After living with Peau Intense for the past month or so, and comparing it with my mid 80’s vintage Montana, before the Parfum de Peau moniker was imprinted on the box and bottle, I find I’m enjoying it, but I also feel it’s redundant. The original is, or was, a leather clad, dominatrix version of the popular 80’s dark rose chypre. Think Diva, L’Arte di Gucci, even Explosive by Aigner or La Perla. Dark rose, animal breath, oakmoss and leather galore, held together by incense and resins. Nothing of that can be found in today’s Parfum de Peau, an almost transparent and anemic version of the great Claude Montana. That’s the reason Peau Intense was launched right? Years of reformulations had taken their toll and Parfum de Peau was just not Parfum de Peau anymore. Peau Intense is, firstly, intense. It’s got a very hefty sillage and all day longevity. The rose is dark and moody, the incense shines in all its cold and churchy glory, and the patchouli takes a wonderful camphor turn as soon as it starts to come to life. It doesn’t turn gourmand nor does it take a turn for the modern “woods” and “amber” that permeate every release for the past 5 years. So, only for that fact, Bravo! But it also has some differences; while the original is civet and castoreum heavy, this version is far less animalic. The leather still shines and the castoreum seems to be solo this time around. The darkness of the rose is still here, but instead of the blackberry touch and highlight, the fruitiness now comes from the orange blossom. Oakmoss ruled before, now it appears as a mere introduction for the hardcore patch. Old formulas had resins among the incense, giving a warmer and more opulent feel, more decadent. Now, the incense is far more pronounced, appearing colder, aloof, more solemn. But still, I’m enjoying it a lot. So why do I feel it’s redundant? Because it exists. IFRA, prohibitions, consumer taste and changes, regulations...everything that made Parfum de Peau a shadow of itself are now reversed for this. So, if this formula can be created in 2019, and is IFRA safe, why not simply do a reformulation (again) and revamp the original? Is it such a big seller? Then this change will surely be embraced by fans. Is it a slow seller? Then is a flanker really going to boost sales or bring it back to the spotlight? Why do a new version that smells more like the original than the current Parfum de Peau, put the Intense moniker, charge double and present it like an improved version of the original, when you could have simply improved the original? Fans know what type of perfume Parfum de Peau is, how it smelled, and this won’t attract those who dislike it already. If it’s for the fans, be less greedy. You’re simply saying “we can make the original better, but we prefer to launch a new one, more expensive, more intense, and call it a day”. Had you given Parfum de Peau this formula, even with the updated box, and not called it a new scent, it would be lauded like Mitsouko in 2015 and Wasser’s award winning reformulation. That said, I still enjoy it. I bought it because the price was less than half of the original retail and even with the smoke curtain, I hope it lasts on the market. And if it somehow attracts new customers, then all the better. Fans of the original will rejoice, especially if they’re not the type to search Ebay for vintage bottles, which still exist and some, reasonably priced. Original vintage, still easily found on eBay: 10/10 Parfum de Peau sold today: don’t bother Peau Intense: 8/10