge it's a reformulation, it's still fraud imo.
by Anonymous | reply 13 | February 12, 2020 12:00 PM |
I have seen this ad at least 4 times within the hour. I won't be listening to Chandelier for another decade.
by Anonymous | reply 14 | February 12, 2020 12:02 PM |
What about Givenchy fragrances? I love Amarige.
by Anonymous | reply 15 | February 12, 2020 12:35 PM |
Miss?
by Anonymous | reply 16 | February 12, 2020 12:44 PM |
Oooh, I love the fragrance bitches (I mean that in the best possible way). I’m not half as knowledgeable, but I love to read what you have to say. I have been so disappointed by so many reformations and reproductions and editions of classic or older fragrances. My old favorites are unrecognizable.
by Anonymous | reply 17 | February 12, 2020 2:12 PM |
So *that's* why they changed all those formulas info crap, r13. Thank you for that tidbit of info.
I never why they all changed formulas but certainly wondered why, as they always seem to re-engineer great formulas into horrible ones - that it was blanket EU regulations makes sense.
by Anonymous | reply 19 | February 12, 2020 4:47 PM |
She’s beautiful.
by Anonymous | reply 20 | February 12, 2020 4:50 PM |
I knew a girl in acting school who is a dead ringer for Natalie but blonde and more of an earthy type. She dyed her hair brown to be considered for serious dramatic parts and it killed her career.
by Anonymous | reply 21 | February 12, 2020 11:34 PM |
The OG Miss Dior. You can still get it (albeit reformulated and watered down) as Miss Dior Originale, but it doesn't hold a candle to the vintage.
by Anonymous | reply 22 | February 12, 2020 11:44 PM |
If you hold a candle to it will it explode?
by Anonymous | reply 23 | February 12, 2020 11:47 PM |