This image is one I copied from an ebay seller's listing. The seller's name is superalx. I've used it because it's the best picture I have come across displaying the flask-type bottle and the best thing is, it's immediately behind the Burberrys for Men I've already reviewed. It's these 2 releases that cause the confusion. I own a 30ml. flask splash bottle ( background ) and a 50ml. ribbed bottle as shown in front. They are different fragrances, but both classically constructed and masculine.
The flask bottle in the background is what I want to evaluate and describe. I have had a difficult time attempting to review this fragrance for a few reasons. Already having reviewed its counterpart, I find it a less appealing and not as interesting a wear.There's also an aspect I can only describe as subtle mustard that is inherent. I experience it each time I apply this scent and it usually rears its head during the heart and base stage. I find it distracting, but not necessarily annoying.
The gist of this Burberrys for Men is a mild and fleeting Citrus, Carnation, Leather, Cedar, Sandal, Patchouli and Vetiver. To be fair, my splash bottle may be a little "off" due to age and it being a splash to begin with. However, its outward condition and color is outstanding as is its box and the information/envelope contents inside. The previous owner kept this aesthetically pristine, so its doubtful they would have left it in light and heat. Then again, who the hell knows for sure........
This is reminiscent of many masculines circa mid to late 70's. The feel of it is dark and a bit serious, but not somber. I cannot help but think this was the most overused note in masculine perfumery back then. It's immediately identifiable and has a propensity for coming to the fore and staying there.
I suppose it is sounding like I have no love for this release. Well, part of me likes it because I grew up in that era, but I guess a bigger part of me is enjoying different aromas, styles and approaches to creating than is evident here. Had this release revealed a transitional nature and a few exciting facets, my opinion would be swayed to tell you "Yes !!!! This is worth adding to your collection". Unfortunately, I'm unmoved and wearing Burberrys for Men Cologne has built no rapport. Sillage is moderate with longevity approximately 4 hours before morphing into a close scent. Neutral rating from Aromi and a sample wear is highly recommended in lieu of purchase.
I have worn these two versions only once each. The first reminded me of Vetiver de Puig, while the second reminded me of Mesmerize for Men by Avon (which is a really good Avon scent). I prefer something like Fendi Uomo (more complex and smoother) to the first but the second is certainly a top shelf scent of its kind, though if you are on a budget I'd say try Mesmerize and you might save quite a bit of money.
ReplyDeleteI have what may seem like an uneducated (fairly ignorant) question: is Burberrys a fashion brand, like Burberry? The "plural" aspect here of Burberry - just add "s" - makes me wonder if the company is related to Burberry, or a separate entity altogether. I suspect they're totally different companies, but I'm not sure. Any clues?
ReplyDeleteBryan, I wish I knew bro. It seems the earlier releases were a result of the right hand not aware of what the left hand was doing. They are Bethco products if that helps at all.
ReplyDeleteBigsly, I'll have to get around to comparing the ribbed bottle of Burberrys to Mesmerize.
Fair enough, I'll have to check older Burberry fragrances if I come across them and see if any Bethco labels are on them.
Delete