Viktor & Rolf Bonbon : Perfume Review

22222

I divide the contemporary fragrance world into the children of Thierry Mugler Angel and the children of Dolce & Gabbana Light Blue? Well, the Angel clan can welcome a new sibling, Viktor & Rolf Bonbon. A textbook gourmand, Bonbon is exclusively for the lovers of sweet. If you like your cotton candy with a dose of peach syrup, then you’re in  for a treat. If not, then you can count on a headache.

bonbon

When Angel was launched in 1993, its caramel and vanilla overdose was so novel that it at once attracted and repelled. “It’s not a perfume, it’s a flavor blend,” said some perfumers. “Unsophisticated, vulgar, crude,” said others. But after a slow start, Angel proved that it had much more than sweetness and that it could create a new family of perfumes. Today, over-the-top vanilla and caramel are nothing new, and as Bonbon demonstrates, they make a commercial, easy to like scent. We’ve been well-trained by Angel.

Viktor & Rolf prides itself on edgy fashions, but there is nothing avant-garde about its fragrances. The first one, Flowerbomb, was a clone of Angel, and Bonbon takes after the big sibling as well as Prada Candy. No surprises here, given the name, right? Candy, despite its lighthearted character and edible sweetness, is a shape-shifter, playing up the dark heft of benzoin resin against the familiar caramelizing sugar accord. It’s rich but translucent, sweet but not cloying. It was a huge hit.

The brief to Cecile Matton and Serge Majoullier, the perfumers who worked on Bonbon, must have included a reference to Candy, because after the sweet tangerine top notes, Bonbon covers you in a similar layer of caramel. It smells like a cotton candy stand crossed with a vat of crème brûlée, and while in Candy, the idea is sheer and subtle, in Bonbon, you get no respite. Next comes a baked peach that gives Bonbon a creamy, heavy accent. Even the jasmine heart seems sugary and caramelized.

I don’t shy away from sweet perfumes, which can be a fun indulgence, and Aquolina Pink Sugar and Lolita Lempicka are mainstays in my wardrobe, but Bonbon turns me off. In comparison to Angel and some other big gourmands, it has little character and hardly anything in the way of memorable effect. It wears well and lingers for hours, but its sillage is indistinguishable from other sweet, candy-like perfumes.

And it’s expensive. I agree with Robin, who mentions in her review that similar options like Juicy Couture Viva La Juicy, Britney Spears Fantasy, or Dolce & Gabbana The One Desire will satisfy the same craving and go easier on the wallet. If your love for sweetness is bigger than your budget, just go for Pink Sugar and indulge without guilt.

Viktor & Rolf Bonbon Eau de Parfum includes notes of caramel, mandarin, orange, peach, orange blossom, jasmine, cedar, guaiac wood, sandalwood and amber. It is available in 30, 50 ($115) and 90 ($165) ml Eau de Parfum.

Enjoyed this? Get blog posts via email:

Or, stay updated via:

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • RSS

94 Comments

  • george: I think you should take another star off for that advert. I won’t sully your blog by analysing it. I love reading your reviews in tandem with Luca Turin’s on Arabia Style. If I could find a third reviewer I trust as much, you’d be like the three pre-cogs in a bath of Minority Report. July 17, 2014 at 7:25am Reply

    • Victoria: Please don’t hold yourself back! I was going to write something about it, but then decided against it. July 17, 2014 at 9:09am Reply

      • george: Unfortunately, like the advert itself, I think it’s all extremely obvious. :-)
        I do like when you describe perfumes as generally being the children of Light Blue or Angel. It makes me think of village of the damned. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqlozoXVxYM July 17, 2014 at 5:06pm Reply

    • solanace: Thank you for the Luca Turin reference, George. I´ve been craving his reviews so much! July 17, 2014 at 7:13pm Reply

  • Anne of Green Gables: I’m not so fond of sweet, gourmand perfumes but Prada Candy was a big surprise. I love it for the exact reason you described in your article. But Bonbon sounds like a real headache inducer. Talking about Flowerbomb, I was in Douglas a couple of weeks ago to test some perfumes. A girl came in and sprayed herself with Flowerbomb around 10 times! Then, I thought, “Oh, she really is a walking bomb”. July 17, 2014 at 8:05am Reply

    • Victoria: 10 sprays of anything but the lightest colognes would be an overkill! Even something as beloved as Iris Silver Mist would be too much. I like sweet time to time, but with so many good gourmands on the market, Bonbon doesn’t stand out at all. And seriously, I’d rather go for Fantasy (and save money while at it.) July 17, 2014 at 9:11am Reply

  • Sandra: I do like coco mademoiselle, so there is a part of me that does like sweet and pachouli, however I reach more for coco noir then CM.

    I didn’t like Prada candy, or Angel? and I agree that girls really overdo the spraying of Flowerbomb and I do think they smell like a walking bomb as well.

    I realized recently that where you are effects how you smell things. I brought Eau de Cologne (Chanel Les Exclusifs) on my honeymoon to Bequia and for the first time I was really able to smell how beautiful it actually is, and how long it really lasts- where is here in NYC I don’t smell anything at all after a few minutes- and use it to refresh myself. Maybe- if I take all these sweet candy perfumes that I don’t like to exotic islands for a smell I may appreciate them more hehehehehe ;-) July 17, 2014 at 8:32am Reply

    • Victoria: I went through a bottle of Coco Mademoiselle when it was first launched, and I loved it. Then I must have overdone it, because I didn’t feel like revisiting it again. But whenever I smell it on people, I like the sillage.

      I can’t agree more than the climate, temperature, humidity, etc. will affect how a perfume smells on you. Which is why the whole concept of seasonality must be taken with a grain of salt–the same perfume worn during different seasons can smell remarkably varied. And Chanel Eau de Cologne is one of the best in its genre. July 17, 2014 at 9:14am Reply

  • Michaela Kristal: I wish I could try it but it’s not sold in Romania…

    I super-love sweet frangances and while Angel edp and Pink Sugar seem to my nose bitter, dry and overpowering, Vera Wang Princess and Dolce Gabbana Pour Femme 2012 proved to be winners. I also happen to just love Candy, it is a wonderful perfume and the only Prada I care for. Well, not enough to buy a bottle, but if someone gifted it, I would gladly wear it.
    Is there any other perfume similar in smell to BonBon so I could figure it out ? July 17, 2014 at 9:14am Reply

    • Victoria: Michaela, I mentioned a few in the last paragraph. They are in the same ballpark, especially Fantasy. I would also add Salvatore Ferragamo Signorina.

      If you find Angel and Pink Sugar bitter, then Bonbon might be better. It’s definitely less woody and less earthy than either Angel or Pink Sugar.

      I have a feeling that Bonbon will be distributed wider later in the year, so you will get a chance to try it. July 17, 2014 at 9:18am Reply

    • Sammy: Try Nina Ricci’s Nina L’Elixir. July 17, 2014 at 9:58am Reply

    • Annette Reynolds: Do you have access to the Profumum Roma line? If so, try “Vanitas.” Or even “Confetto.”

      I can’t compare them to “BonBon” but they are sweet and lovely (“Vanitas” is like the big sister of “Pink Sugar”). July 17, 2014 at 1:07pm Reply

      • rainboweyes: Second Profumum Roma – try also their Acqua e Zucchero and Dolce Acqua. Farmazia SS Annunziata also has something for the sweet tooth – Chia and Cara. July 17, 2014 at 1:40pm Reply

    • Adriana Galani: Heheh, I’d add “Manifesto”, or everything else like Mark Jacobs kind of stuff, minus “Candy”. Look in A Sefora for some sweet juices and You’ll get a whole lot of “same” things.
      No, “Candy” is different, as Victoria mentioned, “Candy” has personality and “Candy” made me love Prada till “Infusion D’Iris” when Prada became one of my favorit houses. . :-) July 17, 2014 at 3:50pm Reply

  • irem: I wonder about the target demographic for Bonbon or other V&R fragrances. I have sprayed it once on a card and didn’t even bother to take the card with me, left it at the counter. Just sweet and no sophistication at all. I have hard time imagining it on anyone past 20, impossible for 30, 40 somethings. I feel only a kid in her early teens might like.
    But then look at the price:definitely not teenager budget (way too overpriced for what it is actually, but that is another discussion). Look at the ad: it is a fully grown woman. The model is young, but she has been styled to give a much older image. Look at the venue: it is still a Saks 5th exclusive in the US, just spotted a bottle displayed among expensive silk lingerie. I don’t see many teenagers shopping there.
    What are they trying to achieve? Sell desperate 40 somethings trying to cling to the last traces of their youth a teenage fragrance to make them feel young again?
    BTW absolutely no offence to the desperate 40 somethings, I am going to join the club next year, and I am nervous that youth is slipping by myself. Although, not a chance that they can sell me Sugarbomb II, I prefer an “old-lady” chypre any day. July 17, 2014 at 9:40am Reply

    • sara: I prefer an “old-lady” chypre any day

      my feelings exactly. July 17, 2014 at 10:10am Reply

    • Hannah: I think there was some kind of study that showed that men were attracted to the scent of sugar cookies. So I think there is the idea that smelling ”delicious” is sexy. I don’t think these fragrances smell delicious, but think that is the idea. July 17, 2014 at 10:43am Reply

      • Sandra: Well in that case- I am sure you can use some sweet oils to dab on instead of breaking the bank for this perfume July 17, 2014 at 10:56am Reply

        • Hannah: You can do that for almost any perfume. I have a incense oil that I bought from CB I Hate Perfume that is better than many incense perfumes and it cost a lot less, but people (including myself) still buy incense perfumes. July 17, 2014 at 10:59am Reply

          • Victoria: For incense, yes, because it’s such a simple note. On the other hand, something done with quality ingredients and well-balanced is truly the work of art! July 17, 2014 at 2:31pm Reply

      • rainboweyes: I heard about this study too. According to the findings that’s also the reason why sex workers use sweet and vanillic perfumes. Apparently it has something to do with the natural vanilla flavour in breast milk. July 17, 2014 at 11:14am Reply

      • Victoria: I always wonder about these studies and what methodology they use. Anyway, wearing what someone else might find attractive is totally not the point of perfume for me; it’s to please myself. The rest doesn’t even matter. July 17, 2014 at 1:28pm Reply

      • Mel: I also read that men love the scent of onions sautéing in butter… July 17, 2014 at 11:18pm Reply

    • Victoria: Perfumes in this family are really good sellers, and they are probably banking on that (Eau Mega was a flop, after all). I can see why gourmands are appealing, and I have a few that I wear on days when I need something lighthearted and not too serious. But my main gripe with Bonbon is that it smells like a bunch of other things already, costs too much for what it is and feels like a me-too perfume. July 17, 2014 at 1:25pm Reply

    • Michaela Kristal: As a 40 woman who loves sweet perfumes I can asure you I am not trying to keep youth eternal and I am certainly not desperate! :))) But I just love many sugar bombs. I have alaways had, since I was a little girl. And in the same vein I could never fall in love with a chypre. They smell awkward on me and I feel ‘disguised’ when wearing them, even those I admire. So, in my oppinion, sweet perfumes appeal to women who love sweet smells, sweet vanillas, caramel and the likes, disregarding their age. I loved my candies at 15, at 20, I love them now and I’m pretty sure I will love them also when I am retired. :))) July 17, 2014 at 2:18pm Reply

      • Michaela Kristal: One more thing: I am not praising Bonbon and I don’t expect it to be not even remotely good. You see, I am not a fan of Flowerbomb, either. But, as a lover of Amour by Kenzo, Addict, Hypnotic Poison and Lempicka L, not to mention many other sweet perfumes, I have a hard time when sweet perfumes are equated with cheap, low quality or trashy. Even if it is not openely said, the secret parfumista paradigm states chypre or vintage is classy and intelectual, floral is boring, wearing masculines is cool and gourmands are vulgar. In my personal book, chypres are cold and boring, tuberose is horenduos, and florals & gourmands done right are comforting. But this is just me, I don’t expect the world to see it this way. I know individuals are different and this is why I’d expect people to express disappointment on why a certain perfume is a flop, not on why gourmands are released. Gourmand lovers are just as pissed off by low quality perfumes, trust me. July 17, 2014 at 2:31pm Reply

        • Victoria: I agree with you. Sweet doesn’t automatically equals cheap and unsophisticated. After all, so many celebrated perfumes are unabashedly sweet, from Guerlain Shalimar to Chanel Coco. Making a good quality gourmand is much more difficult than making an amber or an incense blend. It’s also more difficult, because that category has been so saturated. It’s true that different fragrance genres evoke different moods, and the gourmand genre is the most indulgent and lighthearted of them all. Angel isn’t trying to be sophisticated and effete, that’s not the idea behind it. The aim of the perfumer was to create a feeling of indulgence and comfort.

          But in the end, who cares what others think. I don’t really care if someone finds Pink Sugar or Lolita Lempicka sophisticated or not. The most important thing for me is how they wear on my skin. July 17, 2014 at 3:02pm Reply

          • Annette Reynolds: “…But in the end, who cares what others think. I don’t really care if someone finds Pink Sugar or Lolita Lempicka sophisticated or not. The most important thing for me is how they wear on my skin.”

            Exactly!! July 17, 2014 at 6:08pm Reply

        • solanace: Thank you for putting it so well. Snobbery is such self repression, let´s all enjoy what we like, be tolerant and be happy! July 17, 2014 at 7:38pm Reply

          • Michaela: Yes, yes and yes :) July 18, 2014 at 5:17am Reply

  • Sammy: I tried it at Saks twice because of the cute bottle. Liked the start, not so much anything else. It turns sickly sweet on me. July 17, 2014 at 9:56am Reply

    • Victoria: It’s definitely on the sweet side, especially as it settles down. July 17, 2014 at 1:25pm Reply

  • Marianna: I liked Eau Mega from V&R and that’s it. Flowerbomb and Bonbon are just copycats. July 17, 2014 at 10:09am Reply

    • Victoria: I also like Spicebomb a lot, which is one of the best sweet tobacco perfumes. It replaced the discontinued L’Artisan Tea for Two for me. July 17, 2014 at 1:26pm Reply

      • Kat: Spicebomb is great at bath time. I have the shower gel and although it is spicy and sweet, the cedar really keeps it balanced, imo. July 17, 2014 at 4:44pm Reply

        • Victoria: I haven’t tried the shower gel, but someone else mentioned here that it’s very good and true to scent. July 18, 2014 at 5:39am Reply

          • Kat: Oh…thank you for the heads-up! I will have to get another sample of the juice and compare the two. I’ve already used up my previous 5 ml sample. :) July 18, 2014 at 1:43pm Reply

            • Victoria: I bought a bottle for my husband and then ended up using it myself. :) July 18, 2014 at 3:52pm Reply

      • Mel: I’ve been meaning to try Spicebomb every since you favorably compared it to Tea For Two another time. Imagine I discovered and was thrilled with Tea For Two literally the week they announced it was being discontinued. July 17, 2014 at 11:23pm Reply

        • Victoria: I hear you! I couldn’t believe they would discontinue it. July 18, 2014 at 6:23am Reply

  • Danaki: An SA sprayed it on me whilst I was in a department store. It was like being whacked on the head with a candied apple, whilst someone shoved Werther’s Originals in your mouth to stop you screaming.

    Far too much caramel even for someone who lists Banoffee pie as her favourite dessert. July 17, 2014 at 10:56am Reply

    • Victoria: What an image! :)

      But you’re seriously making me craving Banoffee pie. July 17, 2014 at 2:30pm Reply

  • rainboweyes: I love vanilla and caramel but never in perfume! The good thing about these scents – they are wallet friendly (at least for me ;) ). As a fan of earthy, sober scents, I’m not even tempted to try it.
    That said, I utterly fell in love with Penhaligon’s Tralala… July 17, 2014 at 11:19am Reply

    • Victoria: I haven’t tried Tralala yet, but I want if only for that name. :) July 17, 2014 at 2:31pm Reply

  • Bastet: If anyone is looking for a sweet but less expensive fragrance, I highly recommend Lalique le Parfum.

    Also, I have recently been ashamed of my lingering fondness for Pink Sugar, which I wore quite a bit in my younger, pre-perfumista days. (I still wear the body cream once in a while.) Victoria, I am glad to see that you like it too! Somehow that makes me feel better. July 17, 2014 at 11:55am Reply

    • Victoria: Your recommendation of Lalique Le Parfum is great, because it’s one of the best and most underrated sweet orientals out there. And no need to feel ashamed for linking gourmands! It’s such a fun fragrance style, and what’s wrong with wanting to smell like something delicious? July 17, 2014 at 2:35pm Reply

  • Nancy A.: I guess for those eliminating sugar from their diets, this has become a replacement fix! Maybe, it should come with a warning label. I, too used to wear Lolita Lempicka (the original) for the anise and never considered it cloyingly sweet and in some circles Angel has become a classic. Who am I to judge? July 17, 2014 at 12:05pm Reply

    • Victoria: For me, it works in the opposite way–it makes me crave sweets! So, these perfumes are dangerous. :) July 17, 2014 at 2:36pm Reply

  • Austenfan: I love sweet perfumes but they need to have “a story” too, if you see what I mean.
    Kiss me tender is incredibly sweet but it’s just gorgeous and loveable and it still gives me room to breath.
    I will give this one a sniff, as I quite like a peach note but your review hasn’t given me high hopes of liking it. (Plus I don’t like the name) July 17, 2014 at 12:53pm Reply

    • Victoria: Kiss Me Tender is definitely up there as far as gourmands go–an edible, lush composition, but it has plenty of nuances. That makes it much more interesting to wear, although since it’s rich, I save it exclusively for the colder days. July 17, 2014 at 2:39pm Reply

      • Austenfan: Mme de Nicolaï knows how to handle the sweet notes! July 18, 2014 at 5:23am Reply

        • Solanace: Yes, I love both Vanille Tonka and Sacrebleu, and now I’ll have to order a sample of Kiss me Tender. July 19, 2014 at 5:31am Reply

          • Austenfan: Do! Even if you don’t like it, it is very interesting.
            What other fragrances in that line have you tried? Her summer eaux are excellent and considering you are living in a hot climate would come in handy. I also like most of her masculines. New York is the winner but (the now sadly discontinued) Nicolaï pour Monsieur a close second. July 19, 2014 at 7:06am Reply

            • solanace: I gave my mom a big decant of Eau d´Eté, and she loves its spiciness, so unusual in this kind of perfume. I am also a fan of Odalisque, which some days reminds me of Anais Anais, and of Le temps d´une fete, which I fing truly great. Just un Rêve I find a bit too sweet (but wore the entire decant). All in all, I really enjoy the old fashioned style, smoothness and heft of Patricia de Nicolai´s creations. July 19, 2014 at 9:08am Reply

              • Austenfan: Eau d’Eté is my favourite of her summer fragrances. The discontinued ones Turquoise and Exotique are good as well.
                Odalisque is a beauty, but I like Le Temps a little better. July 19, 2014 at 1:45pm Reply

                • Solanace: Me too! July 19, 2014 at 2:09pm Reply

    • Michaela: The story behind a perfume is what I am also looking for. I can’t help not considering the name. It’s not important, but so often I need to like the name, I don’t know why.
      I’m going to give Bonbon a try, when I can. Some of my dear (very) sweets are Chopard Casmir, Aquolina Pink Sugar, L of Lolita Lempicka and Elizabeth Taylor Black Pearls. July 18, 2014 at 5:26am Reply

      • Victoria: Actually, I’m wearing Casmir today. It’s not the best choice for a +30C day, but I need something comforting and indulgent. Chopard Casmir, Aquolina Pink Sugar, L of Lolita Lempicka and Elizabeth Taylor Black Pearls are all among my favorites too. July 18, 2014 at 5:32am Reply

  • Aisha: Hmmm … no thank you. I think I’ll stick with Lolita Lempicka, Candy, Pleasures Delight and Vanille Tonka for my sugar fix. And yeah, I did finally purchase Pink Sugar. How could I not? It was so inexpensive! ;-) July 17, 2014 at 12:54pm Reply

    • Victoria: Yes, the price is too low to resist it (if you like the perfume, of course). Your gourmand collection is varied enough, and since you have most bases covered, I don’t think you need Bonbon. July 17, 2014 at 2:39pm Reply

  • Elisa: Talk about too little too late. I dont understand why their feminines are so uninspiring when they managed to turn out something as good as Spicebomb on the men’s side. July 17, 2014 at 1:03pm Reply

    • Victoria: I should have mentioned Spicebomb, but I keep forgetting that it’s by V&R. That was definitely their best for me. July 17, 2014 at 2:42pm Reply

      • Elisa: Yes, by far! Would have been AMAZING if they had marketed the same fragrance to women. July 17, 2014 at 5:23pm Reply

        • Victoria: It really would, but I don’t expect it from them. July 18, 2014 at 6:24am Reply

  • Carla: I never cease to be amazed by what fashion houses come up with for perfume – the farthest from creativity and chic possible. July 17, 2014 at 7:12pm Reply

    • Victoria: Some are good exceptions like Bottega Veneta, Prada and Marc Jacobs. I don’t love all of MJ perfumes, but many fit its fashion aesthetic really well. V&R is a disappointment, because it’s such a great and innovative fashion house. July 18, 2014 at 6:25am Reply

      • Kat: I’ll give a shout out to Marni, here, as well! ;) July 18, 2014 at 1:47pm Reply

        • Victoria: That’s a terrific one in all respects. If it were launched by a niche house, nobody would have been surprised. July 18, 2014 at 3:52pm Reply

  • solanace: The ad is really ugly, aside from any other considerations. July 18, 2014 at 7:31am Reply

    • Victoria: Not a fan of it either. July 18, 2014 at 9:28am Reply

      • Solanace: And the smell sounds like a headache inducer, specially in the rainforest. Your considerations about wearing perfume for oneself speak to my heart, as your words usually do. Let’s face it: men are already attracted by every women in the world, as long as they don’t seem particularly interested in them. So, even from this practical standpoint, these psychological researches, which are clearly behind campaigns such as this sad picture, seem totally pointless to me. But… Many of us have a sweet tooth, and this is the reason I think we keep buying gourmands. Caramel and vanilla somehow have the power of warming us inside. :) July 19, 2014 at 7:04am Reply

        • Victoria: It’s no accident that in times of crises the sales of oriental fragrances, rich in sweet, vanilla notes go up. Again, not sure how credible these studies are, but it makes a little sense to me. When I want comfort, I immediately go for my vanilla perfumes. July 20, 2014 at 12:07pm Reply

          • solanace: Hey Victoria,

            Agree, the studies make sense indeed, if viewed from the perspective of the wearer. What I think is silly is translating that into sex appeal. My point is, men are already seduced by default, there being no need to introduce them as another variable in the already complicated equation involving our mood, outfit, the temperature and humidity… :) July 20, 2014 at 4:48pm Reply

            • Victoria: That study I quoted only views it from the perspective of the wearer, and it simply tracked the sales data by family and mapped them over time. I completely agree with you; I think that it’s useless to look for perfume to please someone else, other than yourself. July 20, 2014 at 5:17pm Reply

              • solanace: As a feminist gourmand lover, this ugly ad prompts me into thinking, lol. It is so off putting, it made me question (for a nanosecond, but it did) my love of vanilla, peaches and caramel. July 21, 2014 at 5:47am Reply

                • Victoria: :) It makes me question the thinking of the marketing people behind it. July 21, 2014 at 5:46pm Reply

  • moi: This perfume should be called Non Non. And, like many on here, I do love certain gourmand, or downright sweetly silly fragrances. Angel, for instance, which always gives me a giggly thrill when I sniff it wafting through the air at a party. Good to know some folks still insist on wearing it with pride.

    Also, Spice Bomb is the bomb. I don’t understand, was it just a lucky accident? Or are the rest of these ‘fumes a goof, a secret joke on women? July 18, 2014 at 8:04am Reply

    • Victoria: Antidote, another masculine, was also good, so maybe, they give themselves leeway when it comes to their offerings for men.

      Like you, I find that gourmands can be the best mood boosting perfumes. How can you not smile smelling vanilla and caramel? :) July 18, 2014 at 3:51pm Reply

  • Geneviève: I smelled it at The Bay in Ottawa and I would too, prefer buying Britney Spears’s Fantasy and save a lot of money! It’s not my cup of tea, but I understand why this kind of sweet gourmand perfumes are popular. Each year, I crave for one and wear it for two weeks until I’m tired of it… I never learn! July 18, 2014 at 1:52pm Reply

    • Victoria: They can be so irresistible, especially if you test them if hungry. I loved Aquolina’s Chocolovers for its aroma of hazelnut and chocolate waffles, and I’m a disappointed they decided to discontinue it. It’s not something I can wear daily, but there are some occasions when nothing but chocolate would do. July 18, 2014 at 3:54pm Reply

  • The Perfumed Veil: I really dislike the ad. It completely put me off the fragrance and the whole brand, honestly. Very disturbing motif. July 18, 2014 at 5:02pm Reply

    • Victoria: I also fail to find anything attractive about it (the model is, of course, beautiful, but not in this sort of get up.) July 20, 2014 at 12:03pm Reply

    • solanace: Whever their target was, they failed miserably among Victoria´s readers. July 20, 2014 at 4:49pm Reply

      • solanace: Whatever, sorry for the typo. July 20, 2014 at 4:53pm Reply

  • Ariadne: I am not drawn to sweet perfumes but am understanding them and their appeal much more with this post and replies. I do find Lolita Lem. a lot of fun but I am not understanding the collection of elements in BonBon. On paper it reminds me of the pot of soup you were excited about putting together but which ended up being just overwhelming to taste due to too much going on. Not unlike the bizarre advert. July 19, 2014 at 11:12am Reply

    • Victoria: As Austenfan said so well, a perfume needs to have a story, and it applies to all good fragrances. Pink Sugar, for instance, isn’t some cerebral thing (and it doesn’t aim to be sophisticated, etc.), but it clearly comes across as “totally indulgent, curling up on a coach with a big bowl of vanilla sundae and a box of candies.” Bonbon comes too late to be truly interesting, and that’s another one of my gripes with it. You can find much better, less expensive options. July 20, 2014 at 12:10pm Reply

  • Jai: Victoria, I really appreciate how you review mainstream designer releases, too.

    The ad for this one really offends me, and I don’t understand how V&R think that presenting a naked woman, “tied up” in ribbons, with a big perfume bottle in her lap would make me want to try, let alone buy and wear it.

    Normally, I don’t pay too much attention to marketing, and brands for that matter (I like my cheapies, and can appreciate the art behind well-constructed compositions) — but this ad rubbed me the wrong way in how they depict women as wearing this fragrance to be a gift/object. July 20, 2014 at 11:20am Reply

    • Victoria: I try to review everything, since you can find gems at all stores, not just the niche boutiques. Alas, Bonbon didn’t work out for me.

      And the ad… I agree with you that it’s bordering distasteful. The old-fashioned and often sexist way women are usually portrayed in perfume ads merits its discussion, I think! July 20, 2014 at 12:15pm Reply

    • Ziggy: I agree; the ad is so off-putting I don’t care what the perfume smells like. I’m not sure to whom it’s supposed to appeal, but to me as a woman, it’s completely alienating. July 20, 2014 at 5:10pm Reply

  • gordon: i am soo well sick of fruity-floral gourmands and gourmands with overdoses of benzoin and ethylmaltol. i’m done!
    i live by a high class pharmacy, and for the last year, drop in 3-4 times a week to smell the new releases.
    *all* celebrity scents are now fruity-floral-candy, as is the new Lancome, this one, the new Prada. disgusting! no challenge, no weight, no intellect. diabetic-making.
    be careful what you wish for, gourmand lovers, as if the industry dumbs it down and/or makes it any sweeter, this’ll be a hard time we have recovering from this ‘trend’–which is destroying perfumery. July 21, 2014 at 6:37am Reply

    • Victoria: I don’t mind non-serious perfumes, because let’s face it, there is time, mood and place for everything, including silly, lighthearted things, but I agree that the big launches have gotten safer and less exciting over the last few years. They converge to the formula that you’ve described and that Bonbon exemplifies. July 21, 2014 at 5:50pm Reply

What do you think?

From the Archives

Latest Comments

Latest Tweets

Design by cre8d
© Copyright 2005-2014 Bois de Jasmin. All rights reserved.