Coco Mademoiselle
Eau de Parfum Intense, Chanel (2018)

This is a nice floral perfume, with this slightly dusty feeling. Good for both day and night wear.

Sprayed a 1.5 ml tester I received gratis from Chanel here at home. I instantly pictured myself standing on the main floor of our local Macy’s. I cant believe how people hate on La Vie est Belle when this smells way more ubiquitous and overpowering in my neighborhood. I had to bring in my HEPA filter to clear the room. Thank, God, I only sprayed this on cardstock instead of skin.

This scent is heavy and overwhelming. The scents I have been curating from the 50s, 60s, 70s smell way fresher than this. I get glimpses of Mon Guerlain in this scent and I finally get why my husband thinks that smells too mature for me. I don’t think I have ever felt such a negative feeling toward a fragrance as I do this. There are way better choice for my money.

I remember something in the original Guide (Perfumes: The Guide, 2009) about Chanel doing their version of Angel and being surprised (and embarrassed, it is implied) that it was such a success. But really, what is surprising in people craving a softer, posher, Chanel-ized take on a fragrance so famously jarring? The essential idea of Angel – sugared fruit clashing with a hoary, masculine patchouli – is a clever one but not that easy to pull off. Coco Mademoiselle took the basic template and cleaned it all up, turning the dial from heavy, sour and syrupy to luminous, pretty, and girly.

The Eau de Parfum Intense version plays it very close to the model for original eau de toilette, i.e., the pinkish, perfumey fruit pop of lychee set alight with a shower of metallic aldehydes, all underlaid with a cleaned-up, fractionated version of patchouli and a shit ton of those bouncy, expensive-smelling white musks that Chanel stuffs into its fragrances. The only innovation in the Eau de Parfum Intense is the additional warmth and depth of tonka bean, but the differences between this and the original Eau de Toilette are not as significant as, say, the differences between Mon Guerlain and Mon Guerlain Intense, or YSL Libre and YSL Libre Intense.

I am letting Coco Mademoiselle Eau de Parfum Intense go because I bought it for all the wrong reasons. On my way to live in Rome in late 2018 and leaving my (very young) family behind, I saw the pinkish juice in that reassuringly square Chanel bottle in the airport duty free, and between my tears (and copious amounts of snot), I thought, why not make myself disappear by wearing something that will make me smell like practically everyone else. It was an act of self-effacement and of sorrow. And it worked. Coco Mademoiselle became my urban camouflage – the skin I slipped into every morning when I felt most like a freshly peeled egg turned out into the city. Wearing it, I instantly became one with the faceless mass of women sleepwalking their way through the metro and train systems in the mornings.

I stopped wearing it for two reasons. First, Helen, a tall and lovely but rather intimidating English colleague spun me around at the train station one morning, bellowing in my ear, Oi! Who’s been wearing my perfume then? (Sigh. The inevitable downside of wearing a perfume this popular). Second, more importantly, since I no longer live in Rome and no longer suffer the absence of my children or husband, I no longer feel the need to punish myself by making myself anonymous. Wearing Coco Mademoiselle now feels as not-me as it always was.

I am surprised that I did not get post a review for this one. I am not as articulate as those who reviewed before me, so bear with me. This is a love for me, as is most Chanel. And I have to say, I do slightly prefer this intense version over the original, but I really do love both. This one is a bit warmer, and deeper, and I really enjoy those aspects to it. I do think that if you like one, you will like the other… and it just depends on each person which one is favored. Both are beautiful though.

Coco Madamoiselle Eau de Parfum Intense (2018) is really just an "all grown up" take on the original "girly" Coco Madamoiselle Eau de Parfum (2001), itself a perfume released at the beginning of the millennium for the Y2K generation that wanted dynamic, bombastic, and fruity/sour candy fragrances that could extend their youth appeal indefinitely. With this new Eau de Parfum Intense, the concept of being 21 forever has been given up on and as such, the extreme Jolly Rancher vibe that made the original Coco Madamoiselle so gauche yet so gleefully fun to wear has been excised out. What has been left behind is augmented with a few tasteful and more-mature replacement notes, that while not totally changing the character of Coco Madamoiselle in and of itself, does make it something of an ironically less "intense" experience in some ways while increasing intensity in others. Let's just say it's complicated, even if things are really much simpler in effect than in execution. I like Coco Madamoiselle Eau de Parfum Intense, but a little bit of the recalcitrance that made the 2001 scent fun is lost here.

The opening of Coco Madamoiselle Eau de Parfum Intense is rather similar to the original, but with the tangy candy citruses toned down in favor of a bit more aldehydes, making it appropriately more grown-up in that way. Richer, heavier, but missing the grapefruit, EdP Intense further leans into the orange and bergamot as it transitions to the rose jasmine core it also shares with the original. The peony and lychee fruit are removed here and with them goes the Glade Angel Whispers candle vibe that marked the 2001 release, although there is a sparkly champagne sort of feel with some fleshy peach tones similar to the pillar Coco Chanel (1984) in their stead, yet missing the animalic component that makes Coco so much more vivacious than its younger siblings. A soft vanilla tonka and patchouli "fruitchouili" base finishes this off, but as a midway between Coco and Madamoiselle, the Madamoiselle Eau de Parfum Intense doesn't stand out as much compared to either. Wear time is good at 10 hours and performance is enough, going strong for half of it then quiet. Best use is still casual but perhaps more year-round, and you might be able to get away with it at an office with low applications.

Bottom line here is fans of Madamoiselle will enjoy the EdP Intense, but this won't bring any new people to the line, especially not those who didn't appreciate the original flanker to the classic Coco. The DNA is mostly intact, and Olivier Polge basically plays homage to his retired father here by taking a fragrance meant for people in their 20's and retrofitting it so those same people in their 40's could keep comfortably wearing it. This is of course instead of moving onto their mother's Coco out of some obligation to wear perfume made for older women once they too become such women, so I guess marrying some original Coco DNA and removing some of the fruity ozonic qualities from Madamoiselle is the best way of pulling a "have your cake and eat it too". I personally still wear Tommy by Tommy Hilfiger (1994), which is just about the men's equivalent to this in that respect, so I'd still rock the original Mademoiselle too if I was going to wear anything from the line at all. However, if nobody was ever self-conscious or influenced by peer pressure, half of these fragrances would never come to market. Thumbs up.

I owned a decant of this but recently purchased the smallest bottle available because I tested this once or twice and told myself it was a nicer version of the original. After a fresh wearing I think I've changed my mind. I am someone who adores the original Coco Mademoiselle eau de parfum, and I enjoy the sporty citrus bite that one has in the top notes. I get three distinct tiers of scent and great sillage that lasts all day.

With this one I get a blast of amber and patchouli straight out the gate. They've stripped away the citrus and I don't get a twang from the rose+jasmine combo that seems almost standard in Chanel Perfumes, and for that reason this almost seems like another house's rendition of CM. You know what this reminds me of? Miss Dior (2011-2012) version. I still like this one but I really miss that fruity floral pinch that only Chanel seems to master evoking an air of sophistication out of.

I'm giving this the thumbs up rating because it's still a great fragrance by itself, but my personal preference is for the original. Many people seem to be turned off by the citrus bite in that one so if you find yourself wishing that regular CM dialed that back and skipped straight to its patchouli rich drydown, this one is the better choice for you. But because this one has patchouli from start to finish, if you are not crazy about that note you could get sick of this fragrance after a few hours.

Luckily for that reason this fragrance starts out with great projection and sillage, but slowly dwindles down with wear time. After a few hours I can only detect it when I wave my arms close to my nose (where I applied the fragrance). Total wear time was 8 hours with the last two being very close to the skin. On me the original actually performs about twice as strong as that so this is less impressive to me by comparison but it's nothing to snark at if you're used to weaker scents.

Not my favorite but I can see why it's the preferred fragrance of the line by many people and could see this one doing much better in the current market with the multitude of other sweet patchouli bombs. It's just missing that ‘something' for me that I consider a Chanel fragrance signature if you will. And I couldn't specifically put my finger on what that signature is... but I know whatever it is is missing here and it's missed by me. I probably won't repurchase once my tiny bottle is used up, but as long as they don't tamper any further with my EDP, I'll keep buying and recommending that one.