1. The wait is over! Download the BeerAdvocate app on iTunes or Google Play now.
  2. Get 12 issues / year of BeerAdvocate magazine for only $9.99!

Foster's Lager - Foster's Group Limited

Not Rated.
Foster's LagerFoster's Lager

Displayed for educational use only; do not reuse.

1,554 Ratings

(view ratings)
Ratings: 1,554
Reviews: 569
rAvg: 2.53
pDev: 24.9%
Wants: 9
Gots: 71 | FT: 0
Brewed by:
Foster's Group Limited visit their website

Style | ABV
American Adjunct Lager |  5.00% ABV

Availability: Year-round

Notes/Commercial Description:
No notes at this time.

(Beer added by: kbub6f on 07-10-2001)
Beer: Ratings & Reviews
Sort by:  Usefulness | Recent | High | Low | Top Raters | Read the Alström Bros Beer Reviews and Beer Ratings of Foster's Lager Alström Bros
Ratings: 1,554 | Reviews: 569 | Display Reviews Only:
Photo of crookedhalo
2.33/5  rDev -7.9%

Canadian for beer... Pale straw colored, white lacing. Subtle carbonation. Malt, rice and hops noticable. An off metallic twang to it. Pretty lackluster. But I've put my lips up to worse. It's mostly sweet and finishes with crisp with evidence that the brewers use less than quality hops (kind of musty, not so fresh).

crookedhalo, Jan 08, 2004
Photo of heinekenike
2.2/5  rDev -13%

Well not much to this one, but it doesn't disappoint--meaning that for a macrobrew you could do A LOT worse.

Medium golden color, decent head and a keggy kind of smell.

Regular hoppy taste, with a little bit of a keggy taste too. Nothing spectacular, but if I went to a barbecue I'd much like seeing this beer in the cooler than Coar's Light!

heinekenike, Jan 02, 2004
Photo of CharlesRiver
2.13/5  rDev -15.8%

Poured from a bottle. Light yellow in color with a small head that doesn't last at all. There isn't much of a smell at all. Maybe some corn with a hint of malt. The taste is equally as disappointing. Seems to be very sweet all the way through. Creamy, but not in a good way.I can't pick up any hops what so ever. I can think of many other pale lagers that I would prefer. This beer reminds me a lot of PBR on tap. I wouldn't refuse it on a hot summers day but that is about it.

CharlesRiver, Dec 30, 2003
Photo of francisweizen
3/5  rDev +18.6%

This brew pours a light golden colour with a small white head of foam. The aromas are all light zesty hops, and slight bready malts. The taste is very uncomplex, yet thirst quenching at the same time. The mouthfeel is light in the mouth, and the same as the canned version of this brew. However, For some reason I find the drinkability to be less from the bottled version. Go figure!?

francisweizen, Dec 19, 2003
Photo of Redrover
2.68/5  rDev +5.9%

12 oz brown longneck. One of five mediocre beers served at my company’s annual Christmas Party.

Beer was the standard macro lager color (faded yellow), not a lot of head or lacing.

Beer had a grain aroma. If you strained you could get a bit of hops and some malt, or was that my imagination?

Taste was more on the sweet side as the hops seemed to take most of the night off. No real bad tasting stuff, but no real good taste either. Serviceable enough in a pinch I guess.

Really well carbonated as I’m guessing they want the bubbles to take your mind off the missing flavr.

At one time this was my wife’s favorite brew. I’m glad to say that she now likes IPAs, Hefes, etc. So at least it didn’t turn her off beer for good!

Redrover, Dec 15, 2003
Photo of Rootdog316
2.23/5  rDev -11.9%

I usually like just about any kind of beer out there. But this beer actually proves that the only good alleged thing to come out of Australia really does suck. Even a guy like Dan Grimaldi would not drink crap like this, and he is the kind of guy who would lick beer off of a floor. Very little head, mouthfeel is not so desirable, it kinda pissed me off that I even bought it.

Rootdog316, Dec 09, 2003
Photo of DrunkMcDermott
2.15/5  rDev -15%

Brewed in Canada. I remember this as a beer that gave me a nasty headache the next morning. Not any more. An at least unoffensive odor. Taste is just a bit more malty than in a normal American beer. And I catch a bit of hop in the aftertaste. Had I not found much more interesting brewpub lagers, I might have rated this higher, but now I know better: there's so much more out there, and this is so much less.

DrunkMcDermott, Dec 08, 2003
Photo of ManekiNeko
2.65/5  rDev +4.7%

25.4 oz. oilcan poured into a pint glass.

Appearance: Crystal clear straw color with a healthy and frothy white head. A good layer of foam is left as the glass is emptied and a goodly amount of lacing is left on the glass.

Smell: Grassy and metallic aromas. Mildly hoppy, but just barely.

Taste: Grainy and grassy with a touch of malty sweetness. Some sort of corn aftertaste.

Mouthfeel: Oh so light, oh so crisp, oh so ephemeral. Oh so blase.

Drinkability: I was fully expecting to slam this by saying the only really good thing about this is the manly sized container, but it's not all that bad. Does what a lager ought to do, hit's the right notes and all that rot. Too bad the notes make for Britney Spears when I'm looking for Velvet Underground.

ManekiNeko, Nov 24, 2003
Photo of diablo14
1/5  rDev -60.5%

why am i bothering to review the worst beer in this country next to carlton cold and hahn ice? because for the first time in over 10 years i saw aussies drinking this, at a restaurant i was at last night.

ive always found it amusing that 'foriegners' especially americans, think this is our signature beer considering we rarely drink fosters here. like all other beers carlton are involved with, its no different to anything else they brew, if you can call it brewing. im not even going to describe its qualities, because its just like VB, only worse. i dont know if the breweries that brew it under license internationally do a better job, but here its the epitome of swill. if aussie drinkers wont have it, whats that telling you?

im ashamed that we get lumped with this beer. alas, its deserved on some levels. if aussies in general knew anything about beer we wouldnt allow it. dammit that this is not the case.

diablo14, Nov 15, 2003
Photo of Phyl21ca
2.53/5  rDev 0%

On tap Canadian version - Clear yellow brew with a nice head. usual macro brewery taste of malt/sugar/water. Maybe a tad too much water. This is drinkable but overall a middle of the road lager for hot summer days. I get the feeling this might not even be imported ber bu brewed under license in Canada.

Phyl21ca, Nov 11, 2003
Photo of Gusler
3/5  rDev +18.6%

OK, I know, don’t believe the hype, “Foster’s Australian For Beer”!

The beer pours the archetypal lager golden yellow, the head impressive in size, frothy in texture and a bright white color; the lace forms a nice sealing sheet upon the glass. Nose is prototypical lager crisp, fresh and clean, start is malt laden and somewhat sweet, top is middling in feel. Finish is briskly carbonated, hops apropos to the style, dry aftertaste, but it is a beer when the temperature here in Phoenix hits 110 degrees Fahrenheit or higher taste pretty good, yes better than the “Unnamed Big Three”!

Gusler, Nov 11, 2003
Photo of mwrseeley
2.48/5  rDev -2%

My first review!

Appearance: An average-sized head that dissipated within a few minutes; lacing is average. Not having a colour spectrum for the measurement of beer, I have used a Single Malt Scotch spectrum and would place Foster's hue somewhere between Chardonnay and Sunlight, which is, I would think, quite normal for a pale lager.

Smell: Not much. I wish I could say more.

Taste: Very weak; relatively dry and bitter but not totally devoid of flavour.

Mouthtaste: There really isn't any of which to speak. Carbonated water, mostly but not particularly unpleasant.

Drinkability: It is obvious why most people would like this watery concoction - it has a lot in common with its macrobrewery cousins from North America and might be enjoyable enough with a barbecued hamburger or hot dog. On its own, it offers very little satisfaction, except, perhaps, as a thirst quencher on a sultry summer's day.

mwrseeley, Nov 07, 2003
Photo of Boilermaker88
2.3/5  rDev -9.1%

So I’m on the plane flying to Indianapolis, my son has finally settled down, and my wife asks if I’d like a beer. Sure, I said, what’s available? 1) Miller Lite, 2) Amstel Lite, 3) Heineken, and 4) Fosters. Guess I’ll go with door #4.
Fosters arrived in a 12oz can and poured a clear golden color with a thin fizzy white head that quickly vanished despite the large volume of large bubbles seen racing to the surface. The smell was faintly of grainy malts and some corn. No other aromas could be lured out. The taste was a rather bland blend of grainy malts and grasses with corn. Kinda like a bowl of corn flakes. The feel was light, dry, and seriously carbonated.
Well, meet Australia’s answer to America’s unholy macro trinity. Foster’s is a lifeless brew drank by the exceedingly desperate (me, in this case) or those who think drinking an Aussie macro makes them cool. If Fosters is Australian for beer (as the advert goes), then there are some serious problems in the land Down Under.

Boilermaker88, Nov 06, 2003
Photo of Lafe
3.43/5  rDev +35.6%

Pour this one straight in, and you'll get a crystal clear, pale yellow nectar.

This may be "Australian piss", but for a light lager, it's better than most others. This is Australian for "I'm thirsty, darnit!"

Poured directly into the center of my glass (no side action here) it forms a nice, tight, white head that dissipates in 30 seconds. This beer is an excellent "ice cold, lawnmower" beer. If served under 40F and drunk relatively quickly it is a great thirst-quencher. It has a nice wheat/rice character that is best experienced quickly. This is a dead-of-summer must-have.

Not for snobs, but excellent for what it is, this beer tops its category (light lager).

Lafe, Oct 12, 2003
Photo of RoyalT
2.03/5  rDev -19.8%

Appearance – Thin yellow body with a cheap head that went down quickly.

Smell – The grainy skunk came out in force here.

Taste – The creamy nature of this beer can’t hide the Gummi-Bear sugars and hallow flavors.

Mouthfeel – Flat, watery, and unsubstantial.

Drinkability – The kangaroos are probably spitting this one out. Fosters adds a smooth style to the standard piss formula, but this ale has little else to offer.

RoyalT, Oct 05, 2003
Photo of WVbeergeek
2.3/5  rDev -9.1%

Appearance: Fizzy golden with a nice sized frothy white head with decent scattered patches of lacing. Aroma: Grassy hop character with a mild sweet tone, not bad just clean and decently hopped for most lagers. Taste: A trickle of bitter sweetness here some corn and rice is probably present doesn't seem all grain not a bad hop profile decently bitter for a lager, too bad this is the biggest knockoff of an Australian beer considering it's brewed in Canada. Other than that it finishes clean and unoffensively, take it for what it is a mass produced lager. Mouthfeel: Is thin and artificially carbonated not cloying pretty smooth just uninteresting. Drinkability: As much as you can put down before you can't handle the flavor anymore not filling and doesn't make me yearn for another yet I can't tear it apart.

WVbeergeek, Sep 18, 2003
Photo of Andreji
2.63/5  rDev +4%

Odd lager this is.

Pours an average golden translucent tone with a small fading head and some carbonation.

The smell is soury, sharp and rather wheaty with some hops.

The taste is VERY strange. excessively wheaty, like biting into a piece of bread. Shocking in all regaards, but not very nice.

Glad to get it out of the way, not a beer for 2 times.

Andreji, Sep 12, 2003
Photo of elmocoso
2.45/5  rDev -3.2%

I must have a magic pint glass here at home. Every time i pour a beer with low expectations, I get a big billowy head. This phenomenon held True for this big Can o' Foster's. Big, white and lacy. Hmmm.

The brew was about the color of a nice long piss after a vitamin B shot, but that isn't necessarily putting it down. It was a bold gold. Better than many BMC's out there.

It had an average Lager taste. A little more full bodied, but i am used to light beers, so that might explain the difference. It also had a not-bad graininess/nuttiness that stood out.

I'd still skip it next time.

elmocoso, Sep 04, 2003
Photo of Mark
3.7/5  rDev +46.2%

This is not the first time I have ever had this, but it was all there was today at Suzanne's house. Well banish me to beer hell, it wasn't all that bad. Pale straw color with big white head that settled in to a thin layer of foam that left pretty good lace. Aroma is pretty standard for a lager. Smooth malty taste with a decent hint of bitterness. You know for an import lager you could do a lot worse. I'm not going to seek this one out of course but I won't blow it off if it's available and I don't have many options. Drinkable in a relative sense if you know what I mean.

Mark, Sep 01, 2003
Photo of clvand0
2.55/5  rDev +0.8%

Funny that the commercials promote this as Australian for beer, but it's really not one of the more popular beers in Australia. Anyway. Pours a very average yellow color with a small head that dies off quickly. The aroma is grainy, but not too interesting. The taste is a little watered down and a little grainy as well, so it's not all that enjoyable, but not bad for a macrobrew.

clvand0, Aug 27, 2003
Photo of chilidog
3.35/5  rDev +32.4%

Had one On-tap, where-else, an Outback Steakhouse. It arrived very cold in a frosted mug.I think that put stress on the head for it was thick, but more like thick in spots. Lace was good but not a good read from the mug. carbonation was medium. The straw color and white head matched the somewhat grassy aroma. The taste was crisp, well balance of malt and some hop bitter to round-out the mouthfeel. Not a bad brew, but rather drinkable with a burger or a heavy breaded onion. Good-enough that i'll pick some up for a home bottle taste, nor will I shy away from it out when its available.

chilidog, Aug 17, 2003
Photo of Globetrotter
3/5  rDev +18.6%

I had this served to me on tap in the eatery of Moscow's largest shopping mall. A 400 ml serving came in a 500 ml standard Munich Helles glass. There's something wrong about getting a glass that is not full, but so it goes.

Came out a perfectly decent straw color under a foamy white head with just a touch of contour. The head was a bit larger than I would prefer, but since they had extra space to fill at the top of the glass, it didn't look so bad. The head stuck around a while, and left some perfectly respectable lacing down the glass. The nose was reasonably, pleasantly malty, while the mouth was quite bubbly and light. The taste was as the style would dictate - smooth malt, followed by an ever so light hoppy bite. The aftertaste was the expected combination of hop and malt.

I didn't find this beer objectionable at all. It was a perfectly fine representative of an international macro-brewed pale lager. In other words, utterly average.

Globetrotter, Aug 17, 2003
Photo of beerguy101
2.35/5  rDev -7.1%

Light gold color, large white head. Aroma is grainy and sweet. Light hops and malts. Light tasting lager. Full round Mouthfeel. Good flavor, nice balance. Finish is smooth and clean. Aftertaste is smooth and slightly bitter. That said it still a lager.

beerguy101, Aug 14, 2003
Photo of Beastdog75
2.55/5  rDev +0.8%

I had this one from a 12 oz. bottle instead of the big blue oil can. When I was younger, I always liked the "How to Speak Australian" commericals for Foster's, but like most well promoted beers, the advertisements are usually better than the product itself. Foster's suffers from what I like to call the "Guinness Syndrome." It's still an import, but it doesn't come from where you think it does. All I can say is that Canada must be a good base of operations for these breweries.

Foster's pours a bright yellow gold color, and a decent foamy head forms and dissipated within 45 seconds. The aroma is of corn and grains with some fruity smell. The mouthfeel is thin and is quite fizzy. There is a corny flavor all around with some very mild malt flavor. Moderate bitterness present. The aftertaste is mostly clean, with some continuing corn flavors and some bitter hop fruitiness. No alcoholic warmth to this one.

Other than the corn taste, not much really stands out on this one. Reminds me of Budweiser in a few ways. Label both under the "boring macro" category.

Beastdog75, Aug 06, 2003
Photo of SetarconeX
2.5/5  rDev -1.2%

Not my favorite Lager, but certainly completely drinkable in its own right. This is one of those beers where, if faced with a lousy beer selection, you could probably fall back on it and be alright. Better than most macros, though it seems to have something of a funky aftertaste which prevents me from rating it more highly.

SetarconeX, Aug 05, 2003
Foster's Lager from Foster's Group Limited
60 out of 100 based on 1,554 ratings.