Intimate

I remember smelling Intimate during my youth, there was plenty of it around, but probably it smelled too mature for me at the time. I discovered it for myself in the early 1990s, and immediately fell in love. There just is no other scent like this anywhere these days. And most likely you would have to buy a vintage bottle on ebay. As of a couple years ago, these bottles weren't hard to find, and I did some stockpiling of my own. There are some more modern versions of Intimate out there which are a complete reformulation, some are similar to vintage, others were a completely different scent. Intimate might have had other similar companions in its heyday (1950s-early 1960s), but as of right now, there is NOTHING like it around. I'm sure nearly everything in this perfume is probably now banned by the perfume industry. This won't smell like anything in the dept. store, or in the small niche perfumers, most of which are pretty much just copying whatever trends are out there. For all the niche stuff I have smelled, a lot of it just didn't smell like anything really all that different. Intimate IS different. You may not like it at all, but it is not like anything else you've smelled unless you've been around a long time or have been buying discontinued stuff on ebay. The H & R Fragrance Guide also calls it a Floral/Animalic Chypre and it's in the same category as Andron, Azuree, Bandit, Batsheba, Cabochard, Chimere, Courant, Cuir de Russie, Cachet, Empreinte, Epris, Fendi, Geminesse, Jolie Madame, La Nuit (PR),Mink & Pearls, Miss Balmain, Miss Dior, Montana, Mystere de Rochas, Occur, Cardin's Paradoxe, Senchal, Parfum Rare by Jacomo, Parure, Scandal, Sikkim, Timeless, Trussardi Donna, Jil Sander's Woman III, and Ysatis. Top Notes: Aldehydes, supported by bergamot, rose, gardenia, coriander - overall impression is aldehydic Middle: Jasmine, modified by orris, patchouli, sandalwood, cedarwood - creating a floral woody heart Base: Amber and Castoreum, modified by civet, oakmoss, and musk. Overall effect of base is warm, sensual, mossy. Intimate is a voluptuous, sexy fragrance, without the cedar chest, tar, smoke, fake sandalwood, or headshop smell which so many bases have. Whatever sweetness you get comes from the jasmine. I don't believe there's any vanillic scent in it. To compare with some of the other fragrances listed above, I'd qualify it by saying that I'm familiar with Azuree, Bandit, Cabochard, Cachet, Chimere, Courant, Cuir de Russie, Empreinte, Josie Madame, Miss Balmain, Miss Dior, Occur, Paradoxe, Parure, Senchal, & Timeless. Cabochard, Cuir de Russie, Jolie Madame, Miss Balmain, Parure, and Bandit all have a pronounced dry character, both in the top and in the middle. Miss Balmain and Jolie Madame I wanted so to love, but ended up deciding I just don't do leather well. Azuree is almost all leather, and I couldn't even wash it off my skin. Miss Dior smells greener and lighter to me, and it's always been one of my faves, that is, in its original concoction. I like many of Timeless' notes, but overall, it is woodier and has quite a bit of vanilla, and I just don't care for it much. It is a very nice scent, though, just not for me. Senchal was a scent my mother loved, although this was long after I grew up, so I had never known the scent. It's a sweeter scent than Intimate, and smells more modern, like 80s scents rather than 50s scents. I like Senchal very much and it has what I'd call a "cousin" in Matchabelli's Chimere, which I love also. Both Chimere and Senchal have more patchouli than Intimate. Courant has a cooler scent, due to the prominent orris note in the middle, and cedar forms a larger part of its base note. I didn't like Occur enough to keep it, so I gave the bottle to my mother. I don't know why I didn't care for it, but perhaps it was just too strong for me. I'm a dark blondish person on the fair side, and some scents just are.. too much. (Bakir is probably the strongest scent I ever wore, but I usually wore it mostly around the Christmas holidays.) Empreinte by Courreges and Paradoxe by Cardin are again fragrances I consider "cousins", although they aren't that similar. Both of these are highly underrated and seem to me to be very high quality fragrances. Don't know what they didn't attract more attention. Empreinte features a prominent peach note in its top, and while it is supported by the greenness of armoise and coriander as an aldehyde and bergamot, it's fruitier than I like. Paradoxe has a lovely "sultry floral" heart featuring jasmine, orris, and rose among others, but has a prominent leather note in its base. I would LOVE to try some Batsheba some day, but haven't gotten around to it. I have a feeling that Polly Bergen's Tortue might have been in this category, based on my own amateurish reactions to wearing it. Ysatis was too fruity for me, Woman III, while attractive, came across too masculine for me, Mystere and Fendi have too much cedar for my taste, and La Nuit too sharp opening up. Parfum Rare is nice; I have a large bottle of it, but I don't wear it that often. My personal faves in the floral-animalic chypre category all are described partly by the H & R Fragrance guide as "warm" in the base. While I have no idea what this means, I look for that feature often, and have discovered that it's not often applied to fragrances. Warmth is a quality which it would seem to be one many women would desire, so I'm always wondering why so few fragrances have anything in them which produces this warmth. Woody, smoky, leathery smells are somewhat cool, and yet they proliferate in the fragrance world.

I obtained a big-big bottle today from ebay - mind you, it`s not Revlon, it`s from Jean Philippe now - and on opening the simple and not-so-fancy-looking lilac colored box this amazing bottle pops out. And the initial thought I get here is `I`ve seen this somewhere already`.. But no. The truth is I`ve seen one or two very similar looking bottles of different sizes in my mum`s beauty cabinet and my granny`s bathroom shelf back in the day when I was a child/teenager. This was the 80s, when my country still belonged to the `Eastern Block` thus Revlon or any other western brands were scarce enough and pricey also by the time they made it to smaller towns therefore a lot of toiletries were made locally or exchanged between the countries, including the Soviet Union - a lot of cologne came from there. So the bottles I`ve seen must have been one of these - quite similar, but not the same; different color cap, white label all the way around the bottom of the bottle. I` pretty much by the time I`ve first discovered these, they were at least 10 or 15 years there.. On opening the bottle and spraying I must confirm: the scent is haunting - also similar as those colognes coming from the USSR! So they must have made a good enough copy! It is a vintage scent alright, in every sense. The opening is an oakmoss blast with aldehydes and bergamot, within cca 10 minutes or so these notes get subdued and make way for the animalic civet, castoreum and amber. You can clearly make out the sandalwood also. I can`t really smell rose as such, the flowers must play a supporting role here. There is a masculine edge to this perfume in the dry-down - possibly because my nose is more used to less woody and animalic offerings..As it fades is starts to smell more and more like lipstick and powder used to in my childhood! Definitely a throwback! My partner says it`s `a horrible granny scent` - so I won`t be wearing it near him. To me because of my reference point it`s always going to be one that my mum and grandma wore, even if it was only a knock-off..Although it isn`t really truly a rich and complex scent, it does last due to the strong notes - it will be a cherished piece in my collection and I will spray it on the odd time. Someone said it before that it`s a scent you have to be dressed up for - totally true. Not for trainers and cardigan, a sexy nightdress if anything.;-)

Oh, bliss. I just acquired a big bottle of vintage EdT Intimate for a few pounds on ebay (I already have a little bottle of parfum). Was nervous of it since it has been used slightly and has no box, but I needn't have worried. It's in perfect condition :)) On the reverse of the label on the bottle, it says, "A fragrance cherished as one of the world's seven great fragrances". Quite a claim! And frankly not one I feel it altogether lives up to, but saying that it is still very, very good of its kind, and that kind is one I adore. Intimate is largely about oakmoss for me. Very well blended, proper oakmoss, quite gentle, but permeating the structure from start to finish. So I would go as far as to say, you really must love a vintage chypre to appreciate this. I see there have been many comments about it being grassy, hay-barn and so on, and I get this completely. To me this is delicious! Yes, the beginning is aldehydic floral, but not overwhelmingly so, and soon gives way to the variety of spices, woods and other basenote-type ingredients that characterise this composition. It's interesting to read that many reviewers have found it sweet. This must be the reformulation, since the vintage stuff is certainly not sweet. Dry, in fact. A little bracing and almost medicinal - but not quite. The sandalwood and amber add warmth, the patchouli makes it a little earthy. As for civet, I find it only a whisper (it's more pronounced in the parfum I think, which also seems richer and smoother, as you would expect). What did surprise me, especially considering the name "Intimate", is that my husband doesn't like it at all. To be fair I think he generally prefers my orientals to my strong vintage chypres so perhaps it's not too astonishing. Still, men's tastes seem to have changed quite a bit if this was once a man-magnet - can't see too many men being attracted by this today! Anyway, if you like this kind of thing and have the chance to grab a cheap vintage bottle I unhesitatingly suggest that you do just that. I don't think you will be disappointed!

To me this is Charlie's stricter uptight mom! I usually stay away from Revlon, for the most part; though sniffing and reviewing this is nice...perhaps I will try Fire and Ice next-that name has always intrigued me! :-) One of my dearest friends wears Charlie (original blue box) almost exclusively. I saw her yesterday, purely by chance. When hugging her warmly I was greeted by the familiar (and stunning on her BTW) scent. Maybe Revlon is not that bad after all, I thought, I must try and review Intimate soon... Similar in its opening to many fifties and sixties scents: herbs, aldehydes and creamy florals with the obligatory citric bergamot. This is cleaner and "sharper" than Charlie and is very much a classic perfume. The woody heart is dry but firm, and the florals balance each other well: sensual jasmine and cool, detached iris create something lovely yet not really sweet or all that warm. The drydown is a warm musky, animalic chypre. It is sexy, and makes you want to get closer, but never really gets "cozy". This smells (to me) like something Faye Dunaway might have worn when portraying Joan Crawford in "Mommie Dearest", or something Corrine (mother in V.C. Andrews epic Dollanger saga "Flowers in the Attic") would wear: lovely, but aloof; classy but severe...not exactly what I define "intimate" as, but then again the fifties were half a century ago and maybe it's just my skin. Even on paper I get the cool, dry serious side of this fragrance and nothing really sexual or all that passionate. C'est la Vie... Sillage: good Longevity: very good Overall: 3.25/5 Classic, classy and (unfortunately) not all that intimate for me. I am sure there are women who can transform this into a magical elixir...I just seem immune to it.

I remember my mother having a bottle of this when I was very little - younger than 7 maybe as young as 5 which would be 1970. She had a little left in the bottle, and I rememeber her telling me it was "special". She told me her Aunt Patsy had given to her.I would snif the cap and the top of the bottle - oh what heaven! Aunt Patsy was my grandmother's sister and a very elegant woman she had never had children but had married well and had been a professional secretary - think "Mad Men". As I said Aunt Patsy was very elegant, she had beautiful silk dresses, gorgeous shoes that matched her hand bags and belts, and hats that matched her coats, and she still wore beautiful gloves. She had wonderful cosmetics and wore fragrances like Chanel 5, and Este Lauder Scents. But that was for special occasions, she was frugal as well. She along with her husband had a business and for everyday she wore cotton dresses and more resonable priced fragrances. Someone had given this to her as a gift because they thought it was as elegant as she was, but she could be a snob at times and this just didn't suit her taste. when something like that would happen, she never returned things and was always gracious. She was also generous, and my mother would benifit. As beautiful, glamorous, and "special" as this was it was also very heavy with the Animalic notes - and those often didn't sit very well on my mother's skin. That was the case with this - she usualy scented her scarfs and slips with this, but stayed off from her skin directly. Not her favorite she would have liked something from Este Lauder more, but this was lovely, back in the day.