Perfume Review: L de Lolita Lempicka
December 14th, 2006
As the year draws to a close, I’ve been going over all the 2006 fragrance releases, and came to the sad conclusion that, with very few exceptions, a lot of them are simply uninteresting. Too much mass market appeal and not enough originality is my verdict. Thank goodness for the exceptions, one of them being L de Lolita Lempicka. To my knowledge, it hasn’t officially launched in the U.S. yet (although some online discounters have had it in stock) but it is for sale in Europe. The fragrance is created by one of my favorite perfumers, Maurice Roucel, the nose behind Gucci Envy, Hermes 24, Faubourg, Rochas Tocade, Guerlain Insolence, Frederic Malle Musc Ravageur, amongst others.
Just like its predecessor (the licorice-laden Lolita Lempicka), L de Lolita Lempicka is a gourmand scent. With the notes of bitter orange, bergamot, cinnamon, immortelle, vanilla, musk, tonka beans, and sandalwood, it’s “a fragrance exuding the beauty of the ocean coupled with the myth of the mermaid.” The beauty of the ocean in this case refers to nothing but the bottle, it seems. Its top notes remind me of those white lemon cookies covered in powdered sugar (Spritzers is the name, I believe), with perhaps some added caramel, a touch of cinnamon sprinkled on top, and a slight salty flavor. In spite of such a foody association, L de Lolita Lempicka manages to be a very elegant scent, with an airy, vanillic-musky drydown. Instead of going along with the current trend of syrupy-sweet, cotton-candy-like, toothache-inducing perfumes, it turns to powdered sugar, used in moderation and tastefully. I love its enveloping effect. It’s sultry and cozy at the same time - it can be easily dressed up or down.
L de Lolita Lempicka is available at Imagination Perfumery.
Image source: www.sephora.fr
Entry Filed under: Perfume Reviews
22 Comments Add your own
1. chaya ruchama | December 14th, 2006 at 7:17 am
Hello, Inochka !
Lovely bottle, and the color sure is purrrty…
I’m afraid I didn’t care for the first release- it sent me running in the opposite direction when I smelled it !
If it REALLY smells like the ocean, I’ll still be running…
[Unless they mean real seaweed, low tide, or something organic like that !]
Would I like?
Kiss to you-
2. Elle | December 14th, 2006 at 7:32 am
I love that bottle! My unfortunately sweet amplifying skin made this a bit too sugary, but I’m going to have to retry it anyway. I need it to work so that I can justify getting the bottle.
3. March | December 14th, 2006 at 8:00 am
Oh, this one was such a happy surprise to me, too! I think it’s lovely (although I admit I’m very surprised to read that you like it.) It certainly falls into the comfort scent category, and I love the wee bits of immortelle in the beginning. I’m the opposite of Elle — I have the sweet-eating skin — which takes the sugar off. FWIW if I start to get bored after two hours, I spray a little 10 Corso Como on top, they smell very nice together. That silly bottle is also rather adorable in person.
4. Giselle | December 14th, 2006 at 10:32 am
I can’t wait to try this! I love Roucel concoctions, including Insolence, L’Instant, Envy, Castelbajac, Tocade, 24 Faubourg,
and his Bond No 9 scents. All are full bottle worthy.
I had no idea he was the nose behind this one–thanks for this post! I heart Maurice!
5. Giselle | December 14th, 2006 at 10:34 am
PS-
does anyone get any hint of Magnolia?
6. Tigs | December 14th, 2006 at 12:57 pm
Elegant?!? Really? My teeth ached just getting close to the SA. I thought it was very *young* but I have the dreaded sweet-amplifying skin and maybe I just looked at the bottle - which is really cute actually, but silly - and missed a bunch of nuances.
7. Ina | December 14th, 2006 at 2:27 pm
Chayachka, I think you might like it. I’m especially lemming the parfum which has got to be even better.
8. Ina | December 14th, 2006 at 2:28 pm
Elle, that’s too bad since it’s one of those very few moderately-sweet perfumes. Maybe you should try the parfum which has some patchouli added to it.
9. Ina | December 14th, 2006 at 2:29 pm
March, I was surprised myself, to be honest.
10. Ina | December 14th, 2006 at 2:30 pm
Giselle, I get no magnolia. But you should definitely try it!
11. Ina | December 14th, 2006 at 2:33 pm
Tigs, it’s a very elegant gourmand vanilla, yes.
12. Patty | December 14th, 2006 at 3:18 pm
Sweet-amplifying skin here, got it for the bottle, sent it off to someone who loved it more than me pretty fast.
Sweet scents do work on me sometimes, like Flowerbomb, but I think they need enough patch in there to make skin cells behave!
13. March | December 14th, 2006 at 4:42 pm
Hey, Ina — look — I think maybe P’s forgotten who she sent the bottle to in her haste to get rid of it
14. violetnoir | December 14th, 2006 at 5:46 pm
Ina, does it smell like maple syrup? I really do not like maple syrup, lol!
Hugs!
15. Ina | December 14th, 2006 at 10:27 pm
Patty, see, I cannot stand Flowerbomb with a passion but L works wonders.
16. Ina | December 14th, 2006 at 10:27 pm
March, what are you talking about, woman?
17. Ina | December 14th, 2006 at 10:28 pm
Robin, no, no, no! No maple syrup at all. Yoiks!
18. March | December 15th, 2006 at 8:42 am
Ina — sorry — Patty sent her bottle to me!
19. Julia | December 15th, 2006 at 9:08 am
When I first tried this on skin my tought was SL Chergui. When compared side by side L is much more chocolate-orange sweet but still with that thick, slightly boozy touch I love. Since this behave well on my skin without beeing cloyingly sweet this might very well find a home on my shelf. Beutiful bottle as well, me like a lot.
20. Ina | December 26th, 2006 at 11:48 am
Julia, I see what you mean. Chergui is way spicier but they both share the powdery-gourmand quality.
21. Aromascope » Best o&hellip | December 29th, 2006 at 2:06 am
[…] L de Lolita Lempicka - one of the best department store releases of 2006. […]
22. Alexis D R | May 17th, 2007 at 8:15 pm
I really want to try it. I am in Canada. Any way somebody can send me a sample?
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed