Cuvée Van De Keizer Blauw (Blue) - Brouwerij Het Anker
Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.
Ratings: 1,468 | Reviews: 825 | Display Reviews Only:
1.7/5 rDev -60.6%
A: Dark beer, allows just a little light to shine through. Decent head, went away fairly quickly.
S: Very malty with a lot of spice in the scent. There is also a scent that I have never smelled before. It almost smells like an off smell, but probably not.
T: It is interesting, but I am not sure this is for me. There is a spicy character, and a very malty taste, but there is a taste I have never experienced before that ruins this beer to me.
M: Average, carb. levels are good.
D: The strange taste makes this un-drinkable to me.
Maybe I got a bad bottle. I will get a new one and review again ASAP.
03-26-2007 18:53:20 | More by jeffaz02t
1.83/5 rDev -57.5%
I tried this beer based on the amazing ratings. It tastes like wine. I don't recommend this beer if you are a fan of IPAs, ales, or beer. It tastes like wine. Pick up a St Sebastians golden Belgian ale instead. I would have trouble picking this over even budweiser to be honest.
08-15-2012 08:33:56 | More by GruberMeister
1.98/5 rDev -54.1%
I poured this (newer label) 2008 beer into a Chimay goblet. It looked enticing, but the aroma wasn't very good. As I inhaled, I detected some phenols that weren't pleasant. Upon the first sip, the funky phenols came into play. Now, the funkiness wasn't like a Lambic or red/brown Flanders ale with a "good" funkiness. This funkiness wasn't acerbic, but it was a bad funkiness that rested lightly in the background of the more dominant candy sweetness of this brew. The bad characteristics reminded me of a mix of: hints of Testors Glue, some sweaty neoprene, perhaps some "new tire", and/or wisps of unwanted phenols (like when some American breweries let a German weizen yeast get totally out of control). All of this is then wrapped up in a dominating sugary sweet glaze. Sound appetizing? It wasn't, and I ended up doing a drain-pour. I've had this one on a couple of occasions in the past and thought I remembered it being pretty good, but this latest bottle has discouraged me from buying this brew again. I know sometimes a person's tastes and preferences change, but I don't see how they could have changed *that* much with me and this brew. I don't know...maybe this is a brew that just needs lots of aging before it becomes drinkable, and I've only had aged versions in the past? Now that I think about it, I've had some brews with perfectly "good" phenolics which were aged, and those characteristics sadly disappeared. I think this is a brew which needs some age so that the "bad" phenols will disappear. I bet that's why I liked the aged versions of this brew I had in the past. Whatever the case, and whatever vintage you might find of this brew, hopefully you'll like it...and I still have hope that it can be a good brew.
04-06-2009 22:55:33 | More by ohmybock
2/5 rDev -53.6%
I'm completely baffled by this beer. It looks beautiful; a lovely cola brown with a thick, slightly off-white head. Smells great, with strong plum and yeast ester notes. The mouthfeel was creamy and dense, if a bit undercarbonated. That's the good.
Then there's the taste. I'm familiar with Belgian ales and their peculiarities and eccentricities—I realize they're not all for everyone. But this was just… syrup. I can't recall ever having a beer that was this cloyingly, overpoweringly, nauseatingly sweet. There was no balance or nuance whatsoever; it was like, I don't know, a Myers and Dr. Pepper with five teaspoons of sugar? A Flanders Red and corn syrup cocktail?
I don't know if this was an off bottle, but my GOD was this awful. Huge disappointment; I can't imagine ever drinking this again.
01-08-2013 16:36:13 | More by WetCoaster
2.05/5 rDev -52.4%
Poured from 12 oz bottle into a tulip glass
This beer was such an interesting twist on what I had expected. First off the beer pours like a quad, light brown with a good amiunt of head. That was the best part of this beer. After that all I could smell and taste was sweetness. It's like the brewer took tons of sugar and mixed it with a pound of yeast and hops. A lot of these reciews say to age for 4 years before it becomes good. But why would you want to buy a beer you have to age that long before it becomes good. To me if they would have lowered the sweetness it could have been much better.
08-14-2014 06:11:14 | More by mlhyatt
2.2/5 rDev -49%
A- Body is a dark brown, nearly black that pours with a 1/2 finger head and leaves traces of light lacing in the glass.
S- Biscuity raw dough, strong alcohol, toffee, licorice, anise, raisin, a hint of butter.
T- Lots of licorice and anise upfront with an offensive buttery biscuit backbone. There is a good amount of spicy belgian yeast underneath. Finish is quite medicinal with a bite of alcohol.
M- Moderate carbonation with a medium to heavy weight full body that has a slightly doughy consistency.
D- I'm really hoping that this was a bad bottle. The buttered biscuit is quite overwhelming and masks the more complex components of the brew. I am willing to give this another try-but couldn't finish it this time- luckily this was shared amongst a few of us do it didn't go to waste. Side note- I don't like their tripel either...
05-24-2010 18:06:17 | More by PittBeerGirl
2.2/5 rDev -49%
This beer in the top 100? You must be joking.
I had to take a $20 cab ride and spend another $20 bucks to get this beer, so I was anticipating something special.
A - Beautiful amber body with small brown head and decent lacing.
S - Sweet yeast, molasses and iodine.
T - Extremely sweet, flabby with no balancing acidity or bitterness. This malty soup of sweetness is a desert. Divided among four beer drinkers, the bottle went unfinished.
M - Minimal carbonation, fat with unbalanced sugars.
D - I cant abide by this unbalanced sweetness. This beer is to sweetness as Stone's Ruination is to bitterness. Only times two.
04-23-2006 00:30:12 | More by Naerhu
2.35/5 rDev -45.5%
Im sorry to swim against the tide on this, but I did not find it appealing at all, hich is a shame since I was looking forward to drinking it.
The appearance was okay, but the aroma reminded me of a mixture of cane syrup and alcohol. The flavor had possibly a hint of dark fruit, but it was hard to tell over the predominantly sweet alcohol taste. Finish was likewise a thick, sweet syrupy sensation.
Belgian Strong Ales are not my absolute favorites, but there are many that I have really enjoyed. Unfortunatley, this was not one of them, and I finally poured the last quarter down the drain...which really sucks given the price.
04-25-2007 03:11:51 | More by kimcgolf
2.35/5 rDev -45.5%
The predominant smell and taste is of alcohol. But what else does this beer offer? Not much. The taste was bland and lacked complexity. I couldn't make out much flavor, just the taste of alcohol. The aftertaste was stale. This one is only brewed once a year, on February 24. Why all the fuss? There's nothing special here. This one is unworthy of the great Belgian suds tradition.
02-16-2004 13:07:48 | More by GnomeKing
2.35/5 rDev -45.5%
I had very high hopes for this one. 2007 750ml. I poured it into a pint glass (sinful). As I pored the dark concoction into my glass it seemed thicker than I expected, almost like a stout. There was very little head but it was a very nice tan that left plenty of lacing. Here's where it went downhill. The aroma... full of raisin and fig and brown sugar. All kinds of maltiness. Usually that's the start of something good, but it was overwhelming. Too sweet. The flavor was once again too sweet. Just a thick mouthful of sugary raisin-like liquid. No hops what-so-ever. No underlying teaser of complex flavors inherent to Belgian beers. It was lightly carbonated and very creamy. But in the end I begrudgingly poured the rest down the drain.
11-07-2008 16:42:46 | More by soultrain19
2.4/5 rDev -44.3%
22oz bottle poured into a goblet. Jaargang 2008.
A: Deep red (slightly darker than a typical barleywine) with a big head that quickly fades.
S: Dark fruit and spices.
T: Unpleasant cloying spiciness, sugary sweetness, and harsh phenols. Bready aftertaste.
M: Fairly light with decent carbonation.
D: I don't know what happened. When I had this back in December, I liked it a lot. This time around, it was way too sickeningly spicy and sweet and I had to do a drain pour. Maybe I got a bad bottle.
04-11-2009 05:57:55 | More by BarrelO
2.45/5 rDev -43.2%
Cuvée Van De Keizer Blauw (2012)
This beer seems to be enjoyed by most and came highly recommended, yet it did not live up to the fanfare. This was recommended based on my love of quads, yet this is a strong dark ale, not a quad. I don't know why two different guys at two different beer stores told me this was a quad.
This pours a dark brown, looks beautiful and rich. Minimal head.
Nose is very sweet and when swirled brings out a pungent smell of alcohol.
Taste is very sweet, to a fault. Dark fruits, brown sugar and alcohol are prominent on the tongue. Have I mentioned it's far too sweet?
I shared this with several friends and no one else liked it either. We can't all be wrong about this highly rated beer can we? Is it possible I got a bad bottle? I hope so.
12-26-2013 15:48:20 | More by BeerGod27
2.58/5 rDev -40.1%
2009 bottle poured into a tulip glass.
A beautiful looking beer with a tan cottony head. Smells wonderful and sweet. But the pleasure ends there. The taste starts lively and fresh but quickly goes way too sweet for me. Can't taste anything but malt, sugar and alcohol. Thick and syrupy mouthfeel. I would rather have a coke but it may just be a style preference. Sorry.
08-14-2010 01:55:14 | More by ritter57
2.63/5 rDev -39%
A - 2005 vintage. Pours a deep, clear chestnut brown, with a couple of fingers of light-tan head. If allowed to settle it falls to a thin ring leaving behind plenty of lacing, but is easily refreshed to a finger in depth.
S - Masses of sweet dried fruit - dates/raisins/fig, molasses, dark rum, cinnamon, orange peel buried in the back. There's more there, but tough to define what it is. Really appealing.
T - Rich, dried fruit comes to the fore immediately. The alcohol is fairly well masked, but only because sweetness dominates. Unfortunately this also stops any other flavours showing prominence. Long, lingering aftertaste of tobacco. Huge letdown.
M - Very coating, syrupy mouthfeel. Cloying. Carbonation is very light, which doesn't help to cleanse the mouth and add some balance. Disappointing, possibly due to its age.
D - I'd held high hopes here and the beer showed initial promise. Let down by its complete imbalance. Might revisit with a fresher bottle, but can't imagine the overpowering sweetness being brought into check.
02-28-2010 15:47:09 | More by haz77
2.68/5 rDev -37.8%
Gouden Carolus Grand Cru of the Emperor: Kind of a fancy pants name for a beer that I did not think was all that good. Big bomber bottle marked 2000 around the neck ring. Corked bottle. When pouring, I quickly noted substantial chunks of sediment, and this beer poured into somewhat of an unappetizing murky reddish brown color, with not much head. It did taste better than it looked, with predominant tastes of dried fruits, raisons prunes, etc. I did sense a tiny taste of sourness that was not all that unpleasant. All in all, Id pass.
01-20-2003 15:36:43 | More by jackndan
2.83/5 rDev -34.3%
Pours a rich brown color with minimal head. Smell is malty and sweet with some mild fruity notes - prune and plums mostly. Taste was sweet with lots of caramel flavors and some mild chocolate. Thought it was close to a dubbel with the high caramel taste. Sticky sweetness on the tongue. Overall, I thought this was tough to drink, but I am not a fan of dubbels and this one reminded me too much of that style. Not a bad beer but not a fan of beers with lots of caramel flavors and taste.
04-21-2007 22:58:54 | More by jhu1995
2.83/5 rDev -34.3%
2006 vintage. Purchased at Whole Foods.
A: The beer pours a dark amber, leaving a thin head that quickly dissolves. Very minimal lacing.
S: The beer is overwhelmingly dominated by the smell of bananas and caramel; also, lots of spices which I can't quite distinguish.
T: I'm experiencing a very strong maple taste that I don't particularly enjoy. The high alcohol content is very evident and the spices are overwhelming any other taste in this beer. I have to admit, this is probably the sweetest beer I've ever had.
M: The beer is medium bodied and coats the mouth well, but because I didn't particularly enjoy the taste, it's not really a beer I plan to sip.
D: I'll probably never try this beer again. In my estimation, the beer is overspiced and way too sweet. Some, however, may enjoy these qualities and would appreciate the beer more than do I.
07-29-2007 21:16:30 | More by sessycuban
2.88/5 rDev -33.2%
2010 vintage, poured into a Chimay chalice
A: Dark brown with almost a rose color at the edges of the glass. The light tan head is pretty small, maybe 1/2 a finger's width, and does not have much retention, though it leaves some nice lacing and keeps a patchy covering on the surface of the beer.
S: Some sweet malts and a heavy dose of grapes, mixed with some bready yeast. Really interesting and lovely aroma.
T: Wow. I was sold on this beer until I actually tasted it. Up front, the taste is lovely and matches the aroma: some malts, a nice hit of yeast and the grape flavor. Unfortunately, after that flavor there is nothing but sweetness. Overt, cloying unbalanced sweetness. That flavor lingers in the back of the throat for a while, and is actually pretty nice once the majority of the flavor fades. Alcohol gently warms the throat, though it is well hidden in the actual flavor profile. I am pretty sure that there is a good beer here, just hidden behind a disgusting amount of sweetness.
M: Pretty heavy body, lots of carbonation and slightly sticky.
D: Honestly, I do not find this beer drinkable at all. It is way too sweet, and I don't even know if I can finish a single glass, let alone an entire 750 bottle. So unbalanced, and if I wanted something that tasted like this I would buy some grape syrup.
03-07-2011 02:00:31 | More by DaveBlack
2.9/5 rDev -32.7%
I really don't see what all the buzz is about with this beer. Had the 2008 version. It was way too sweet with a super thick mouthfeel. I can't put my finger on it but I think it is the huge amount of Belgian esters combined with a ton of candy sugar and malts. I think it's too much and I drain poured.
03-25-2009 06:57:28 | More by PeprSprYoFace
Cuvée Van De Keizer Blauw (Blue) from Brouwerij Het Anker
96 out of 100 based on 1,468 ratings.