As Mademoiselle Gabrielle approaches the reverend age of 54 she gets fruitchouly hormonal and starts putting on some weight that will forbid her to wear her beloved vanilla trousers and so she starts obsessing just a tad too much about her fading jasmine glory and out comes her Madonna-esque 6th decade post-menopausal arousal of baroque sandalwood self-celebration, the way celebs become a photocopy of themselves as time goes by, but I digress...
Coco cleans her drawers and takes away all the amber, delicious clover and labdanum attempting to get rid of the dusty smell that an ageing body will inevitably emit... and then adds a grapefruit Glade bar for the crowd pleasing effect and the illusion that freshess will extinguish the anguishing economical crisis that chokes the free spirits and makes crowds run towards the "secure, inoffensive patchouly-grapefruit fragrances" aisle at every department store, with so many dupes and dupes of dupes to hide yourself among...
Also, the afore-mentioned world crisis calls for a black funereal dress to play it safe after the frilly Mademoiselle pink and white orange happiness of the golden 2000s.
So sorry, so so sorry Mademoiselle Gabrielle. We all know you didn't deserve such a sad treatment, and you certainly didn't deserve a perfumer who would downgrade you to synthetic triumphant Calvin Klein status.
Wow...Coco Noir is really getting some bad reviews on here. Perhaps if it had been called something other than "noir"this would be percieved better? I realize that Chanel really upped the ante with the Noir part. To me....Coco Noir has resembalance to both Allure and Coco Madmoiselle. It definitely is a warm, close to the skin scent. It truly makes me feel beautiful when I wear it. It is sophisticated, comforting, but yet has that patchouli "bite" that I loved in CM...it is just creamier here and not so sharp. Perhaps Chanel called this Coco Noir not as to be a "noir" fragrance but because Mademoiselle Chanel loved black so much, and it is another representation of her style? Just something fun to think about. Both Coco and Coco Mademoiselle are such distinctive fragrances on their own that for some it is a disappointment to have Coco Noir have such similarity. Who knows for sure? Maybe something like Coco Femme would have been better!
I agree with the majority of the reviews here. Coco noir is... well, nothing to rave about. Doesn't really remind me of mademoiselle which is too sharp on me but not Coco either. I get mostly fairly linear short leaved faint citrucy patchouli. Not bad, not difficult to pull of, just unmemorable.
I have to admit a darker version of Coco must be very challenging. But if this is the concept then it's not succeeded at all. I almost feel sad for Jacques Polge.
After all, Chanel is notorious for the high quality bold perfumes. And Coco Noir does not belong among them. The only thing I found stunning is the -beyond chic- bottle. But that makes it even more sad...
oldish perfume for my test. fits women at their 50+.
the smell is nice, not too heavy. sexy or dark, definitely not noir, frankly i dont understand why it is called noir.
I don't like any of the Chanel perfumes - too strong - until now. I tried it in the airport and kind of liked it. LOVE the bottle. I use three spritzes - one on each arm and one on the neck. The smell is warm and a bit sweet. I don't get any specific notes apart from maybe roses? Definitely a fall/winter scent. Doesn't get a lot of love here on MUA, though...
Echoing comments below .. Banal, insipid. I smell uninteresting, unoriginal and ubiquitous in this fragrance. Ain't a noirism in smell here whatsoever. But mass market appeal of the Brand and the relatively artful creations of its predecessor namesakes are sure to bring success and profit to the shareholders. But I don't believe there's much to sing about, save for the sophisticated signature Chanel packaging. Real shame.
I was eager to try Coco Noir, it is basically a modern version of Coco, easier to wear, more likable, more quiet also.the dry down is my favorite part, yet this isn't for me. I am not a fan of Coco, too classic, nor Coco Mademoiselle, heavy and sharp.
It still has the elegant edge of a French classic, and with please the Chanel fans who are looking for a lighter and more casual scent.
It isn't bright nor cheerful, I just don't feel real pretty wearing it!!!
Mind-bogglingly banal. Average, non-descript, half-heared, sad.
There is nothing in this perfume that stands out, nothing dark or enigmatic or special about it at all.
To make matters worse, it conforms to the latest Chanel trend in creating perfumes that evaporate and disappear off the skin within 2-3 hours.
The only possible explanation for someone buying a bottle of this is because it's Chanel and is therefore felt to be shorthand for elegance and sophistication. The bottle is sexy, and I';m sure there are women out there who feel sexy simply knowing that they are wearing Chanel, in whatever form.
Give this one a miss. An utter rip-off, and one of the most insipid fragrances to be recently released.
Everyone has said it already, noir this is not. At first on my skin, it is a clash of mademoiselle and chance. Then as it dries down, it turns to a light mademoiselle baby powder. With a black bottle I was expecting a big hitter like Black Orchid. Sadly this fragrance works for neither my skin nor nose.
There's a troubling trend of 'Noir' and 'Nuit' fragrances that are 'nah' and 'ennui'.
At first Coco Noir EdP smells strongly of berries and patchouli, but a light, weak-willed patchouli. This must be a trend, because La Vie Est Belle by Lancome also has this and lots of sweetness.
Then the scent appears to go nowhere. It's a monotonous drone: top, middle and base are identically pitched. I understand the comparisons to Coco-M and, at first, pretty much went with the theory that this is really a Coco-M flanker. But there's something in the dry down that's similar to the dry down of Coco EdP, but with a lot more 'candy' -- or berries. I don't see how a scent that leaves out the prominent spice and floral notes of the original and adds fruit and sugar (notes not typically associated with 'darker', headier, sexier versions - as the name Coco Noir suggests) can be described as 'noir'. Even the patchouli is cleaned up, and the rather generic sweetness overplayed. Sugar should, at best, be a bit player. Or really skilled, original and sexy if the role is a big one from a big, expensive brand. This is a very average sweetness. Seems to me they were counting on a fleeting resemblance to Coco original's dry down (it's definitely there) *and* a memory of the sweetness in Coco-M, to carry a new flanker that's ultimately not as good as either predecessor.
Back to the comparison with Coco-M EdP (older version). Between the two, Coco-M is the statement maker, not Coco Noir. I understand why Coco-M's ubiquity makes it a difficult one for perfumistas, however there's enough in it to make an entrance. The lovely citrus (maybe bergamot, grapefruit?) top notes last well into the scent, and the slightly rough / dirty patchouli gives it an edge. The florals are kind of lost in the haze, but the sweetness and any pedestrian feel is toned down because the top and base work so well together. It's not an overkill sweetness -- certainly not compared to this new wave of base-light, sugar-heavy mass market (and now Chanel) releases. Coco-M's dry down has a mild chypre bite that is missing in Coco Noir. Noir dries down too sweet for a patchouli scent or a 'noir' scent. I'd go as far to say that Coco Noir is the perfume that Kiera Knightley should represent, because Kate Moss, with all her imperfections, was a better Coco-M girl.
The only reason Coco-M is 'common' is because of its huge popularity. Any similarities between this and Coco Noir are deliberate: they wanted the market success of Coco-M with the classic status of Coco. Chanel try to deliver a scent they hope will appeal to lovers of Coco original -- and Mademoiselle fangirls. I'm not sure it's suited to either group because it's not even a darker version of Mademoiselle. For this I'd take a step sideways and try another flanker, the unloved Allure Sensuelle (well, sort of...).
Ultimately-- the sugar and fruit, although well-handled and infinitely better than in a thousand other modern sweet scents on the market, are too strong in Coco Noir and the patchouli is...well, it's like a mid-note and not a base note. Does that make sense? The passing resemblance to Coco original merely makes me crave Coco original.
The resemblance to Mademoiselle reminds me of how much better the notes are differentiated in that one. It's like resorting to Lindt milk chocolate because the supermarket sold out of Green & Blacks 70%. Lindt's good quality, but it isn't my favourite. And milk isn't dark etc..
On the upside because of the passing similarity to both, and whatever signature Chanel formulas use, it smells expensive and classy enough. It smells 'Young-Chanel' -- although (for me) hardly a shining example of the house's talent.
This is too youth-oriented for me.