Monstre Rouge - De Proefbrouwerij (bvba Andelot)

Not Rated.
Monstre RougeMonstre Rouge

Educational use only; do not reuse.
BA SCORE
77
okay

106 Reviews
THE BROS
-
no score

(Send Samples)
Reviews: 106
Hads: 151
rAvg: 3.32
pDev: 18.98%
Wants: 4
Gots: 13 | FT: 1
Brewed by:
De Proefbrouwerij (bvba Andelot) visit their website
Belgium

Style | ABV
Flanders Red Ale |  8.50% ABV

Availability: Limited (brewed once)

Notes & Commercial Description:
Beer added by: HoosBrews on 06-29-2010

This beer is retired; no longer brewed.

No notes at this time.
View: Beers (105) | Events
Beer: Reviews & Ratings
Sort by:  Recent | High | Low | Top Raters
first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Reviews: 106 | Hads: 151
Photo of DefenCorps
1.29/5  rDev -61.1%
look: 3 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1 | feel: 1.5 | overall: 1

On tap at 72 Hours of Belgium yesterday. Quite amazing.

Hazy red with a thin, white off-head. The nose is oxidized aramel, cardboard and sweetened prunes. The palate has wet cardboard, a mild tartness and is rather disgusting. Thin, papery and lacking in sourness, this is nothing more than an epic fail. Side by side with the Rodenbach 2008, it was no contest. (362 characters)

Photo of largadeer
1.44/5  rDev -56.6%
look: 3 | smell: 1.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

On tap at The Bruery Provisions. Monstre Rouge is a murky, hazy amber-red; it pours with a finger of head that settles to a film. The aroma is a perplexing blend of sweaty funk, brash oak, dark fruit, metal and muddled hops. The palate is surprisingly bitter, astringent and metallic. Sweetness peaks through a bit, as do notes of dark fruit. It isn't sour so much as it's funky, and there's little of the acetic sourness that's characteristic of a Flemish red. It finishes with harsh American oak astringency. This is absolutely awful, I choked down about an ounce of my pour before I could finish no more. (607 characters)

Photo of AlexFields
1.48/5  rDev -55.4%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 1 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 1

I drank this a couple months ago, just getting around to posting some old reviews.

APPEARANCE: Nothing excited, just a typical amber color.

SMELL: Malty. I may detect a faint trace of sourness, or that might just be my expectations telling me I should.

TASTE: This is terrible. It tastes like an aged DIPA, and I mean that in the worst possible way. Just a huge malt bomb with a faint trace of faded hops and ZERO sourness. The malts aren't even interesting, just that awful maltiness that's supposed to be hidden behind a big hop profile and only develops after the hops die. Maybe the hops would have made this beer drinkable when fresher but at this point it's nowhere close to enjoyable.

MOUTHFEEL: Wasn't paying a lot of attention to mouthfeel when drinking this as the flavor was just that bad. Suffice it to say the mouthfeel didn't stand out as a redeeming quality.

OVERALL: An epic fail. This was not even close to being a Flanders Red as advertised, nor to being any other kind of sour. I've never had another beer that was intended to be a sour that had literally NO detectable sourness or funk in the flavor. Incredible that this thing passed quality control. Truly awful, I would rather drink a PBR by far. Three of us forced down a few sips of this and then poured it out. (1,291 characters)

Photo of MMAJYK
1.54/5  rDev -53.6%
look: 2 | smell: 3 | taste: 1 | feel: 1 | overall: 1

A- Deep maroon color with some brown highlights. Small head that fades fast. The clarity is in the "murky" range.

S- Sweat, Pine, Prunes, Citrusy hops, perfume.

T- It tastes like Duchesse (sp?) mixed with a very astringent IPA or DIPA, then topped off with hairspray and nail polish remover. Absoulutely disgusting stuff and I want my $12 back.

M- Very highly carbonated, thin in the mouth, and astringent.

D- A drain pour. I've NEVER poured out a whole bottle of anything in all my years of brewing and tasting beers. This was my first.

I'm serious, this beer is a total mess with too many ingredients that dont work well together. Disgusting beer. I wish I would have never tried it. (690 characters)

Photo of Sabonis
1.73/5  rDev -47.9%
look: 2.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

Dark amber in the glass. Smashed fruit smell, alchohol, ferment. Taste is bitter and sweet like a DIPA. Really, really boozy. Not a Flanders Red at all and not a good surprise. Some beers defy a label (like Troegs beers) but this just defies good taste. Drain pour half the bottle. Quite expensive too. A failure. (313 characters)

Photo of Thorpe429
1.91/5  rDev -42.5%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1 | overall: 2

Thanks (or not) to Max for opening this bottle. Reviewed from notes.

Pours a moderate red-amber color into a red wine glass. Slight red-tinged light tan head with a bit of retention and some mild lacing. From there, it's all downhill. The nose is some light malt and hints of cherry and oak. No perceivable lactic or acetic character, and what is there is quite faint. The taste really adds nothing and is quite terrible, considering the style. There is absolutely no sourness, no vinegar, no oak. This is just a slightly sweetened amber ale with a mild amount of cherry. The feel is awful. It's light and contains nothing that would indicate its style. Drainpour. (665 characters)

Photo of BucketBoy
2.02/5  rDev -39.2%
look: 4 | smell: 2 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Had this in my cellar since it was released - figure now is as good a time as any to open it. I had this on-tap at Busy Bee in Raleigh many moons ago and it was terrible then - let's see how it performs in the bottle with some time on it. I'm rating this to style as that is what I was hoping to drink.

A - Open with a soft pfft pop and pours a rich amber into my '12 Darkness snifter chalice. Looks more like an Flanders Our Bruin than a Flemish red. Lushly thick and sticky head forms peaks of almond lace around my glass, upping the appearance factor significantly. This is the best part of this beer.

S - Weak floral and orange hops lead into light honey and sweet malt, but not much follows. Perhaps a faint notion of acetic character in the middle gives way to wet cardboard. Smells like the "Imperial" nature may be administered in its hop character.

T - Pretty darn tasty - if this were a faded American "strong ale" (catchall category where this doesn't fit into any other) or perhaps barleywine. Plenty of bitter hops and even a somewhat strong malt backbone prop up some light brown sugar notes and leather. Dare I say even fairly balanced here. However, as a Flanders Red, this is way off the mark. No sour, no tang; if there is any Brett spice, it is swallowed up by the bitterness of the hops. Rated to style this is just not right.

M - Actually, not bad. Full and nicely carbonated, perhaps even a touch of velvet that is pulled back by the astringency of the hops. A bit of alcohol in the finish. Certainly not the expected mouthfeel of a Flanders, but still nice.

O - Not at all to style, but far far better than when I had it on-tap, when it was just an abomination. Rated off style or re-categorized, this would surely fare better, although its still nothing very memorable - more just meh. nice looking beer and fabulous lacing, but as a Flanders red, this is a fail. (1,893 characters)

Photo of jjanega08
2.08/5  rDev -37.3%
look: 2 | smell: 4 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 1 | overall: 1.5

A= The pour is a thick looking hazy poop brown color similar to my last homebrew in which I skipped a few rests in the mash to experiment. Needless to say I should have added the rests and this beer needs to clean itself up a bit too. The head is rediculous at 5 fingers high thick and creamy looking with amazing retention and lacing. I almost wish it wasn't so bit so I could sip it sooner. It looks like whipped cream on top of the beer the head is so thick only the color is tan.

S= An interesting smell. It has a tart note that isn't quite what I would call sour. It's sort of like a pie in the smell or some sort of candy. Almost an artificial strawberry smell. Biscuity underneath the tart fruityness.

T= The taste isn't quite as plesant as the nose is. It hits me with a ton of sort of chocolaty roasty malts which don't quite fit in the rest of the profile because from there it venture to a little tart without pushing sour and astringent. It has a sort of sandy taste to it if that makes sense. I get a little oaky vanilla barrel flavor from it and that's about the only thing that fits in the profile as far as I'm concerned.

M= Gross. Super dry to the point of it being sick. I feel like I ate the wrong part of a walnut.

D= I wouldn't recommend this beer to my worst enemies. I love Terrapin but I have yet to have anything outstanding from De Proef. Another one bites the dust. (1,396 characters)

Photo of beer4colin
2.15/5  rDev -35.2%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3.5 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 1.5

I was so looking forward to opening this baby. Being from the NE, I have had only tastes from Terrapin and had liked what I have had.

750ml with a wired cork! Sweet. The collaboration concept rocked.

Appearance was good. Very HUGE head was disturbing but I pressed on.

Taste: Burnt! Nothing more to say. But yet I pressed forward thinking that it was my uneducated taste buds. NO! This tastes like burnt toast!

Drinkability: I don't think so. Very disappointed in this Terrapin offering.... (494 characters)

Photo of philosobeer
2.16/5  rDev -34.9%
look: 3 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 4 | overall: 1.5

I heard 'Imperial Flemish Red' and briefly mourned sticking 'imperial' in front of every beer style you ever heard of. Still, got to branch out and try new things, right? Tried this out at Local Option, review is from notes on a napkin, expanded later.

A // Poured into a wide wine-glass kind of goblet, reddish brown and hazy with some white head.

S // Not getting the usual wild character. Plastic and alcohol and solvent are way stronger than they should be. I smell some vinegar like acids, too. But it isn't all bad, grain sweetness, wood, and even hops come out of this.

T // Plastic and alcohol again come out swinging. The grains are too much for the style, and it swallows anything about this that might have made it a Flemish Red. But then again, it takes some of the good things from an almost American Barleywine style. Some, but not nearly enough. I cannot imagine they designed a beer to intentionally taste like this. Why would they?

M // Ok. I really have no big complaints about the mouthfeel, for all the grain sweetness and hefty alcohol character, it's surprisingly light and crisp with this level of grain. It accidentally got something right, and a lot wrong, but this is pretty much right.

D // It isn't drinkable. I'll say this much only: I did finish my glass.

Overall? I think I tasted a failed experiment that might be used in cooking... maybe. I didn't despise this, but I did not like it either. (1,430 characters)

Photo of thegodfather2701
2.19/5  rDev -34%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

A-Brownish-red with a tan head that dissipates quickly leaving a nice ring of foam

S-Not much going on here at all. Some alcohol is present and what I can only describe as a typical red ale smell. Very weak nose.

T-Like the nose there is not much in the flavor department either. What I can pick out are brown sugar and some dried fruits. Not real sourness or even complexity. It is more malty than hoppy.

M-Not too thick or too thin, average.

D-Easy to drink because there is nearly no flavor.

Overall, not a good beer. I don't know what happened when they brewed this, but I think it is safe to say this is not what was intended. (636 characters)

Photo of drabmuh
2.21/5  rDev -33.4%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

This beer is fucking gross. "Imperial Flanders red" WTF does that mean? I foolishly thought that meant that it taste like a Flanders beer but bigger, meaning more sour, more in your face, MORE EXTREME, unfortunately this beer just sucked. Not even close. I'm very disappointed in you both. Well, I had better write a review so this doesn't get flagged.

Beer is brown and completely hazy, no head, carbonation is low, no lacing, the appearance is the best part.

Aroma is super sweet, malty, some yeast, no acids, no hints of sourness or even bitterness. Bummer.

Beer is medium in body and super super sweet. Its cloying and weighs heavy on my palate. I power through and drink most of it, but I give up ultimately. My desire to drink this is overwhelmed by the overall suckiness of this beer. Never again. (807 characters)

Photo of CampusCrew
2.29/5  rDev -31%
look: 4.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 1.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

is this a joke? Were they shooting for a over malty, unbalanced, non-sour flanders red ale? Pours mucky brown, great head lacing. Lots of floating yeasties. But the flavor is lacking. I don't think I got a bad bottle. I just think this was an experiement that went wrong. Very suprised from a reputable brewery like De Proef but Terrapin has been off for awhile. I just don't know whats up with them latley....

Hello???? this is a sour ale and imperial at that. It's not sour!!!! (480 characters)

Photo of Jay888
2.34/5  rDev -29.5%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

Poured into my Stone Sour Fest taster glass, with a little bit of unintended irony. Plastic cork, wrestled out with a corkscrew. If you can twist this out by hand, you are quite talented.
Copper colored, retains a nice head, slightly cloudy. Big time brown sugar/caramel, small time funk, way short on sour. Tastes like a lot of calories. I'm underwhelmed on all fronts. I'm a fan of beers from both breweries, but I am not thinking that this is the beer that the label deserves. I do like the rye and wood in the background, but it's just lost in sugar. No way I could finish a 750 ml bottle. I never drainpour beers but I do cook with them and that's where the rest of this went.... (684 characters)

Photo of b3shine
2.4/5  rDev -27.7%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 2 | overall: 2.5

750 mL to snifter. I'm thinking of a word... It's on the tip of my tongue... Oh yeah, AWFUL! This is an embarrassment to sours - and to Terrapin. I'm shocked they put their name on this. Probably pot-committed. As a sour, I'd be better off describing everything it's not. And at $15/bottle?!? Do yourself a favor next time you wanna try this: take your $15 and go buy yourself a case of Budweiser. (397 characters)

Photo of champ103
2.47/5  rDev -25.6%
look: 2.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

A: Pours a murky dark reddish color with plenty of yeast floaties. Looks like mud. A two finger beige head forms, but recedes quickly. A light film of lace is left behind.
S: Lightly tart cherries and some oak aromas. Not much else. Just find of neutral.
T: Some lightly tart cherries, crusty bread, and rotten/moldy wood. Watery hops. I am not really digging this.
M/D: A medium body that is just a bit light on the carbonation. There is a bit of heat from the alcohol, and overall nothing I really care to come back to. I don't care to finish the bottle.

This is a big miss for me. It does not really meld well. Not one of De Proef's better collaboration offerings, and really just bad. I would not recommend this in any way. (728 characters)

Photo of SkeeterHawk
2.53/5  rDev -23.8%
look: 3.5 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2 | overall: 2

I picked this beer up at the downtown Spec's a couple days ago. An imperial Flanders definitely looks interesting to a sour-puss like myself, so let's give this a shot:

Appearance: Initially pours a murky brown color with a solid 1" of creamy tan bubbles on top that slowly starts to fade after a minute or so. There is some lacing left on the glass, and the head never seems to want to quit. The beer really never clarifies.

Aroma: I initially got a dry earthy aroma that seemed like it was wood derived along with the expected ripe fruit. After the beer has sat for a little while, the head is still pretty thick, but I am getting clearly defined American hops in here...which is quite odd I must say.

Taste: The flavor is somewhat malty in the beginning with some dark caramel leading the flavor profile, but this quickly turns acidic due to the wild yeast and high hop combination. The finish is a bit harsh. It has hops drying things out in an already very well attenuated beer, and then after all this is just about all you can take, the alcohol sets in and adds heat to the mix...which is just about as welcome as rubbing alcohol is on an open-wound at this point.

Opinion: Wow. All I can say is wow. I really have no idea if this was what they were shooting for or if the batch just went south so they decided to be creative on the packaging. I would say that this is a beer that even the brew-master could only drink a little bit of. Not because it is so wild, but because it is unbalanced. There are flavors there that could be the making of a good beer, but the American hops start to screw things up and then it doesn't get any better from there. I would say, stay away from this one unless you are a serious hop-head that also loves sours...this may be for you. The hops push what I would consider a mediocre beer over the top for me, so it's not my "cup of tea". (1,880 characters)

Photo of donkeyrunner
2.54/5  rDev -23.5%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2

A birthday beer!

Dirty sepia pour sits dark brown in my glass. Creamy beige head settles down into a thick layer of retention that eases down to glass bottom and leaves a wide sheet of lace.

Caramel sweetness, bread crust and citrus hops make up the majority of the aroma. There's a very slight note of apple cider vinegar funk from the Brett but not nearly enough for the style.

Tastes like mildy apple juice influenced crystal malts, nutmeg, dark break and general "malt" flavor. Alcoholic warmth carried along with the citrus hop blast. So lacking in brett character it tastes more like a mediocre imperial red than anything else.

I'm not a stickler for style at all so I'm not saying a Flanders red with an obvious citrus hop character and very little funk is wrong. It's not just not thing.

Like James Taylor, it needs more funk. (841 characters)

Photo of Overlord
2.56/5  rDev -22.9%
look: 3.5 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Pours a light brownish red. Some bubbles ... no real head, just some bubbling crust.

Smells like rotten cherries with wood. Hmm...not very pleasant.

Taste is all over the place. The wood notes are not well integrated, almost like wood chips were still in there, and the cherries feel fake and almost ... rotting. Hmm...

Not particularly pleasant to the tongue either: needs more carbonation. (394 characters)

Photo of srhoadsy
2.65/5  rDev -20.2%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

Poured chilled into a tulip.

Poured a murky brown with about a quarter inch, tan head that quickly faded.

Had an aroma of malt, sour apples and a deep earthy, mineral quality to it.

Taste mirrored the aroma.

The mouthfeel started out fairly crisp but then flattens out.

Overall, not a great effort from two decent breweries. Add a little more carbonation and make it a little drier and you've got yourself a great beer. (427 characters)

Photo of brewcrew76
2.65/5  rDev -20.2%
look: 3 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2.5

A - Murky amber brown with a fluffy tan head.

S - Very ipa like. Caramel sweetness with piney and citrus hops. Toasty oak with hints of vanilla. Smells like a barrel aged ipa.

T - Mostly sweet caramel and heavy oak followed by a punch of citrus and piney hops. Some funk is noticeable but the hops drown it out, especially as it warms. The oak becomes heavier. Like a bad barrel aged ipa.

M - Medium body and slightly harsh. Harsh bitterness mixed with too much oak.

D - Very bad. Not sure if I can finish the 750 by myself. Might be the rare drain pour. (558 characters)

Photo of snaotheus
2.65/5  rDev -20.2%
look: 4 | smell: 4 | taste: 2 | feel: 2.5 | overall: 2

750ml bottle split into a couple large goblets. I'm reviewing the one that had more of the sediment poured into it

Pours a reddish brown, a little muddy, not much head or carbonation, a fair amount of suspended sediment. Smells sour and hoppy.

Taste is not so pleasant. Bitter, dingy, a little sour.

Mouthfeel is flat and a little oily. Overall, I'm not impressed. I'm pretty disappointed. (392 characters)

Photo of stag
2.74/5  rDev -17.5%
look: 4 | smell: 2.5 | taste: 2 | feel: 3 | overall: 4

Drove to a release party to try this beer. Was very excited, because Flanders Reds are some of my favorite beers. This beer, however, is not a Flanders Red. We actually had to check to make sure we had the right beer. Right color, right glass, wrong beer. Super hoppy, a ton of American Oak, tiny bit of Brett dryness, and NO sourness. Very disappointing. Nice beer, definitely would have enjoyed it under different circumstances, but name/style needs to be changed. (466 characters)

Photo of caveman
2.76/5  rDev -16.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 3 | overall: 2.5

Walking in blind. Never heard of this beer. Color and appearance was consistent with a Flanders, more on the brown rather than red side. Had a slight sweet aspect to the aroma. Mouthfeel was a little thin as was the taste. A little astringent on the front and mid palate. I mean an off astringency, for a Flanders ale. There was not the fuller flavors to fill in the spaces between the sour aspects of the style. (412 characters)

Photo of kbutler1
2.76/5  rDev -16.9%
look: 4 | smell: 3 | taste: 2.5 | feel: 4 | overall: 2

Bottle. Had this one in the cellar for quite a while and finally had the chance to open it up. Poured into a NB tulip glass a slightly hazed dark copper color with a light tan head. The aroma is malty with orange, slight booze note as well. Medium mouthfeel. Sweet start with a building level of citrus rind note. This is like a hoppy red with too much bitterness in the end. Laces nicely. Not a big fan of this one. (416 characters)

first ← prev | 1-25 | 26-50 | 51-75  | nextlast
Monstre Rouge from De Proefbrouwerij (bvba Andelot)
77 out of 100 based on 106 ratings.