To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Mixoist – :
Bought my bottle when it was released in 2002 after someone I had a crush on told me I looked like a young Audrey Hepburn. It was quite a double swoon for me!
With head planted firmly in the clouds, I strode into Nordstrom to purchase the scent of Audrey. I later came to know this version was not the L’Interdit she wore.
L’Interdit 2003 is cool and metallic. Fresh, bright, soft, gentle. It’s youthful, uplifting and easy to see the connection to the persona of young Audrey.
It smells “real” to me. Lots of stem and leaf greenery.
It’s easy to wear and some days it provides a little lift to my spirits.
On my skin, it is very linear and without much change or development. Because of this, I rarely wear it. It becomes a bit boring.
znk018Diobtetty – :
Guys, I wonder if fragrantica researchers could specify it more accurately, when this release was made (basenotes says it was 2002). Also, here we do not have a certain mention of noses behind the reformulation. As per basenotes, they were Olivier Guillotin and Jean Guichard, father of divine Aurelien Guichard.
No wonder this version inspires controversial reviews and feelings. The original is really just as far from this one as any fresh or light flanker may stand apart from it’s initial version. Nor even EDT. Almost independent fragrances…
But there is something wonderfully common in the two amazing scents. The aura of fluffines, zesty fruitiness and soapiness neighbouring with a suttlest skin-scent animalic nature combined with notes de fond of transluscent woody sweet tonality.
Adorable work, really. I also tend to agree with a bold person who dared saying there is something akin to Amarige d’Amour – the author, Bertrand Duchaufour, must have been surely mesmerized by the connotation that Guillotin and Guichard meant to invest in this release (or, the other way around, whichever of them was the first to try this consistency of a flanker). As his version of Amarige makes almost the same out of the idea behind the original perfume Amarige. Retain the spirit of irresistible liquid though supple femininity and marry it with a modern lightness and minimalism.
Sorta this way, imho…
legion28 – :
I have a bunch of these from my mothers old collection if anyone is interested in purchasing one
DeBill – :
Spring Time is here and so is this. L’Interdit this is the 2003 reformulation. It came in the mail on Friday and I wore it already. I’m also waiting on the original vintage L’Interdit which people have compared to a fruitier Chanel No. 5. This one is pretty. It has all the flowers I like except magnolia. This is a fruity floral plain and simple. As it opens it’s got peach strawberry and plum. Not at all like the fruit in Femme or Tresor, just sweet scents of mostly peach and strawberry. There’s also a sweet honeysuckle early into the fragrance’s first stage. Then it turns very flowery with scents of violets, roses, heliotrope, peonies and tuberose. A beautiful floral bouquet. It smells really good although it doesn’t reach the heights of other floral masterpieces like Yves Saint Laurent Paris or Quelques Fleurs or even Estee Lauder Beautiful. But it’s still really beautiful. The dry down has a lot of notes that support it well and keep it from having a short life. This lasts about 6 plus hours. It has amber and sandalwood, tons of oak moss and woods and a whisper of patchouli. It’s a floral chypre and if you like perfumes that have tons of flowers and woods, you’ll love it. A perfect spring fragrance.
kaps_tat – :
This is one of the rare perfumes that smell better farther your nose is away from it.
Powdery watery violet leaves opens this. At times it veers into the “I don’t know about this” feeling and yet further away I catch a pleasant whiff of peach.
Silage is past arms length and evolves better at a distance. Compared to the original there isn’t one. Its not close. You could say its a nice relation, but the original was soft and demure.
It smells really synthetic at close range, yet this is something I’m not repelled, going oh god no..
Try this for yourself. I can tell you if you have a young nose and a sweet gourmand lover , you will struggle with this. This 2003 version seems to be a struggle to enjoy for me, which is odd of givenchy scents. I usually have a great experience with them at first spray.
FaugrurGe – :
I bought this at Harrods in London during Fashion Week. I was under the impression, like most of us are, that this is an tribute fragrance to Audrey Hepburn and her fragrance from 1957 L’interdit. I have the original vintage old formula and this is nothing like it. The vintage is softer, powdery and has less fruit concentration. This L’interdit wears more like a heavier fruity-floral and it’s more full-bodied and has that 90’s floral-fruity vibe. You get more peach than you do strawberry. It’s also one big orange blossom. It’s actually a lot of everything when it comes to the flowers. The original was a big strawberry.rose.The flowers that stand out in this one : violet, tuberose, heliotrope and jasmine. The rose should have been more prominent like in the original but here it’s barely perceptible. The plum peach and strawberry notes make it very sweet and therefore there was no need to add vanilla! I like this but it’s too fruity for me and I’m not always fond of fruit in fragrances. This has amber which gives it a clean dry down and it’s musky instead of powdery. The sandalwood is very nice and gives it the feel of a vintage woodsy perfume. This is lovely and girly very romantic and perfect for spring and summer. Classically feminine, sweet, heady and gorgeous. I love it but it’s not related to the original L’interdit which wears more like a subdued version of this one. This one is far more elaborate, with lots more fruits and flowers. It’s like L’interdit the original on steroids LOL Love it.
aid-haron – :
I have no idea what the original was like and I’m glad that I don’t because I had a blank olfactory canvas so to speak, when trying this.
This is a very elegantly beautiful perfume which just surrounds you with powdery florals and violets. Instant love for me, it’s too wonderful for words.
Silage is good but longevity isn’t great because it is an EDT after all, but I don’t mind a few re sprays through the day.
If you can get hold of it and you like a perfume with a vintage vibe but not too old fashioned, this one is lovely and well worth searching for.
mokko – :
On me, this is a floral that feels subdued, contemplative. I really like the powdery-ambery -musky drydown. It is a fitting companion for rainy days, and I went through a grey period where this perfume was the only thing that I wanted to wear, so much so, that I went through two bottles of L’interdit.
I had the body veil lotion but tossed it — it turned pretty quickly.
Kittycat – :
Reminds me of Chanel #5. Not an especially good thing but not awful.
Tatsy38751 – :
I too do not have the original to compare. However, I would like to say that at first spray, it smells like bug spray. After about 5 minutes it starts smelling like violets, and after about 15 minutes it smells like violets with just a hint of powdery smell. Never dreamed it would dry down to such a gorgeous scent. I guess people either LOVE or HATE this scent!
jon9797 – :
I agree with Yumm and several others here, glad i am not the only one to have noticed, the old version was lovely, this new one certainly doesnt come anywhere near it, I too dislike this new version very much and feel so “ripped off” by paying for it
arkdev – :
09. may 2011
I have tried it today on a tester paper the red box of EDT. This is a really nice scent where i can clearly detect a sweet note of strawberry and peach but also a very very pleasant flower notes on the drydown. Lasts quite long for an EDT and would be really nice for spring summer i think. One day i will buy it.
I have not tried the vintage one, but having nothing to compare with i really like this version. Maybe i would changee my mind after trying the old version, but since i haven´t i love this one, don´t know wither about the version that came after this one…. This is the only version of “L´interdit” i have tried by far.
UPDATE: (20 january 2014) it is very strange that the notes has been changed for this version of “L´interdit” Previously there was a strawberry note listed amongst them and i swear i smelled it very clearly as well. Now i am very much confused. I need to get that last bottle i´ve seen standing in the shop to retest it and see whether my nose was wrong or not. But i swear i smelled a strong artificial strawberry in here.
Artskyone – :
Its best parfum!
zloyGeniy – :
Ugh. The old version was beautiful. This one is truly terrible. I gave it away.
dnskirilin – :
I am shocked by how much I love this perfume. I bought it mostly because (among others) I collect Givenchy perfumes. This has a strong opening-powdery but not so powdery that you feel like choking. I would recommend a light touch because a little does go along way. After a few minutes the powder fades but does not disappear and I get a sweet light note-tuberose I think and plum and finally sandlewood and musk. I know this perfume is mostly disliked but it smells amazing to me. I never thought I would find a Givenchy fragrance that I would like better than Organza but I did.
Семьянихин.В.Е – :
Givenchy, with it’s stellar image failed to replicate the original version of this once beautiful scent. I wore this in the 70’s and the memory of the fragrance lingers on. It was said that Audrey Hepburn wore this while filming Breakfast at Tiffany’s and so it’s popularity rose. I was highly disappointed to find that the reformulated version had an unpleasant mix of what smells like faux flowers, a distant cry from the original scent. My search is on for a vintage bottle of this haute couture fragrance of the past.
ydw865speagoessenda – :
had the old version – the one before 2003 and feel disappointed the new version spoils a legend:-)
won’t buy it again!!!
predisposedss – :
new version is bad…cheap smelling note…but,first version is beautiful..and i like it very very much…
123321123 – :
It was the new version I tried. It started out nice enough, spicey with some incense, but quickly turned to a rancid cheap smelling floral. It disappears fast with my chemistry too. From what I’ve read, the newer version is nothing like the original.