First of all I'm not the biggest fan of Diesel fragrance but I don't hold any grudges and I'm always welcome to being surprised but this I'm afraid is more boring nonsense. Bad? Nah I wouldn't say it smells bad as such but when combined with the fact that from the notes at least, it had the promise of bucking a trend of mediocrity in designer releases lately, sadly Bad doesn't do that. Instead it is a mildly noxious cocktail of the good the BAD and the en vogue. I have to say it has that modern feel of an Invictus, single handedly trying to be everything to everyone a bit of freshness here, some aquatic masculinity there and shades of thick clunky oriental all around. The only two things that stand out are a kind of amber scent, with lavender and sage vibe with some darker tones of tobacco. There's critically no caviar but there is that bit of calone or aquaticness which could nod towards it I suppose? However, in my view has no business being mixed with tobacco. It all just messy and I can see why there's comparisons to Just Cavalli which is similar but perhaps a bit better? I'm not a fan of this and although it's perfectly okay fragrance It's not for me and is just too mainstream for my tastes. I will wear the samples I have and I have any further thoughts I will add them, can't see my mind changing though.

This was very nice in many ways, a spicy yet clean scent with the right amount of depth but still incredibly accessible and crowd pleasing. I think due to the relative boldness of Icon Absolute I was expecting this to be even more luxurious and some how even louder but it isn't. Reserve is the key to this and it plays it's hand well. The opening is mysterious, clean masculine woods very subtle, vetiver and some peppery spice with a smooth cardamom vibe. It's very much a raw stripped back L'Nuit de Homme and definitely more in the vein of the original Icon. It dries down to a heart of deep and satisfying woods (which is apparently ebony) and it's really lovely there's also a creamy sandalwood at the base. So all in all a decent fragrance, well it's not without it's issues. The facts are this scent is very subtle, the quietest so far in the Icon line and longevity was not great. However, I have only worn once and I really didn't spray much at all, so I could be being unfair to Icon Elite. I really need to try this fragrance again because I definitely liked it, wouldn't go as far as to say I enjoyed it but I'd definitely give it another go. Update: Having given this another go I have to say it really resembles Paco Rabanne XS or Creed Himalaya but crucially with a more amped and soapier focus on cardamom. This is the heart of the fragrance but there's hints throughout at a softer drydown, which last time revealed that exotic wood and santal vibe I liked let's hope it does the same now I'm wearing a proper application. I have to say this is a pleasant masculine scent which I have a soft spot for because of the assoiation with Paco XS, a scent from the 90's I'm coming to realize, I really miss. Good but not great, more palatable to my nose than the other versions, although I'm okay with them too.

Okay so Oud can play tricks on us all, mutating into lots of complex, sub-categorized notes. Oud'ish I've no doubt contains oud but I can't say in manifests itself in a way I've smelled before. I found this to be more of the minimal, sterility I've encountered across much of the Zarko range but with a crucial difference...I actually like the way this smells. It's a curious woody musk with an odd quality (Which is perhaps the tea, the fact that I love a good tea note makes me no authority on it because again, Oud'ish doesn't make it easy to recognize. The one thing I do get when it dries down on my skin is a very creamy woods, almost sweet and vanilla like. It's very smooth and actually gives a warm dimension to what are largely cold, indifferent fragrances. I actually like this one but the performance was pathetic on me barely lasting an hour or two, this one might be worthy of further investigation.

This is not my idea of a nice perfume. As a house Zarko is as conceptually confused as the plot of this offerings Hollywood namesake. The citrus opening is fresh but then gives way to a aldehydic, and coldly metallic, calone laden aquatic. Inception is not so much salty and sea like but less natural and authentic than that. Even the green or woody element to this fragrance doesn't evoke nature. I just don't dig it, smelled it before and I'm over this sort of arty, minimalism unless it really speaks to me and this has nothing interesting to say. It does have some lasting power, a plus I suppose for those who do like it but it's a very mild skin scent when dried down.

I can't be too hard on this fragrance because it actually delivers quite a pleasant experience. I don't think it's as good or accessible to men for example as something like Liquides Imaginaires Dom Rosa. Pink Molecule is certainly a well rendered champagne fragrance, the notes are instantly recognizable and airing on the side of feminine with fizzy bubbles and freshness in the opening, a lovely apricot note and hints of blossom and florals and the sweetness of dessert wine. It evokes pinkness in the same way as Dom Rosa and to me that is a good thing, however The hint of roses adds a dimension this stuff just doesn't quite achieve. I won't dwell on that though, this is a nice smelling fragrance with average performance and a brisk, effervescent quality a big bruiser of a man like me doesn't possess and doesn't really want to either.

This is funny one and not least because of the instant reminders of Escentric molecules and the minimal/Lazy perfume design of the ultra modern era. I'm not a lover of the vague woodiness of some of these fragrances but not apposed to the use of these techniques or molecules either, I'm just yet to find one that really speaks to me. This has an air of Iso E super about it just in approach perhaps? I mean it's distinctly different , a hard to pigeonhole opening of citrus, then some indiscriminate woods one could describe as cedar but there's a warmth and a bit of muskiness too. It did get a little woodier as it dried down becoming more worthy of the 'Wooden Chips' name and increasingly like a subtle sandlewood but decidedly less spicy. I can't say I get an earthy, patch or oud vibe from this just a weakly disappointing and suspicious skin scent. I'm often worried about being very strong to others and I can barely detect. Don't get me wrong I like my perfumery arty, avant garde and interesting but without tipping over into pretentiousness and Zarkoperfume Molecule No.8 is something that maybe does do that. I don't want nondescript, committee made scents from trendy Scandinavian houses just for the sake of it. I want pieces of art, compositions that are slaved over by perfumers who treat their 'baby' with all the due care and attention they deserve. I'm just not that taken by No.8 and having tried the whole line, this isn't the worst or the best. Blandness seems to be a theme of Zarko...shame really.

Well you better believe it...an 'Intense' fragrance that is worthy of the moniker and some praise. I was dubious about this one, unsure of what direction it could go in but very simply it is a heightened version of the original, perfectly capturing the spirit but deepening it significantly. I feel that the original despite being compared with DH and DHI is as different, as it is similar and Intense is same story. I'd say it's more bracing than the original especially in the opening and notably sweeter. It has a not quite bubblegum but kinda fruity, sweets (candy) gourmand feel which is palpably amped up. The nutty, creamy, vanilla/iris backbone is as lovely and grounding as it was the first time out and the performance was better too. Just to note, I did absolutely drown myself in the stuff for a first wear but I got 8 hours plus and even longer as a faint skin scent. Just while I'm on the 'bubblegum' comparison I'd compare it to two recent releases (in style alone)...see if you can follow my thinking because this immediately sprang to mind. The new Popeye Le Male and the Ultra Male share that highly synthetic, sweet note which is faintly around in Popeye and on steroids in Ultra Male which is slightly vulgar at first but as it dries down to become sublime. I think this is the tale of Valentino Uomo & Uomo Intense, with the crucial difference that it's candy notes are great from the start, never overstepping it's bounds. Yeah this is nice, I'm glad they haven't ruined the good rep of the first one and if I run out of Uomo anytime soon I definitely get this one.

I knew nothing about this release and it turned out to be something I hadn't expected from Aramis...but perhaps should've done. No brand is too precious to jump on a trendy bandwagon and this is what Aramis have done here and maybe with flankers like adventurer and black so as I say...it was half expected. The opening is straight away identifiable as tonka bean, so I guess that's something and it's that synthetic, dirty, heavy vanilla chemistry that runs right through the experience. Lavender actually compliments Tonka well and there's a hint of that combo in Voyager. Look...this is normally something I'd say I don't like, I'm not into designer, gourmand, tonka fragrances as a rule but after the harshness and clunkiness of the opening and first hour or two it becomes a subdued, skin scent which to me is quite inoffensive. I'm more tolerant than I used to be but this isn't good...I'll pass.

I remember trying the pour homme and I could've sworn this one too? Maybe I didn't so I've revisited it to see what I think and I'm pleasantly surprised. The opening is a very uplifting citrus not all sharp, bitter grapefruit, some sweeter fruity tones. A clean light, peppery musk greets you as it settles and in the drydown with a body of woods, cedar and vetiver at the back. It's not rocket science and it will never astound anyone but this is a very nicely put together and wearable fragrance. Givenchy Pour Homme seems to be a throwback somehow, because it doesn't have any obvious, modern trickery or faddiness...but I suppose it did come out in 2004! I want to see this heavily reduced and I would consider adding it to my collection, because it's a worthwhile fragrance, without being remarkable in anyway.

Very interesting bottle and so is the scent within. Finally someone has done a good, sweet smelling, rich, gourmand oriental in the designer realm and I never in a million years thought it would come from Ferragamo. Perhaps I'm being slightly hasty and rushing into reviewing this (something I rarely do without at least a couple of wears under my belt.) because I only briefly tried it on my arm today. It shapes up to be something sweet but not cloying and genuinely deep, without being harsh in any way. Uomo opens with a fruits, a tart sweetness, which actually when settled smells more like a slightly boozy fig scent. The base is a kind of powdery cacao and tonka bean vibe which I must admit I didn't immediately associate with tiramisu but I suppose a kind of vanilla/chocolate/coffee is exactly what tonka and cacao are so...yeah Tiramisu. (a dessert I love BTW) The bottle has a striking look to it and is reminiscent of Lubin, guerlain and Lalique flacons with the similar embossed black bits. I will have to update this review because I'm intrigued to try Uomo again and that fact alone means its a good release. Be warned though this fragrance is for those of us with a sweet tooth and I'm predicting it will not be to everyone's taste.