Angel
Mugler (1992)

(Review of Angel Excessive Extrait)

This is best version of Angel, full stop. Yes, I understand that’s quite a statement given the massive number of flankers Mugler has created for its blockbuster debut from 1992; it is no less contentious to say a flanker is better than the original as well. I should provide context by also saying that I have never been a huge fan of Angel, certainly not to the level of fandom that it has always garnered. I do honestly like it, but in the competition of Angel versus Alien I am most definitely Team Alien. But Angel Excessive Extrait… this puts me on the fence.

Firstly, it retains all of the famous gourmand qualities of the original. Excesses of chocolate patchouli, vanilla, brown sugar, and touches of fruit. Unlike the original though, in EE they are luxurious. This is not the milk chocolate candy bar of the original, it’s a sultry, deep, dark, rich artisanal chocolate. The vanilla isn’t a sugared-up baking extract, it’s earthy oils pulled straight from the bean. The brown sugar is now more like molasses, a cooked maple syrup type note that is robust and a touch bitter. The fruit is boozy, dark blue and black. Then there is the musk, and a lot of it. EE is does not shy away from the civet and animalic musks, they are massive and loud in the classic vintage manner.

Generally speaking then, EE smells like a far more nuanced, luxurious, and “adult” gourmand compared to the original Angel’s somewhat puerile and crass approach. Despite its heaviness, richness and excessiveness - what a great name for this flanker, too - it never reaches a point of being too much. It doesn’t go so sweet or gourmand that I feel like I might dry heave; it doesn’t take up all of the space in the air around me, never letting me catch a break; it doesn’t cloy at my nose or coat my skin like cling film. It feels vibrant and dynamic while also being elegant and stately. It might be the best gourmand I own, and quite easily one of the best I’ve ever smelled.

This was not as bad as I thought it would be. There is actually an interesting fruity floral/pachouli thing going on under all that sugar.

I have a 2022 bottle of EdP, and it is a work of genius. I was concerned, when my partner fell in love with it, that I'd grow weary of smelling it around the house, but I relented and we got it for him.

On mornings when he wears it, the scent always surprises me, the undefinable mix of strawberries and candy and citrus and roses drifting around.

I would love to smell older formulations to compare, but as it stands, this is a perfect fragrance to my nose, 10/10.

I was so disapointed with this one. I'm a total vanilla and gourmand addict. I got absoloutely no vanilla or sweetness from this AT ALL. Absolutley NOTHING :(
All I get is really sharp and dusty, musty floral notes, which I'm presuming is the patchouli and jasmine, or some of the other floral notes. It reminds me of the oldfashioned really sharp, strong perfumes my grandma used to wear when I was a kid.

I must be smelling the reformulated version because the patchouli isn't very prominent and the performance is moderate.

A provocative hellion. Iconic bliss dwells in this rank mixture of patchouli-cocoa. Truly, Angel was a heaven-scent 90s paradigm shift, proof that a perfumer can create something no one asked for and see that visionary risk pay off with blockbuster sales success. Angel provokes desire and then puts it to bed, a sensory merry-go-round.

I loathe gourmands (the requiste vanilla powder and spice is here) but embrace this one wholeheartedly, as there is something 'loamy' about its deeper notes. Is it sexy, or is it innocent? Who cares? Angel is deep and earthy, powerfully dry and sweet, yet as ethereal as cotton candy, too.

Suffice to say it's an almighty legend for good reason.