myxun – 2022-07-02:

5 out of 5

I definitely do not find any resemblance to J’adore.
Just putting that out there up front.
I bought this fragrance as a joke between my husband and I. In the United States in the early 80s, before Cable TV really took off, there were about 7 TV channels. If you had a giant antenna on a pole near your house you may have gotten lucky and gotten 12 channels.
Anyway, in the Tri State area on the East Coast (NY, NJ, CT), there was a TV station called WPIX channel 11. It still exists today. In the early 80s that channel would play marathons of the original Star Trek episodes back to back. When there was a snow day and no school, one of the best things to do when we were cold and all done sledding and playing on the snow was to put on our pajamas and watch TV.
Since there were limited channels, not much was on except…. Star Trek!
My husband and I both grew up watching these Star Trek marathons on channel 11 by default and this turned us in to closet Trekkies.
We know every classic episode and can randomly quote lines from them… it we don’t tell anyone because of the nerdy stigma attached to it. I guess that’s lame… but anyway I HAD to buy this to tease him about his inner Trekkie.
This fragrance reminds me of the 1980s Pantene Shampoo scent. It has a very shampoo like body spray vibe. It’s pleasant. Sillage is a little more than a skin scent – kind of like a strong body spray maybe. It only costs around ten dollars US…
But the joke between my husband and I was priceless!

ntvurist – 2022-07-02:

4 out of 5

I dont understand how this is listed as a gourmand because its not sweet at all! Its a very sharp fruity perfume, opposite to what I typically go for. Its got that very cheap/generic smell. I wasnt expecting alot but I figured if it was gourmand it should be wearable but alas this is not what I was expecting. I dont get any sweetness, absolutely no vanilla. Ah well! It was really cheap and I love star trek so I wanted to collect this for the bottle mostly : )

gadost74 – 2022-07-02:

5 out of 5

EDIT: layer this with justin bieber’s someday.
smells great
sweet, soft powdery, soft flowery, kinda fruity. detectable sandalwood and vanilla. it is quite lovely. (i’m at about 30 mins into this first spray, may edit with more later) it did dry down to strong/soapy light/floral smell. EDITED NOTE: i do think it would be better in warm weather. it smelled nicer to me when i warmed up my hand. other than that not bad for a cheap (i paid $12.79/3.3oz fragrancenet store on ebay, free shipping) great fragrance for a trekkie!
being new to fragrances i haven’t experienced many smells. i have mostly chanel perfumes so this is very different for me.
since i’m new i’ve read a lot here on fragrantica (learned a lot THANK YOU!) and heard people say something like “green, like freshly cut flower stems”
I TOTALLY smell that description in this PON FARR. am i the only one? i smell it when i put my nose closer to the skin. (EDIT i now wonder if that was an early version of the “soap” smell that comes later…?maybe? my nose is still new at picking out individual scents and figuring how scents smell together) i am getting wafts of sweet powdery flowers with sandalwood/vanilla.
i am a star trek fan which is why i purchased this BLIND from fragrancenet. i am happy with it 😀
live long and prosper

lumikko – 2022-07-02:

3 out of 5

Rather generic, until the drydown (which takes about 3 hours on me), but the end is worth waiting for. A beautiful base, very oriental with the sandalwood and patch swirling together. I find it….fascinating.

kiskis79 – 2022-07-02:

5 out of 5

The picture on the box is actually Arlene Martel as T’Pring in the episode Amok Time.
I found the perfume very insipid, probably aimed at young teens. If I were to design a perfume named after the Vulcan mating frenzy, it would a strong oriental spicy. I will not buy this offering again.

palomalena – 2022-07-02:

4 out of 5

Pon Farr whatever that means in Trekkie is a sweet fruity floral vanilla perfume. Delicious. I’m here to spread the word that this affordable fragrance is really nice. It’s mostly fruity on me. I can smell the sweet nectarine and the Mirabelle. The violet and orchid are pretty although I’m sure they’re synthetic as this fragrance is mostly one of those fantasy note perfumes. But it’s lovely. Delicate. Feminine. Nothing about it is vulgar, strong, offensive or too musky despite the musk and the patchouli at the base. The fruit and flowers give way to vanilla at the very last part of the dry down. Vanilla, sweet and familiar vanilla. Very nice. I wear this to parties. Don’t see how it has anything to do with Star Trek. It smells like the prettiest and nicest princess on a far away planet.

Рамиль – 2022-07-02:

3 out of 5

Cheap and pretty uninteresting but I wanted it! This is sure to make some Trekkie guy fall head over heels for me at a Star Trek convention LOL This has an opening of fruit, sweet fruit, pretty typical fruity floral stuff. It has a nectarine apricot and something citrusy probably a mandarin. It’s fresh and sweet. The flowers include orchid and violet as well as jasmine. On me the fruit became more prominent than the flowers and the floral note I could clearly detect was the violet. The dry down is slightly musky and very vanillic. I’m not knocking this perfume. It smells really good. I love the packaging. I love that they have Nichelle Nichols as Uhura on the cover. She definitely deserves her own fragrance and this is a lovely fragrance to honor the first major black female TV star.. Smells sweet feminine and delicious. Just like she does I’m sure.

qwetis – 2022-07-02:

5 out of 5

Initially a nice violet which becomes a soft version of Fracas or Versace Blonde. However, for a few minutes in the middle, I get J’adore which was probably the aim of the creators of this perfume. Overall, this is a crisp, bright floral. Lots of Lily of the Valley.

rhics2012 – 2022-07-02:

3 out of 5

Actually saw bottles of Pon Farr, Red Shirt and Sulu at TJMAXX this weekend and had to laugh that $4.99 bottles warranted being encased in those little plastic lock boxes!!!
I didn’t get any of them despite the bargain price because I just can’t risk catching the attention of any of the Trekkies I work with, all of whom are 20- to 30-something guys who live in their parents’ basement, have those little scraggly goat-beards, don’t seem to know what deodorant is and have never boldly gone anywhere, let alone where no one has gone before.
That being said, I think it would be worth $4.99 for a nice, safe, soapy floral and worth far more for the giggles to see the bottle sitting amidst my Diors, Guerlains, Goutals, etc. 😉

kym70 – 2022-07-02:

4 out of 5

Though this fragrance definitely doesn’t “leave logic behind” I was more than pleasantly surprised! Reading over the notes, there’s no mention of patchouli on the packaging and I can’t detect it on my skin either, a huge relief since I’m not a fan of that note. Pon Farr smells like a shower with an apple blossom body wash, very clean, fresh, and soapy. Suitable for warm weather and inoffensive enough to be worn to work. It’s not terribly unique, but very safe.
The longevity is decent, about six to seven hours on my skin, but the sillage is nearly non-existant. After the first twenty minutes or so it settles into a skin scent. I agree with LoriAlyse83 when she says it’s really more of an EDT. Admittedly, this fragrance is very linear. The smallest development is only apparent in the drydown when the vanilla and sandalwood add some warmth to the floral and soapy notes.
Overall, I feel that the quality is spot on for as inexpensive as it is, and I’m really loving this for summer.

RUSSAK – 2022-07-02:

3 out of 5

I wish this perfume would have boldly gone where no perfume had gone before… Sadly, it didn’t: instead it rather timidly stays grounded, clinging to mass-market appeal in concept: a breezy-fresh fruity-floral with a cooler- rather than warmer- character. I fear that, in the wilting heat of the planet Vulcan, under the sweaty spell of Pon Farr, this perfume would have simply gone ((*poof*)).
That being said, it isn’t without its charms. The drydown is a light, lovely white musk with woody accents; traces of the fruit-and-flower bowl still clinging after 8 hours.
Bottle-design is pretty nifty, though! Both the old and the new.

dkzafgl038 – 2022-07-02:

3 out of 5

… Well I’ll be. I’d have never thought that Star Trek would have a fragrance associated with it…