Fucking Fabulous Tom Ford

3.93 из 5
(57 отзывов)

Fucking Fabulous Tom Ford

Fucking Fabulous Tom Ford

Rated 3.93 out of 5 based on 57 customer ratings
(57 customer reviews)

Fucking Fabulous Tom Ford for women and men of Tom Ford

SKU:  5bec1c2e8942 Perfume Category:  . Fragrance Brand: Notes:  , , , , , , , , , .
Share:

Description

Tom Ford presents a new limited edition called Fucking Fabulous from his exclusive Private Blend perfume line during the New York Fashion Week in September 2017.

Key ingredients of the composition include bitter almond oil, tonka bean, orris root, leather, cashmerean and clary sage oil.

Tom Ford Fucking Fabulous is available on September 7th at Tom Ford boutiques and on the official site as a 50 ml Eau de Parfum.

57 reviews for Fucking Fabulous Tom Ford

  1. :

    5 out of 5

    Smells good. Dormant leather with some faint flowery vibe plus lots of almond tonka vanilla heart which is the strongest. Smells more like if it were a designer scent because it doesn’t smell more natural or richer than an average designer perfume. And even if I totally disregard the price I still wouldn’t consider purchasing it, just because I have many others on my list that I would rather buy which I like much more, but that’s just my personal taste I guess.
    I think it’s very wearable and very unisex. It can wear classy and it can wear casually. But by casual I don’t mean at a barbecue on the sidewalk with your boys drinking beer and showing your bellies.

  2. :

    3 out of 5

    Overpriced and boring , with a vulgar name. Vulgarity may be edgy to Ford, but it is generally not considered classy . ( Look at some of the vulgar and classless world
    “Leaders “ ).
    This kind of endeavor is foolish and makes me wonder if Ford has the judgement of Elon Musk. The previous reviewer was correct – this was dead in the water before it launched.

  3. :

    5 out of 5

    The world’s most expensive cotton candy.

  4. :

    5 out of 5

    It’s a nice fragrance indeed, i’ve try it today, yes only today, but know what? not even original, try Orlov Flame of Gold released in 2015, very similar but much better in my opinion, much well composed and better ingredients (not so synthetic in the dry down) and i’m talking about the newer version, apparently Orlov flame of gold was much better a few years ago, never smelled that one but love this version, much more then FF (they are not the same fragrance, but similar)

  5. :

    3 out of 5

    Never judge a book by its cover or “title”.
    If anything: fucking over priced is what this is.
    And fabulous? Not really, it is just an ok scent.
    Besides, such name could only fit a truly extraordinary creation… The original Shalimar extrait de parfum comes to mind; the most voluptuous and scandalous perfume known to mankind. Sadly, not too many young people know how fucking fabulous the original Shalimar actually was. 🙁

  6. :

    3 out of 5

    People hate Fucking Fabulous contextually…
    So what does that mean?
    It ticks off almost all of the boxes to make a fragrance collector/connoisseur hate it:
    -The fashion-over-form marketing edgy name. (Are you gonna tell someone with PRIDE that you’re wearing a fragrance called “Fucking Fabulous”?).
    -The increased price compared to the other Tom Ford Private Line (there’s enough mental gymnastics required to justify spending $4/ml, let alone however much this costs).
    -It’s not upscale enough to justify the aforementioned cost (it leans much more casual).
    -The scent isn’t ground breaking enough to justify the name or the cost.
    So how does it smell?
    It doesn’t matter how it smells. Fucking Fabulous was dead in the water before it even swam.

  7. :

    4 out of 5

    It’s not unique enough to justify the price. Smells very designer like in the opening. Later it develops into something more interesting, but again, not interesting enough. Longevity is great, projection not so much.

  8. :

    4 out of 5

    I’m sampling this today, and it’s absolutely revolting. It smells like car tires. It’s so gross and cheap-smelling. I can’t believe the amazing reviews this thing is getting. It’s a scrubber, for sure, and I’d stay FAR away from anyone I smelled wearing this.

  9. :

    4 out of 5

    I finally got to try this one out. I was initially expecting something bold, outstanding or strong from this perfume given its premium price over the other private blends. I have to say that I am a little underwhelmed after trying it out not because it’s bad but because it does not feel special. The experience you get from this scent does not match the hefty price it commands. It’s not something that you smell and becomes memorable. Fucking fabulous pales in comparison to the other popular scents in the private blend line.

  10. :

    4 out of 5

    Tom Ford is changing lanes and it seems like he is heading for an olfactive cliff. I wish he sticked to making movies because he is getting really good at it.
    In terms of this particular fragrance: I bough, I tried, I sold. Fucking ridiculous. Nothing represents better the times of a pedestrian glamour we have found ourselves in that this fragrance: basic,repetitive,surgically enhanced,commercialized, attention seeking, overpriced, overhyped, unoffensive, ephemeral, devoid of substance. Swipe left.

  11. :

    3 out of 5

    I could care less about the name, and didn’t know about the hype around this release until I looked into the reviews. To be honest, my eyes got tired of rolling. I purchased a sample decant of this off e-bay based on the notes listed. I love powder, woody and almond scents. Tom ford fragrances are pretty hit or miss for me, and need to be worn a few times to really test them out. A sprayed card in a store never gives me the full experience of a skin/fabric test.
    So amber, vanilla, tobacco, musk, woodsy and sweet or smokey scents smell good on my skin. Florals or anything too citrusy usually gets weird and funky with my particular chemistry. All the notes listed on FF seem to be right up my alley.
    I’m fairly surprised no one has mentioned Korrigan by Lubin as an almost identical scent. It open almost the same with this weird bandaid/medicinal/playdoh/plastic doll head note that almost puts me off but then that note starts blending with the warmer booze, leather and vanilla. I think the medicinal smell comes from the clary sage, that is fairly astringent in the beginning but fades out around the half hour mark for me.
    Then theres this creamy and powdery moment that goes on for a good long while, with the almond and tonka bean. There is still a teensy hint of the clary sage at the very tippy top.
    5 hours in it seems stronger. Its gotten boozy, and ambery and so much sun warmed leather.
    the sweet note is a little cloying, but the leather and smoke kinda balance it out. and the cloying note kinda settles down into a humming nutty musk smell that is really fucking fabulous if you asked me. I can’t tell if its more masculine or feminine. The sweet smell makes me want to say its more feminine but the smoke and leather make me think masculine. I’ll have to ask my husband to try it on to see if i like it on a man. It is definitely a more mature scent and also really seems to bloom and project more on warm skin. I probably wouldnt wear this is super hot weather, just seems to heavy for summer or spring. the leathery note in the dry down just seems more suitable for fall/winter.
    I’ll definitely wear it again and am curious how it will wear on clothing as opposed to skin. We shall see.
    Update:
    I have worn this 3 days in a row and can safely say i am addicted. My coworkers at the office love it. (I’m usually a one spray between the wrists and one spray over my chest which hits both skin/clothes.) Apparently the silage is more nutty smelling. The desk next to mine said
    I smelled like coconut, I’m guessing that’s the tonka/almond mixture. This was right after I applied. I don’t think the scent aura lasts that long. I was only catching little baby wafts when I moved around at the 4-5 hour mark. It was definitely still there, but was very much a skin scent, so I went to the bathroom to reapply cause I was missing the smell. I wish this wasn’t so expensive, but I’m really thinking about pulling the trigger and adding it to my collection! 🙂

  12. :

    4 out of 5

    Really nutty in the beginning. The nicest almond effect by far, almost like hazelnut. I get that the ingredients must be top-notch. Then, it mellows quickly to a nice and sweet and clean lavender based maskuline scent. Nothing more. Sadly and really, nothing more.

  13. :

    4 out of 5

    This smells like a cheap, drunk whore. I can’t stand the stench. It doesn’t live upto its name at all. It ain’t even fabulous. I almost bought this online. I can’t even imagine how devastated I could have felt if I had bought it. Thank god I tried it before pulling the trigger.

  14. :

    3 out of 5

    There’s an alcoholic note in here not mentioned in the pyramide, maybe it is the sage mixed with some birch, maybe not. Once it settles down, you can feel the aroma of a beautiful and new leather handbag. Now I can get clearly vanilla and tonka, that’s the almond. A boozy lavender paired with an ambar note is in here to add some volume and the sexy vibe. Now, I feel a salty woody note, maybe it’s a rosewood. Well, is that fucking fabulous? No. Is that a sexy fragrance? Heck yes! Is that original? Fucking no.

  15. :

    3 out of 5

    Very close to Amouage Journey Man.
    The other recent new TF, Fougere D’Argent, is very similar to Memoir Man.
    Rip off Amouage seems to be TF’s new policy.

  16. :

    3 out of 5

    Fragrance – Fucking Fabulous Tom Ford
    Bottle from – 2017
    Fucking Fabulous opens on my skin with a bit green,bitter and herbal almond with the tender trace of powdery orris and fine leather laying on top of a cozy blend of tonka and vaniila.At this point,in the opening he’s got that fougere vibe going on.
    As time goes by,he becomes deeper,darker,more dry,more leathery and woody with a nice touch of tonka and cashmeran.
    I’m not sure about the name,but be that as it may, this is a nice scent.
    Longevity – 10/10(10+ hours)
    Silage/Projection – 8/10(moderate to high projection and silage for the first 2-3 hours,than sits closer to skin for the duration of the scent’s evolution)
    Weather -best in autumn,winter and spring.
    Versatility – 8/10
    Age – 22+
    Compliments – 8/10
    Scent – 8,5/10
    Main notes according to me –
    almond,tonka,leather,clary sage,vanilla,cashmeran,orris.
    The drydown is deeper,darker,more dry,more leathery and woody and I get some -tonka,leather,cashmeran and woodiness.
    Emotions -cozy,sexy,sensual,seductive.
    Occasion -for more or less any ocasion.
    Could be a nice signature scent.You’ll get compliments with this one.

  17. :

    5 out of 5

    It’s by no means the best Tom Ford fragrance. And there’s no reason to buy this unless you’re a collector as there are better fragrances for every aspect of this.
    But it’s also by no means a bad fragrance. The leather gourmand combination works quite nicely.
    It certainly doesn’t deserve the overwhelming negative reactions it’s getting. People are letting their feelings about the naming of it come before the actual perfume.

  18. :

    4 out of 5

    Really? I tested this perfume and it was anything but fabulous. I was quite underwhelmed to be honest. Another Tom Ford marketing strategy to get people talk about something, to shock them with these names and to make them curious in the end is the goal in my personal opinion. It’s the same pattern of strategy with his nude ads.

  19. :

    3 out of 5

    I have high expectation on this but as I spray on my skin, right off the bat I got sick from the peanut/almond smell. I dont like peanuts 🙁 I bought the rollerball sample .33 OZ if anyone want trade/buy

  20. :

    4 out of 5

    I think this smells amazing but idk about fucking fabulous. Absolutely a love for me tho. Anyone try blending this with any other TF private blends? I tried blending this & ombré leather together 1 spray of each on my arm & smells actually fucking fabulous!

  21. :

    4 out of 5

    I tested this on my skin, instantly I was taken back.
    This fragrance smells 90% of what D&G Pour Homme (2012) does on me.
    This begs the question, why would anyone spend the money on FF.. I just don’t get it.
    In comparison the 10% more that FF provides is the fuller, more quality ingredients.
    Sorry Tom, but the props go to D&G for making this scent DNA first…

  22. :

    5 out of 5

    Not so Fucking Fabulous after all…
    It’s a bougie interpretation of the ubiquitous coumarin-almond orientals you smell everywhere these days. You know, things like Girl of Now, Poison Girl, Black Opium, Scandal, the list goes on.
    You’ve smelled this kind of perfume in every night club ever, and now, thanks to Fucking Fabulous, you’ll smell it in art galleries too! Yay!
    Tom Ford has built his empire on always being just edgy and controversial enough, from nude publicity campaigns to basing perfumes on poppers. I really don’t fault him for it, since it’s always worked up till now, and we’ve got some pretty great perfumes from this kind of art direction (Gucci Rush, Envy, the Private Blend collection.)
    Still… with this one, I can smell a bit of desperation behind the almonds.

  23. :

    3 out of 5

    This smells like Sweet Powdery Ear wax stank shit. Something a stripper would put on after putting in a busy night of work. If you want something it was trying to be, try Clive Christian’s Rock Rose, its much better, but more expensive.

  24. :

    5 out of 5

    Tom Ford’s controversial perfume turns out to be just a marketing stunt. Upon first spray there is sweet velvety almond, which is very pleasing and may convince you of buying the fragrance if you’re impatient. The sweet almond may be nice, but has nothing to do with Tom Ford’s deep and glamorous releases from the past, and fairly soon it turns into a bland almond/lavender combination, which is not at all fabulous. The perfume is definitely a more approachable take on the niche genre, but it doesn’t justify the higher price tag in any way. Rather, it is an unnecessary and absolutely ridiculous addition to the once great Private Blend collection.

  25. :

    3 out of 5

    I purchased this fragrance the first day it was available at my Tom Ford boutique. After spraying the fragrance on my hand, shaking my hand for a few seconds, and placing my nose gently near the back of my hand, I thought for a moment I would smell a fragrance that would change my life. This would be an experience I would remember for many years. An experience I would share with my children and my children’s children. Nothing would be the same after this smell entered my nose.
    But then something very strange happened. FF was just another fragrance. And not a particularly novel or “fabulous” fragrance. As I inhaled, I thought to myself, this is nice and I have smelled this before. 5 seconds later I realized this was Givenchy Play Intense. Despite my misgivings, I laid down my card and agreed to pay the required $337. Would I do it again? No.
    Here is how I see it
    Smell: 8/10
    Longevity: 9.5/10
    Projection/Sillage: 9/10
    A good fragrance. Entirely forgettable.

  26. :

    5 out of 5

    Hate the name love the fragrance a gorgeous, powdery to my nose, beautiful fragrance. Great for cooler weather. Has s make up vibe. I really love those types and this falls into that category. Tonka strong, almond hanging out all in all a beautiful blend. Full bottle worthy.

  27. :

    5 out of 5

    Tom Ford’s FF is a unique scent in my opinion. Despite the negativity on this forum, I happen to enjoy it and find a lot of use for it. It’s perfect for casual and formal wear, and it certainly catches other people’s attention. It is a more daring fragrance and not everyone will find it enjoyable. That being said, my opinion is as follows: The opening is a sharp, but delicious combination of almond and vanilla with a touch of suede leather. It can be compared to Pegasus by parfums de Marly, but it is much less sweet and much darker of a fragrance. On my skin, it dries down to a soft leather but still has great projection. I still get wafts after 6-7 hours and it becomes a true skin scent at 8. For me, this fragrance is a perfect blend of gourmand and leather, with no anamalic touch. It, however, is not sweet, but the almond gives it the slightest edible quality. I would classify it as a leather scent above all else.

  28. :

    5 out of 5

    this one is very comforting to me it reminds me of something I smelled as a kid I just can’t place my finger on what it was, this is a beautifully done fragrance regardless of the hate it gets over the name/price tag! is it worth it
    well I have a bottle of it but that don’t mean its worth it
    I would suggest you to try a sample a nice sample 5ml 10ml where it for a bit not just a quick sniff then think about it if it reminds you of some thing then awesome if not thats cool to wear it inside for a day wear it out side, spray your close or blanket before going to sleep basically if you are going to give a fragrance a chance you should try all these steps plus some
    I love this one 🙂
    ignore the name ignore every ones opposition to you trying new things and just try it

  29. :

    3 out of 5

    The notes are not accurate because they missed one… ” Liquid arrogance “.

  30. :

    4 out of 5

    It is not “Fabulous” but it doesn’t warrant all the hate. It is a creamy, smooth, modern fragrance that would suit a number of occasions. It does not warrant the high price tag imo and there are better fragrances in the Tom Ford line for less. But if money is no object to you, then go for it. It is an OK fragrance, nothing mind-blowing.

  31. :

    5 out of 5

    Trashy name and if that wasn’t bad enough the scent itself is very pedestrian and just “meh” really. Nothing fabulous about it whatsoever. To add insult to injury it’s a skin scent with no sort of performance to really speak of. To me this fragrance really just taints the whole Tom Ford line in general. It just doesn’t belong with masterpieces like Tobacco Vanille, Tuscan Leather, and Soleil Blanc. All of which I love and cherish regardless of price. Ugh, honestly this stuff just makes me want to puke. Garbage.

  32. :

    3 out of 5

    Smells like an expensive “Cotton Candy Clubbing Scent”. Gourmands you either love them or hate them. If you like Sweet gourmands, then this is for you. Its not fabulous. It projects and you will get noticed I’m sure to the young persons nose mostly. Women can pull this off more than a man.

  33. :

    4 out of 5

    Well,
    I finally have it. I’ve finally tested it.
    I’ll start by saying 90% of the TF line is gorgeous and the names almost always lead you into the area/direction of expectations. FF is not that fragrance. It’s soft, woody, musk-y and lightly leather-y.
    Light is what comes to mind – fabulous? No, actually. I’m not digging this at all. I happened to try 2 fragrances that day – Rentless from lush and FF by TF. TF was gone /vanished from my wrist (and memory) in maybe an hour. The lush fragrance is still here two days later.
    Not sold on this fragrance – definitely not a buy from me.

  34. :

    4 out of 5

    I don’t really get why they named this fragrance as they have. Don’t get me wrong, the name doesn’t bother me at all but whenever I’ve seen a tester at any Tom Ford concessions the ‘Fucking’ is always blanked out by a thick, black line. So what’s the point of being ‘daring’ and ‘controversial’ and then covering up the very thing that is supposed to be ‘daring’ and ‘controversial’? It makes no sense to me at all.

  35. :

    5 out of 5

    I don’t get it tbh. Didn’t smell any kind of fabulous to me. Perhaps it is a case of trying to use “the law of attraction”? If you name it ‘fabulous’ and act as if it is, it will become?
    No idea.

  36. :

    3 out of 5

    I smelled this the other day and it smelled ok. It was nothing really “Fabulous” to be frank. However, the name is tacky, cheap and vulgar. I understand Mr. Ford loves shock value ( do you remember the gucci ad he did with the letter “G” written in body hair on the lower body part of a female model??) I am sorry but using curse words in your product name as PR Stunt and publicity just dilutes your brand and it makes the company look like it something from a bad reality show. When I first heard a perfume was going to be named “F***cking Fabulous” I thought ” IS this Kim Kardashians new scent!?” When I found it was a TF private blend collection, I was very surprised. When I was at the department store, some families were walking by the perfume counter and one of them had a child reading the names of the perfumes on the counter. The mother quickly turned this bottle around so her child wouldn’t be using profanity words her child saw at the store. Needless to say, I am just not impressed by this fragrance.

  37. :

    4 out of 5

    I dont care about the name. All i care is how it smells and this one smells great. Semi sweet leathery vanilla and some incense to spice things up a bit. Beautiful. Worth the price? Probably not. 8.5/10

  38. :

    4 out of 5

    This smells nice. A small sample is certainly worth a blind-buy if you are considering it. Nothing overwhelming or off-putting here…

  39. :

    4 out of 5

    I don’t have an issue with the name, but I do have issues with the performance of Fucking Fabulous. It’s lovely for about an hour then turns too quickly into a skin scent. So not fabulous. I don’t hate it but its too pedestrian with its almond and tonka bean forward notes, so therefore a pass.

  40. :

    4 out of 5

    ALATCHKA… oh dear the only person showing no class is yourself am afraid! Would hate to be in your company. People like you should not be allowed to post on here, you obviously have a high opinion of yourself..
    Anyway this is a very overrated fragrance.. just smells of faint oily nut scent. Not impressed at all but at least most people have a sense of humour and marketing, pretty smart if you ask me as it’s obviously worked.. am sure Mr Ford will be worried about some of the comments… NOT… 5/10

  41. :

    3 out of 5

    @juniemoon: I rather disagree with your statement. I don’t know about Jo Malone frags because i never cared enough to try any, But as far as TF goes, when i want whole day performance, i grab one of his in my collection. My skin just eats perfume, and i have to reapply every couple of hours, but i don’t have that problem with TF fragrances. I’d gladly exchange my entire collection for additional ten or so TF perfumes of my choice.
    @alatchka: Seriously? F word is for people with no class? Well i grew up in Europe, and my parents’ closest friend was part of an old royal family. She oozed class, and she got me into perfumes when i was just a little girl. She cussed regularly. Plus, if you care to google it, numerous studies show that all intelligent and successful people cuss.

  42. :

    3 out of 5

    Currently in the USA, and maybe in other parts of the world, the “trend” seems to be to use the “F” word in every day language (verb, nounm etc.). The trend amongst people with no class, IMO. I would think that Tom Ford with his hefty price tags would like his fragrances to be worn by classy people. However, I suppose that there is a market for “trash with cash” and Mr. Ford doesn’t care where he makes his money just as long as it comes rolling in. Before this frag came on the market I was intrigued by TF fragrances. This marketing ploy has turned me off completely…good job TM! This is coming from someone with a 300+ bottle fragrance collection and still looking for a signature scent.
    P.S. I should have also mentioned that I am in the market for a really lovely Almond fragrance. Too bad, so sad.

  43. :

    5 out of 5

    hahaha, those who say ” oh this is very unique and blabla” listen. Anyone can make something unique, does it mean that it will be a good thing? not always. This frag is nothing special and after 1 hour it smells like hand lotion. Nothing more, don’t waste any time or money.

  44. :

    3 out of 5

    From all the fragrances I own, there were only few of them that blew me away. This is one of them. Really unique, sophisticated and making a statement type of scent. I feel divine when wearing this.
    Scent: 10/10
    Performance: 7/10
    Versatility: 7/10

  45. :

    4 out of 5

    ‘Flipping scandalous’ was my first thought when I saw the name and found out the price of this stuff!

  46. :

    5 out of 5

    Shame on you TF for stooping to such low and moronic tactics to ‘peddle’ your wares. I’ve tested it today and given its equally vulgar price, it’s ‘alright/meh’ at best, and certainly not worth the price it retails for. Shocking people is not the same as impressing people – the latter requiring much more skill, maturity and artistry than this delinquent product can muster. Don’t fall for the hype folks: once the novelty value of that crass & juvenile name has worn off (4 secs), you’ll find that “Fabulous” is anything but ‘fabulous’. If you don’t believe me, just look above at those mediocre scores.

  47. :

    4 out of 5

    Had to buy this. Could not escape from the marketing weapon and the histerical hype generated on purpose by the name itself other than the aestetic of the whole project.Not fabulous at all, not even long lasting or sillage monster and that’s final..nonetheless a mesmerizing juice, sexy and conturbating in its delicacy yet dark mood.Leather and liquorice are fast apparent and Almond and lavender straight in your face..but there is also something soft, pinky and cloudy underway.Like the smell of a rubber toy, the odor of a barbie doll plastic skin tinged of suede..Really an original composition and I can’t stop sniffing my wrist.Worth the price? Yes but not for the good reasons 😉

  48. :

    4 out of 5

    I bought this perfume because of the hype. There. I said it.
    I’m no fan of Tom Ford. I find his tendency for opulence and provocation rater vulgar and verging on cliche.
    Former experience with Black Orchid and other fragrances by this house was heartbreaking – melted plastic fumes, synthetic and headache inducing.
    And still, I had to buy this perfume.
    The notes seemed too pretty, too promising to ignore.
    This was a blind buy, and while waiting for my new scented friend to arrive I had constant changes of heart –
    What if this, too, will end up being a migraine-in-a-bottle?
    What if the bitter almond note will cause the same sad effect that Mandorlo di Sicilia by Acqua di Parma had on my skin (root beer/soda tragedy)?
    What if I’ve just wasted a heap of money for hype’s sake?
    And then it arrived. And resting there, in its simple black bottle, it was fucking fabulous. It was all i wished for it to be and even more.
    It was green (hello clary sage!) and warm and delightful. It was yummy but subtle (cashmeran?) and it kept changing, intriguing, winking at me.
    It was warm toasted tonka beans and it was a gentleman’s type of lavender and it was dry cardboard and it was me.
    Kudos, Tom Ford, you’ve won my heart.

  49. :

    4 out of 5

    I don’t have a problem with the name of this perfume at all, it’s fun, though I can see how it would be awkward to ask for it in the store. That won’t be an issue for me though, because I just don’t like it, for no reason other than that it doesn’t smell good to me. It does have a really delicious marzipan note paired with tonka in the opening that reminds me very much of Guerlain Tonka Imperiale, which I love. However, the leather and herbal notes really clash with it and ruin the gourmandness that it could have. Another reviewer said that it smells like flatulence, which sounds crazy, but when I read that I immediately realized what the “off” notes smelled like, and I couldn’t unsmell it…flatulence. I think it’s the leather note, or maybe the way the leather note blends with the other notes, but it really smells like farts in the opening. Pretty terrible, but I wanted to give it a chance to develop so for the next few hours I tried to sniff my wrist as little as possible (it was bad). That gas smell did go away after half an hour but what it left behind was so uninspiring and completely not my thing. It got a bit more spicy and woodsy but also much softer, and basically ended up smelling like “every generic woodsy unisex perfume ever”. While it wasn’t awful anymore at this stage, it still wasn’t something I enjoyed at all. If you want the almond and tonka notes in this but done MUCH better, just get Guerlain Tonka Imperiale (or Cuir Beluga if it’s gourmand-y, buttery leather you’re after). They’re both bargains compared to this, which is a word I never thought I’d use to describe those perfumes.

  50. :

    3 out of 5

    I wish Ford would return to his greatness of M7/Gucci Pour Homme1. Then again, this is a new era. Ford seems to a bit of a shit show, keep shooting until something sticks. Are we the new fools?

  51. :

    3 out of 5

    I wanted to love this so much after a recent shopping trip to the Tom Ford boutique on Sloane Street, I left empty handed (I still bought a gorgeous t-shirt).
    At this price level, the fragrance needs to be exceptional and perform strongly.
    A warm vanilla with hints of spices, mostly a skin scent after a couple of hours.
    It’s nice, but it’s not ‘Fucking Fabulous’.
    🙁

  52. :

    3 out of 5

    This smells nice. To me, it is not really unisex, it is more on the masculine side. It smells sexual, but not „wild“ or vulgar, if you know what i mean. It is a well crafted and balanced fragrance. The freshness of the lavender pairs perfectly with the richness of the leather. FF is mature, sensual and luxurious. I imagine a successful, very manly man wearing it.
    It is a shame that it is a limited edition,this one is one of the best from Tom Ford.
    Final note: 10/10

  53. :

    5 out of 5

    Oh I am so sad this is too green for my liking as some said before the oregano bite to it doesn’t help… and I am a TF lover…. so this is me just being honest… I’ll stick to my other TF’s for now :-/

  54. :

    4 out of 5

    Couldnt help but write this here. At least Selfridges have put a tape across the name on all its bottles on display and in the cabinet. Otherwise it’s reputation would be questionable by many.

  55. :

    3 out of 5

    I’m sure I won’t get any balloons for this review, but to my nose it absolutely smells like oregano. As the drydown progresses it gets even drier and I can almost picture an oregano focaccia right under my nose. So odd. Please do me a favor, smell it, think ‘oregano’ and see what happens.

  56. :

    5 out of 5

    I don’t understand all the hate for this fragrance. I understand the name can be a put off, and the price is steep. If it had been a regular release, and priced around $150, and not a Private Blend, and he named it “Unicorn Farts” people would be hyping it everywhere. The smell is amazing. To an unskilled simpleton nose, It’s just alright, and they are the ones that spew nonscence and ruin the ratings. It gets to where nobody can trust the hogwash ratings. I get great performance, and the smell is deep and intoxicating. It will be rebranded, I’m pretty sure. Buy yourself a decant if you’re on the fence and give it a chance. It’s a winner.

  57. :

    5 out of 5

    Perhaps one of the signs that we live modern times with some confusing conservative aspects is the repercussion that had from the fact that Tom Ford uses a swear-word curse to name his new perfume, Fucking Fabulous. But considering that the designer understands marketing very well, this was certainly purposeful – after all, in an industry that launches more than 1000 perfumes a year nothing better than a controversy so that consumers do not forget your product. It is not exactly an innovative approach if you remember a little bit of perfumery history – see Lanvin, for example, when they created a perfume called My Sin or even YSL when they launched a perfume inspired by a narcotic drug, Opium . Perhaps the boldness here has been not to make censorship for the North-American market.
    As much as people love to hate and talk about Tom Ford and its niche line, it’s amazing that Tom Ford still takes creative risks and dares to present different aromas to his audience. Perhaps this was one of the reasons Fucking Fabulous was initially limited in distribution – but this is also a marketing strategy, because in creating the controversial and limited you fuel people’s curiosity and therefore create demand.
    As a concept the perfume is very interesting, and its name bothers you just call it Fabulous and it is solved. Structurally the perfume makes me think of a very classic idea, the fougére, only reworked so that it sounds different. The creation relies on 2 of the tripods of a fougére – coumarin and lavender – and exchanges the third: instead of a classic woody base with oak moss we have an accord of leather, musks, mineral woods and cashmeran.
    It surprises me how much the creation here turns to the aroma of tonka beans, not the way we are accustomed, but to the raw material itself. The aroma of tonka goes beyond its gourmand side, its aroma of almonds and the nuances of honey. Tonka beans before being roasted have an almost black and grassy aroma, with something half-numbing in the smell when felt for a long time. This darker and less explored side is rightly highlighted in Fucking Fabulous, combined with a leather accord that resembles charcoal nuances.
    The effect on the output itself is somewhat daring, referring to an ink scent and the quality of paper used to print newspaper. Passing on this most challenging moment,

Fucking Fabulous Tom Ford

Add a review

About Tom Ford