Amour – Kenzo

Kenzo

Release Date – 2006

Kenzo Amour arrived with all the makings of a favourite: notes I enjoy, a bottle with shelf presence, and the confidence inspired by Kenzo fragrances I’d already come to know, love, and wear.

Flower? A classic for a reason. Rêve Lotus? Daringly innovative and imbued with the storytelling that made me fall in love with fragrance in the first place.

It pains me to report that Amour, somewhat ironically, stirred no feelings of love in me whatsoever. In perfume terms, it was a scrubber.

This little heartbreak came into my life via JoyBuy. Think Amazon, but perhaps a bit less soulless and with far more tempting detours for the fragrance-addled mind.

It arrived in a day, which is both impressive and terrible for someone like me – next-day perfume delivery and 3am Fragrantica spirals are a dangerous combination.

Naturally, I was excited to liberate Amour from its box and admire her in all her fuchsia splendour. And visually, she is fabulous. The contoured, brilliant pink bottle is striking and statuesque, mercifully deviating from the standard glass brick so many perfumes seem resigned to inhabit.

For a 50ml, she stands oddly tall, towering over the rest of my shelf and matching the height of her 100ml sister Flower. Her branding prepared me for something unusual, maybe even transportive.

Fragrantica had described Amour as having a savoury quality. I started imagining creamy rice notes with a starchy warmth, maybe the vanilla deepened by something edible-but-not-sweet, with the florals (frangipani, cherry blossom, heliotrope) adding a plush, delicate edge. In my mind, this was going to be milky, comforting, strange, and addictive.

Reader, it was not.

---

First Impressions

The first spray hit me like Play-Doh that had been left too close to a vodka tonic. There was that unmistakable doughy, slightly salty, vaguely synthetic almondy thing, but not in an interesting way. It brought to mind a nursery craft drawer rather than the sensual skin scent I had pinned my hopes on.

After a little while, it did soften into something smoother and a bit nuttier, with an almond-vanilla creaminess trying its best to emerge. But savoury? No, sir.

---

The Trouble With a Beautiful Benchmark

I suspect part of my disappointment stems from the fact that I was hoping for a rice note more in the vein of Diptyque’s L’Eau Papier – a true savoury beauty, all blonde woods, sesame, and curls of rice steam.

The first time I smelled it, I was floored. It felt so distinctive and intimate that it reminded me why fragrance can be such a thrilling art form.

So no, it’s not entirely fair to hold Amour up against it, but L’Eau Papier was my first encounter with rice in fragrance, and I foolishly assumed all rice notes might carry themselves with the same airy grace.

---

All Dressed Up, Nowhere to Go

Once the opening of Amour had settled, it became just… ordinary. I felt as though I’d smelled versions of this profile countless times before from more affordable houses – Tesori d’Oriente came to mind.

And that is not necessarily an insult, because there are some excellent budget scents out there, but when a fragrance arrives wearing the costume of something distinctive, I do expect it to do more than rehash a well-trodden powdery vanilla-floral script.

Still, I let it sit on my skin. I checked back in ten minutes later, prepared to admit I’d judged too soon, to perhaps discover some hidden milky richness waiting in the wings.

But Amour had faded so dramatically that I was left wondering whether I’d gone anosmic. I know skin chemistry can be cruel, and perhaps a period of maceration might coax more from it, but first impressions are first impressions.

---

Final Thoughts

So yes, I’m sad to say this was a disappointment. I wanted creamy rice pudding with a savoury twist, something soft and unusual and enveloping.

What I got was a faint, overly familiar almond-floral vanilla that flirted briefly with my interest before disappearing entirely.

Pretty bottle, promising concept, but on my skin it amounted to very little.

3 sniffs out of ten.

---