Hilfiger Est. 1985 fragrance notes

  • Head

    • bergamot, mandarin, pink grapefruit, juniper, rosemary, papaya
  • Heart

    • curcuma, mahogany wood, white tea rose, warm skin accord
  • Base

    • suede, sandalwood, cistus, papaya, tonka, cashmere wood

Where to buy

Latest Reviews of Hilfiger Est. 1985

Boring aquatic like scent when first applied, but once it dries down gets slightly more interesting and better. But still nothing that sets the world on fire for me, but I've owned/have worse. On a positive note though, the longevity for a fresh scent seems quite good...and I'm wearing this on a cool and rainy day.
17th March 2015
I was shocked that this fragrance wasn't a sensation on here, I received a bottle as a present and as soon as I sprayed it I knew I was in love. To me Hilfiger1985 makes a connection and I guess that is what we all strive for when trying on something new, an initial hit of Wow, a hit that makes you stop thinking and try to let the scent put you somewhere. I could wear this at any occasion and feel comfortable, like an old friend is with me. Yes to me it is that good.

The only downside is the longevity. In a way I'm glad I go against the majority here as its each to their own, it also means its connection to me will find its way back into my collection soon.
6th March 2015

Generic HilfigerA citrus-bergamot opening with papaya and a bland wood drydown. Fresh but bery synthetic and generic and distinctly unexciting. We need hundreds more of these scent to get more bored....
26th September 2013
I didn't like this much at first, I thought it was too generic. But I stuck with it and I have totally changed my mind. This is a lovely woody/spicy EDT that lasts. It has a lot of character to it. I think this is gorgeous.
10th November 2012
Another generic criminal – fortunately this one does not get away with murder, expiring mercifully instead after about an hour. Synthetic citrus-spice dime-a-dozen ‘gents' combo. The pale blue colour of this stuff says it all; another loser reliant on marketing to snare the gullible. Close inspection reveals a few miniscule points of interest – a sharp little stab of sandal, a recalcitrant bubblegum hiding in the wings. Disregard all the exotic ingredients listed – they're not part of the olfactory experience of this one.
23rd July 2012
I'm going to go against the grain on this one.
I like it.
IMO it's better than that darn Tommy that smells like so many other frags of it's genre.
The initial spray can be synthetic.
But I like the drydown and the Papaya.
Yes, there are similar fragrances out there but 1985 still has some different notes that make it enjoyable for me.
Silliage is so so.
Longevity 5 plus hours for me.
Best For Casual Affair.
31st January 2011
Well, at least this is something different.
The scent is dominated by a rather synthetic papaya note which is quirky, sharp, slightly metallic, fruity, unfamiliar and persistent. Do I like it? No.
Green - orange bongos are beating in my brain. Release me from their incessant drumming...
8th January 2011
Damn you Tommy Hilfiger! This stuff is not good! I am aware the TH house isn't exactly the most respected amongst Basenoter's, but still, I was expecting much more.

Bought it at Wal-Mart on sale for 15 bucks, and returned it.. Ya it was THAT bad. I know I used the term "chemical" often when defining the quality of these cheapies, and this once is now exception. Rightfully so.. this is VERY chemical; both in smell and feel.

The opening is a harsh citrus, fruity, spicy, woodsy mix infused with ginger and synthetic smelling floral notes. As if you couldn't tell by the note pyramid.. this stuff is all over the place. But it's also very well blended; which makes it hard to detect individual notes. Even when I look at the pyramid, I don't get most of those notes individually. Instead, I get a poorly done combination of 20-30 top notes that you'd find in various mainstream designer fragrances, shoved in a blender with a bunch of electronics. Blended together and BOOM.. they catch on fire. If this confuses you, let me make it simple. 1985 smells like a mix of the most synthetic smelling top notes imaginable and a bunch of electronics set of fire (giving out that "burnt/fried" circuit" accord).

I'm sure it's just a matter of time before they discontinue this catastrophe. While it's completely unwearable, it doesn't smell putrid. There is a tea note that shines through eventually, the ginger accord is ok once it simmers down, and as it dries it becomes a little better. But, for the most part, this is an accident.
28th December 2010
This one just screams out to me, eh. Nothing new, nothing fantastic, just not bad. Spicy citrus up top, leading to a fairly linear drydown. Longevity isn't great, maybe 4-5 hours if that. Good for teenagers who just want to smell good and pleasant.
25th September 2010
Surprised by the hate of this fragrance. Maybe I'm a sucker to its marketing; the bottle is one of the best I've seen. Meanwhile, its fresh, citrisy, and is an American version of Versace's "signature" fragrance. Its opening is a tad more complex and zesty, and maybe less fresh. A fresh new addition to Tommy. Its only "generic" because its fresh.
5th June 2009
Bland washed-out opening leading to an underwhelming base. Not worthy of much comment, what were they thinking?
26th March 2009
I disagree with SirSlarty. I really enjoy this frag! I get a lot of compliments on it no matter which note is present!
14th January 2009