Gimmicks - good or bad?

I'm generally a p^rogressist in like, but when it comes to gastronomy, I'm somewhat of a conservateur, so gimmicks are not muy thing.

OK, when the glasses have been a long-standing tradition like the Kwak (round balled bottom and its wooden holder) or Charles Quint (with four handles), I accept it no problems.

So far, the IPA gimmick has brought nothing to me (I'm not a hop-beer fan) and the beers brought up in wooden berrals (wine or whiskey or others), haven't done anything for me either

 

I dunno, I never had the balls to try it.

 

Sure I can. In some areas of the U.S., Rocky Mountain Oysters are considered a desirable treat, especially pan fried in a cast iron skillet over an open flame. In some areas of Colorado they are easier to find than sea oysters for making an oyster stout.

 

It's an homage if it's tied to something you love, it's gimmicky if it's tied to something you've no interest in. It can be both.

 

Depends on the beer (quality) and how you define a gimmick. I don't see where Tired Hands created the beer as a gimmick - more like they were just doing their business as usual with a catchy, humorous tie-in to the movie that seems to go along with what they do regardless. The article even accurately describes what Tired Hands does - small batches, constant rotation, and it looks to me like they have a pretty quirky sense of humor already.

It's advertising and marketing, I guess, to tie in beers with certain themes. Game of Thrones is the most obvious one - why not capitalize on a hot trend that already exists and cash in for the brewer (and whomever owns the GoT franchise). Potentially it brings in some new customers, but it could risk alienating the "hard core". If the brewery puts out a poor quality beer with some sort of "gimmick" tie in, then shame on them.

The ones that annoy me are the ones where the beer itself might actually be the gimmick with no rhyme nor reason behind the experiment. But again, it's a case of where do you draw the line? I thought Habanero Sculpin had to be a gimmick until I broke down, tried it, and found it's really good. Hell or High Watermelon - not my favorite, but it's a pretty damned good beer rather than a sticky, syrupy mess like some others. I can't remember the stuff I tried that was allegedly licorice based and had some clever tie in, but we both damn near spit it on the floor at a tasting. Some "gimmicks" advance brewing, others take us back a few steps, seems to me. I like my classic styles, but I also like pushing the envelope and find the "hybridization" of styles that results in beers that cross the lines equally enjoyable.

 

I see your point, but I think I disagree. I came to beer from a wine background and one of the appeals of beer is it can be awesome, and fun or a bit silly at the same time. Serious bottles of wine demand serious attention (in the wine geek world at least) and I know people who would look down on me if I cracked a bottle of Petrus and drank it with a delivery pizza...

I do not look forward to the day that beer gets like that. I by no means mean to imply that was your point / desire, but having silly names or kitchy tie ins with geeky movies is fine by me because it keeps beer fun. As long as the beer is well made, I actually want more of this. I would love to see "Slimers Revenge" in the top 20 beers, and I would be a happy camper indeed pounding a 4-pack with a slice of delivery in one hand, and Bill Murray screaming on the TV

 

And since whether or not it's a gimmick is subjective, the gimmick is in the eye of the beholder. One person's gimmick is another's idea of clever.

 

While I understand that hoppy beer in Belgium might not be what it is in the US, in no way is the IPA style a "gimmick." Over-hopping styles like the English IPA or the English Pale Ale might have been a gimmick in 1975 when Anchor did it with Liberty Ale, but it's no longer a gimmick, and the test of time has proven that it is a legitimate set of styles all its own.

Similarly, bourbon barrel-/wine barrel-/spirit barrel-aging might have been a gimmick when Goose Island did it in 1992, but the time has long since passed that it could be considered one anymore. Now, barrel-aging is extremely common and has evolved into a huge subset of beers.

To say that either of these things are gimmicks is to have a very closed off worldview, ignoring the success of these massively popular styles worldwide.

I'm curious: how do you feel about Cantillon's 50n4e or the Lou Pepe series? Both are aged in barrels that formerly held non-beer liquids.

 

No you're right - I'm definitely not suggesting it should be on the same level as wine. And by no means should beers all come in 750 format with names like Civil Disobdience etc. Beer can/should be in a position where things are less serious. But for me personally, GOT/Ghostbusters is a step too far.

 

Agreed the game of thrones felt really cheesy, and then I had one, and it was delicious! As long as the beer is good I am a fan, but I can see how it gets used to sell mediocre beer, and that is damaging in the long run. I imagine that it isn't too far down the road before we see something really lazy just to sell crappy beer.

 

I find humor in a lot of things. I still have a can of Billy beer (Jimmy Carters brother blatantly profiting off his brothers presidency) sitting around that someone gave me when I was 10 years old. But now a days, if it is a good beer, man I don't really care. Brewers gotta have fun to. But if you put out a shit beer and try to get gimmicky to dump it, I have a feeling you will be outed and lose a lot of respect.

 

Well, it seems like of late every brewer wants to join on the IPA bandwagon. At least from the Belgian PoV...

We have had some really hoppy beers for decades if not centuries, but never really heard of these IPA that seems to be constantly in mouths of beer hipsters in the Benelux.

Similarly, the wooden barrel-ageing for beers isn't exactly wide-spread in Belgium (to my knowledge anyways) except in the case of Lambic beers (then it does matter, I'll agre). But I've tasted a few of these barrel-matured beers (namely, the one from Dubuisson >> the Bush brewer), and it was anything but conclusive (positively, I mean). Not only does that make it expensive, but I thought it only brought weirdness in my beer glass)

 

First, I agree with @otispdriftwood:

Second, I think the world of craft beer is big enough that some gimmicks are not going to hurt or help the overall craft beer scene. There are thousands of breweries, each vying to get attention in a booming market, so some gimmicky marketing is bound to happen. I think this sort of marketing is another sign that craft beer has arrived and is now part of the mainstream economy and culture. Gimmicky beers are designed to grab people's attention and if you are focusing your attention on the gimmicks, then they did their job, even if you don't like it. Besides, gimmick beers [however you define that] are still far outnumbered by beers/breweries marketing themselves in more traditional, classic, and distinguished means; but if you're not seeing them then you are allowing yourself to be distracted by the gimmicks.

 

Beers have to be called something; I think naming it after one of your other interests is only natural. With the reputation of Tired Hands I doubt they are relying solely on the Ghostbusters theme to sell their beer.

 

neither good nor bad, kind of irrelevant, most of the time the beer name is just that a name, and when it does bear some resemblance to the name describing it, it is usually kind of gross, that being said, most beers in general that rely on name alone (or reference to some non beer related entity) to sell them are not that good anyway

 

Where do you draw the line between gimmick and honoring something though?

For instance, I have bought one of each of the labels of Dogfish American Beauty because I love the Grateful Dead. I think many at DFH love them too, which is why they made the decision to collab with the band and go even further as to include the fanbase to help with choosing the main ingredient that went in to the beer. Many probably see this beer as a gimmick but I view it as a proper token of appreciation from the guys and gals over at DFH.

 

I guess my point is that just because it's not popular in your part of the world does not mean that it's a gimmick. In the grand scheme of beer, both those things are quite popular.

Sour beers were once gimmicky and weird to most drinkers in the US, but we have now embraced them with open arms. Obviously Belgium has been doing those styles forever. Your issue with hoppy and barrel-aged beers is quite similar to how most Americans once felt about lambic.

 

I think gimmick beers can be fun if a brewery is already capable of making good beer that doesn't rely on gimmicks.
For instance, Dry Dock makes great beers of all sorts but they have "throw shit at a wall" firkins every week that range from fun to grotesque. I think that's a fun way to do things.
When you over-rely on gimmicks, that doesn't seem like a good long-term business plan. Even DFH's experiments are mostly funded by the sales of things like 60 and 90 minute.

 

If I was gonna associate ales with the above list, it would not be with Ghostbusters. Breweries don't much lose my respect over this. The gimmicks are fun to read about, but I ask myself if what's in the bottle something I want to try. That being said, I have to admit, a Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man stout does sound rather tasty.