The Impulsive Buy » 5 Rating

REVIEW: Limited Edition Cocoa Chex Mix

Nichol — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 10:00:32 +0000

You darn kids have it sooo easy!

Way back in the day, my sister and I had to a walk half a mile to the local IGA every so often just to buy ourselves some Chex Mix (uphill, both ways, naturally). Sure, that might not seem too daunting, but you must keep in mind that it was snowing or raining or hailing or sleeting or doing one of the other thousands of things precipitation is capable of doing in the Midwest approximately 89 percent of the time.

Also, in those days, we only had two options: cheddar or regular. That’s right. No barbecue, no honey crunch, no turtle shell, and no jalapeño cheddar blend. Even hot and spicy didn’t yet exist. Thank the Chex gods those dark days are over!

We always chose regular for the simple fact that the fine folks at Chex Mix lacked a Doritos-level grasp of the concept of sticky flavor powders. Here’s a hint, Chex: moisture is probably involved in the process.

Chex Mix was a specialty snack for us, fit for only one occasion: Saturday night Nickelodeon. SNICK. Do they still have that? I’m struggling to recall the original line-up. Ren & Stimpy and Are You Afraid of the Dark? were involved. That I’m sure of. It seemed like a repository for all the, at best, questionably appropriate Nickelodeon shows – a miasma of violence, fart jokes, rubber nipple salesmen, kitty litter, Canadian imports, and genuine terror. Truly, it was a thing of beauty.

We made a game of not eating during commercial breaks, which sounds boring, but as a seven year old, resisting the savory allure of Chex Mix for even three solid minutes proved challenging, especially when the whole bag was right there and my parents were all the way at the opposite end of the house watching PBS, completely out of supervisory range.

Times change, though. By the time I hit middle school, SNICK seemed to be rotting away into a non-offensive, semi-palatable mush. Clarissa finally explained it all. Amanda Bynes joined the cast of All That. The great northern imports disappeared entirely. Meanwhile, in the junk food world, Chex Mix blossomed into an array of just barely differing flavors. My approach, by and large, was to ignore all of it, rent old Ren & Stimpy tapes at the local video store until I destroyed them, and make my own flippin’ Chex mix. I was impossibly cool and alternative. Every so often, though, Chex would unveil a new variety capable of cracking my shell of teenage indifference, usually with sugary bits or new pretzel shapes.

Some things don’t change. I am still just that stupidly easy to sway. Limited Edition Cocoa Chex Mix manages to target two of my snack weaknesses with the inclusion of Lucky-Charms-like mini-marshmallows and large cinnamon bun pieces where the rye chips once stood. I couldn’t resist grabbing a bag. This particular mix also comes equipped with cocoa powdery corn Chex, vanilla yogurt rice Chex, and, for better or worse, the same old circle- and window-shaped pretzels which seem to exist nowhere outside the Chex universe.

Normally, the great thing about Chex Mix is, well, the mixing. No handful is complete without a metric ton of salty, spicy coating covering every piece, harmoniously joining a range of ultra-processed grains to create something far greater than the sum of their partially hydrogenated parts. This is the point where Cocoa Chex Mix begins to lose steam. Remember the cheesy Chex Mix from before? Well, even given *cough cough* years (sorry there, I seem to be getting choked up by the dryness of this snack), the fine people at Chex still haven’t quite figured out a way around the powder dilemma.

Every square inch of the mix, from the cinnamon buns to the window panes, comes coated in an ultra-fine layer of excess powder which from the cover picture I assume was only meant for the corn Chex. This powder isn’t especially sweet or exceptionally chocolatey. It’s basically just cocoa powder. The haphazard distribution of the stuff leaves the mix looking like something you’d dig out of the back of a couch, a relic of SNICKs past.

The cinnamon buns are tasty. The marshmallows, marshmallowy. But everything is so, so very dry. In theory, the yogurt rice Chex compensate for this. In practice, there are about five yogurt rice Chex pieces distributed throughout the bag, hopelessly lost in a barren wasteland of corn Chex hell-bent on sucking up all moisture and happiness in the world. If you’re lucky enough to scoop up a handful with one of the rare yogurty rice pieces, you’ll be amazed. Once you add those guys in, the mix truly begins to shine. But in all likelihood, particularly if you’re sharing the bag, you’ll never really experience the dazzling effect of the full flavor array. My advice to you in that case is to steal all the cinnamon buns while your Chex eating buddy isn’t looking. Insist that, like the rice Chex, the cinnamon buns were woefully scarce from the beginning.

As a treat for those determined enough to make it all the way to the bottom of the bag (or unobservant enough to open the bag upside-down), the marshmallows mimic the original Chex’s peanuts in their astonishing ability to cluster and sink to the bottom. They might look scant now, but just wait. Or shake the bag.

Actually, no. In order to experience the best this mix has to offer, just go buy a bag of marshmallows and some cocoa powder. Combine. Shake that. Voila! Cocoa for people who hate liquid! You can thank me later. Now get off my lawn. Blasted whipper snappers!

(Nutrition Facts – 1/2 cup – 120 calories, 30 calories from fat, 3 grams of fat, 1 gram of saturated fat, 0 grams of trans fat, 0 milligrams of cholesterol, 65 milligrams of sodium, 21 grams of carbohydrates, less than 1 gram of fiber, 7 grams of sugar, and 1 gram of protein.)

Other Limited Edition Cocoa Chex Mix reviews:
The Talking Spoon

Item: Limited Edition Cocoa Chex Mix
Price: $2.49
Size: 12 ounces
Purchased at: Fry’s
Rating: 5 out of 10
Pros: Cinnamon buns as delicious as they look in the picture. Early SNICK. Marshmallows are of the kids’ cereal ilk. Yogurt rice Chex are a revelation. Ren & Stimpy. Mix does not actually taste like it came from between two couch cushions.
Cons: Powdery dryness akin to licking salt flats in Death Valley. Contains no chocolate morsels, chips, or chunks. Not overtly sweet. Utter lack of rice chex kills the flavor dream. Are You Afraid of the Dark?-induced nightmares. Marshmallows woefully smaller than their Lucky Charms counterparts. Dumping the mix in milk in a desperate bid for moisture makes the pretzels soggy. The last few seasons of All That.

REVIEW: Domino’s Stuffed Cheesy Bread (Cheese, Spinach & Feta, and Bacon & Jalapeno)

Jasper — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 10:00:13 +0000

It’s a wonderful time for cheese lovers. Cheesy Christmas music is playing everywhere, Cheeseheads can purchase shares of the NFL champion Green Bay Packers, and Domino’s recently introduced their new Stuffed Cheesy Breads. While watching another Packers victory as well as the 60 Minutes segment on Michael Bublé’s Christmas special, my roommates and I decided to make it 3-for-3 on the cheesiness for the day and ordered all three Stuffed Cheesy Breads varieties: Spinach & Feta, Bacon & Jalapeno, and Cheese only.

The Stuffed Cheesy Breads looked like big calzones with garlic and cheese seasoning on top. One order had eight pieces, with each piece weighing in at 140-160 calories. Normally we’d be concerned about such high caloric intake, but since it took us so much energy to sit on the couch in our underwear and watch football that day, we felt completely justified in carbo-loading before the rigorous evening TV lineup. I had expected the orders to come with marinara sauce, and I was disappointed to find out that wasn’t the case. But sometimes life throws you curveballs, and all you can do is roll with the punches and mix your sports metaphors, so we dove right in sans dipping sauces.

Domino’s claims each Stuffed Cheesy Bread contains as much cheese as their medium pizza. The pieces on the ends, then, were akin to the pizza crust, as no cheese was actually inside the two end pieces. The remaining six pieces really were quite cheesy. The gooey mozzarella and cheddar mix on the inside played well with the different texture and taste of the crusty Romano cheese seasoning on the outside. Similarly, the top of the bread had an appropriate amount of crunch, while the inside was soft and doughy (though occasionally too doughy). The bottom of some pieces got to be a bit soggy and grew soggier as we slowly made our way through each Stuffed Cheesy Bread.

The Cheese Only one was fine but quickly became boring, especially in the absence of any dipping sauces. I won’t ever order it again if only because the other two varieties were clearly tastier. The Spinach & Feta Stuffed Cheesy Bread contained a reasonable amount of both titular ingredients, and the sharp, salty tanginess of the feta really shined. I only wish the feta had been spread more evenly throughout the order. The Bacon & Jalapeno one had a hefty amount of both ingredients, and I was pleasantly surprised to find that the bacon came in actual strips and the jalapeños came in whole slices that gave the Cheesy Bread a real spicy heat. I suppose I don’t have any Bacon & Jalapeno-specific complaints, unless you count the fact that Domino’s doesn’t use a tilde in their spelling of jalapeño (in which case, you and I would probably make great friends, but possibly only because you’ve driven away all your other friends with your grammatical nitpicking).

One final thought: This might sound silly to a lot of you, but it kind of bothers me not to know what role these Stuffed Cheesy Breads should play in a meal. Is it a side dish or is it a main dish? Breadsticks are clearly appetizers, but ordering bread stuffed with the cheese of a medium pizza to serve as the appetizer to an actual pizza feels like a convenient semantic loophole for fat people to exploit. (Note: I may be one of these fat people.) If you don’t particularly care about the identity crises of your foods, just go out and get cheesy this December. Take a Lactaid supplement, turn up the Michael Bublé Christmas album, and order a couple Domino’s Stuffed Cheesy Breads.

(Nutrition Facts – Cheese – 140 calories, 6 grams of fat, 3 grams of saturated fat, 420 milligrams of sodium, 16 grams of carbohydrates, 1 gram of fiber, 1 gram of sugar, and 6 grams of protein. Spinach & Feta – 140 calories, 6 grams of fat, 3 grams of saturated fat, 260 milligrams of sodium, 16 grams of carbohydrates, 1 gram of fiber, 1 gram of sugar, and 6 grams of protein. Bacon & Jalapeño – 160 calories, 7 grams of fat, 3.5 grams of saturated fat, 350 milligrams of sodium, 17 grams of carbohydrates, 1 gram of fiber, 1 gram of sugar, and 7 grams of protein.)

Other Domino’s Stuffed Cheesy Bread reviews:
So Good Blog
dillonpapst (YouTube)
Poor Food and Wine

Item: Domino’s Stuffed Cheesy Bread (Cheese, Spinach & Feta, and Bacon & Jalapeno)
Price: $5.99 each
Purchased at: Domino’s
Rating: 5 out of 10 (Cheese Only)
Rating: 7 out of 10 (Spinach & Feta)
Rating: 8 out of 10 (Bacon & Jalapeno)
Pros: Really cheesy. Nice contrast between gooey mozzarella and cheddar on the inside, crusty Romano on the outside. Top of bread has crunch, inside of bread is soft and doughy. Spinach & Feta had good amount of spinach and feta. Bacon & Jalapeno had tons of bacon and jalapeños. Bacon came in strips. Jalapeños came in whole slices, which added some nice heat.
Cons: Bottom of some pieces grew soggy. Two of eight pieces had no cheese inside. Didn’t come with marinara sauce. Cheese Only got boring fast. Feta could have been more evenly spread. Domino’s doesn’t use a tilde when spelling jalapeño. Grammar nitpicking. Semantic loopholes. My roommate is going to be mad when he reads I think Michael Bublé’s music is cheesy.

REVIEW: New Burger King French Fries (2011)

Marvo — Sat, 10 Dec 2011 01:53:00 +0000

Some people love Burger King French fries, I’m not one of them. In fact, I believe it’s the third worst way for a potato to meet its end, right behind getting potato blight and being turned into Pringles.

As I’ve confessed in previous French fry reviews and to Ronald McDonald at knifepoint, I’m a McDonald’s fry guy and think they’re far superior than fries from other major fast food chains. They’re so far ahead of the competition, they’re like Tiger Woods before all the hookers.

Over the past several years, some of the major fast food chain have released new versions of their deep fried potato sticks. Jack in the Box has done it twice, Wendy’s did it last year, and now Burger King has introduced their new French fries.

What’s new about Burger King’s fries? According to the company, they’re thicker, have a better potato flavor, and have 20 percent less sodium than their previous fries. So what they’re basically saying in a press releases’ worth of words is that their old fries sucked. And they’re absolutely correct. They had a weak potato flavor, they weren’t salty enough, and, my goodness, what the hell was up with that starchy coating that made the fries seem a little unnatural.

But Burger King’s old fries are now in the past, joining their old old fries that were available until the mid-1990s. So what about Burger King’s new fries. Are they better than their old fries? Also, are they better than McDonald’s fries?

Well, I’m happy to say Burger King’s new fries are an improvement, but it’s slight. If you liked the flavor of Burger King’s old fries, you’ll enjoy these because they pretty much taste the same and they have the same starchy coating to keep them crispy and hot for longer. The potato flavor is slightly enhanced, but I really was expecting more. And, while having 20 percent less sodium than Burger King’s previous fries helps blood pressure, it doesn’t help with the flavor.

Also while I’m talking about sodium, can someone explain to me how it’s possible for Burger King’s fries to not have much of a salty flavor, even though they have significantly more sodium than McDonald’s fries, which have a wonderful saltiness to them. A small-value serving of Burger King’s new fries has 330 milligrams of sodium, while a small serving of McDonald’s fries has only 160 milligrams. Heck, a large McDonald’s fries has 350 milligrams of sodium. This blows my mind.

Perhaps the most noticeable difference Burger King’s old and new fries is that the new fries are thicker, which obviously makes them appear more substantial than other fast food fries. But I have a problem with Burger King putting their new bigger fries in the same Frypods and sleeves Burger King put their old fries in. Maybe it’s just me, but I feel kind of gypped getting less fries.

Burger King’s new fries are thicker, but are they better than McDonald’s fries? Oh, hell no.

The thing about McDonald’s fries is that they’re addictive, like potato chips. It’s hard to stop eating them. They have a flavor that’s robust enough that it doesn’t need ketchup. When I run out of McDonald’s fries, a part of me feels sad and wishes I had more. These are things I’ve never felt towards Jack in the Box, Wendy’s, or any of the Burger King fries, even these new ones.

But, again, I have to say Burger King’s new fries are an improvement over their old fries. It’s a slight improvement, but it might be enough for me to consider being turned into Burger King fries the fourth worst way for a potato to meet its end, right behind getting blasted into a wall with a potato gun.

(Nutrition Facts – Medium size – 410 calories, 18 grams of fat, 3 grams of saturated fat, 0 grams of trans fat, 0 milligrams of cholesterol, 570 milligrams of sodium, 58 grams of carbohydrates, 0 grams of sugar, and 4 grams of protein.)

Other New Burger King French Fries reviews:
Serious Eats
Grub Grade

Item: New Burger King French Fries (2011)
Price: Part of Whopper Jr. value meal
Size: Medium
Purchased at: Burger King
Rating: 5 out of 10
Pros: Thicker fries. A slightly improved potato flavor. Starchy coating makes the fries crunchy and hot for longer. There’s 20 percent less sodium than Burger King’s previous fries. McDonald’s fries.
Cons: Tastes almost exactly like their old fries. Doesn’t even come close to being as good as McDonald’s fries. Has less sodium, but still much more than McDonald’s fries. Starchy coating makes the fries seem unnatural. Potato blight

REVIEW: Taco Bell Triple Steak Stack

Marvo — Mon, 28 Nov 2011 22:20:17 +0000

You know how you’re not supposed to play with food? Well, how the hell can I contain myself from playing with the Taco Bell Triple Steak Stack? Its flatness makes me want to bust out my die-cast toy planes and turn it into an aircraft carrier called the USS TSS (Triple Steak Stack). Also, because it’s flat and has a light exterior, I want to pretend its Barbie’s waif Russian supermodel friend, Katherina, who likes to go shopping with Barbie during the day, but is a secret KGB spy at night.

The list of ingredients for Taco Bell Triple Steak Stack isn’t very long, although, because I feel sorry for its lack of ingredients, I’m going to try to make it look longer than it really is by using the power of unnecessary words. The Triple Steak Stack contains a triple serving of marinated steak and a triple cheese blend of low moisture part skim mozzarella cheese, pasteurized process Monterey Jack cheese, and American cheese in between a nine-inch bolillo flatbread.

With a limited number of ingredients, I expected Taco Bell’s newest addition to be bland, and it turns out I was correct. Taco Bell’s “improved” steak may be an upgrade over what they used to serve, but it still tastes like cheap meat. How cheap? It tastes like the roast beef and gravy from a 99 cent frozen meal. However, that cheap meat was tender and the triple serving of steak was enough to nicely fill the nine-inch flatbread.

The cheese just lies there like its Jabba the Hut after being choked by Princess Leia and it adds almost nothing to the Triple Steak Stack’s flavor. Speaking of things that don’t have much flavor, the bolillo flatbread was not only quite bland, it was also not sturdy enough to handle the amount of steak in it. The soft, but thick flatbread easily felt apart while I ate it.

If you’re going to eat the Taco Bell Triple Steak Stack, might I suggest asking for extra Taco Bell sauce packets on top of the handful they already give you, because you’re going to need a lot of sauce to cover the taste of the cheap meat and to spread across the nine-inch flatbread. I’d also suggest taking more money than you usually do when visiting Taco Bell. Five bucks will usually get you a full Taco Bell meal, but that same five dollars will get you only one Taco Bell Triple Steak Stack.

Video Review

(Nutrition Facts – 690 calories, 120 calories from fat, 20 grams of fat, 13 grams of saturated fat, 0.5 grams of trans fat, 90 milligrams of cholesterol, 1,950 milligrams of sodium, 59 grams of carbohydrates, 5 grams of fiber, 12 grams of sugar, and 46 grams of protein.)

Other Taco Bell Triple Steak Stack reviews:
Smidview
Grub Grade

Item: Taco Bell Triple Steak Stack
Price: $6.49 ($4.99 at most locations)
Purchased at: Taco Bell
Rating: 5 out of 10
Pros: It’s long. Lots of tender marinated steak. Awesome source of protein. Makes me want to play with my food.
Cons: Bland. Pricey. Steak tastes cheap. Cheese and flatbread bring very little flavor. Going to need a lot of Taco Bell sauce packets to give it some flavor. Flatbread not sturdy enough to handle the steak in it.

REVIEW: Kellogg’s Choco Zucaritas/Frosted Flakes Chocolate

Drew — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 10:00:00 +0000

Hola, mi amigos! Como estas? Esta es la Compra Impulsiva, y hoy–

Ah, dammit… sorry, I was looking at the wrong side of the box. As it happens, the package of Frosted Flakes Chocolate I picked up has English on one side; but instead of a maze or outlandish claims about being healthy for you on the back, we’re treated to a mirror image of the front except the product name is now “Choco Zucaritas.” (Es nuevo!) Interestingly, the top and bottom of the box only use the Spanish name, and that’s what’s shown above the nutritional information on the side, so I guess it’s primarily targeted at Spanish speakers? Either way, I applaud Kellogg’s for reaching out to the Latino community, despite it serving as another painful reminder that when choosing a second language in school, I picked French instead of one that might conceivably be useful to me someday. That’s okay — I’ll be the one laughing when Canada finally invades, ya hosers.

But let’s get serious for a second: we’re talking about a product that on the surface sounds… well, fantastic. Awe-inspiring. God’s own breakfast cereal, one might reasonably speculate. I’ve sampled plenty of cereals in my day, but I always find my way back to Frosted Flakes in the end, because it’s one of the best. Which begs the question: can you improve upon the best? True innovators always think so, and Kellogg’s has given it a shot by adding a chocolate coating to the classic sugared flakes. You might consider that overkill — can your palate really handle frosting AND chocolate at the same time? — but it’s that kind of thinking that could have deprived the world of Peanut Butter Cups, so I’m prepared to give this a shot.

Opening the package immediately wafts a strong chocolate scent into your nostrils. I wondered for half a second why it smelled so familiar before realizing it’s the identical aroma given off by Cocoa Krispies. Promising, and a look at the flakes doesn’t change that assessment, though it is a little surprising. I think I was expecting flakes that were entirely chocolate, but that’s not what these are. Nor are they regular flakes with just a slight dusting of chocolate on them. It’s a little hard to describe, but basically they look like Frosted Flakes that are in the process of converting to chocolate, like you caught them mid-transformation or something. Remember in The Monster Squad when that cop shot Dracula, and they found him stuck halfway between human and bat forms? It’s like that. Also, don’t think about that scene before you eat these, it’s gross.

Unfortunately, if the smell and the appearance of Frosted Flakes Chocolate are like the first 1:18 of “The Final Countdown,” the taste is the remaining three minutes and fifty-two seconds, where even Europe fans pack up their stuff and head for the exits. I don’t know what it is, but for some reason the two flavors of frosting and chocolate don’t mesh well together. It’s just too much, and I’m a guy who never shies away from the most cavity-inducing option. For the first second or two they taste fine, but then it’s almost like a time delay kicks in and both the sugar and chocolate flavors burst onto the scene at once. And like every pair of cops ever depicted on TV or in the movies, they don’t play well together.

It highlights the danger of going in with such high expectations, I guess, because it’s not like Frosted Flakes Chocolate are terrible. They’re chocolatey, they’re sugary, they stay crunchy for the same length of time as the regular variety. We’re all familiar with gimmick cereals and I guess I hoped these would be different, because chocolate + frosting = win, right? But it’s like listening to two talented rappers battling, only instead of taking turns they’re both going at the same time, so everything sounds like, “Yo, your girlfriend your momma came over last really knows how to WORK that pole my rhymes are dope, you got no hope to cope, you’re a joke and my ASS, bitch.” Then they both drop their microphones at once and you go deaf.

Or, as Antonio el Tigre would say: No son gr-r-randes!

(Nutrition Facts — 1 cup — 110 calories, 10 calories from fat, 1 gram of total fat, 1 gram of saturated fat, 0 grams of trans fat, 0 milligrams of cholesterol, 135 milligrams of sodium, 45 milligrams of potassium, 26 grams of total carbohydrates, 1 gram of dietary fiber, 12 grams of sugars, 13 grams of other carbohydrates, and 1 gram of protein.)

Other Kellogg’s Choco Zucaritas reviews:
Grub Grade

Item: Kellogg’s Choco Zucaritas… I mean, Frosted Flakes Chocolate
Price: $2.93
Size: 18 ounces
Purchased at: Walmart
Rating: 5 out of 10
Pros: Learning Spanish while I eat breakfast. Smells just like Cocoa Krispies. The Monster Squad. Satisfying your curiosity. Peanut butter cups. The first 1:18 of “The Final Countdown.” Both individual tastes are good.
Cons: Chocolate and frosting tastes do not mesh well. That much hype is a lot to live up to, and it doesn’t. Choosing French in school. Simultaneous rap battles. My rhymes. No son grandes.

VIDEO REVIEW: Mentos UP2U Gum (Mandarin Strawberry/Spearmint and Berry Watermelon/Fresh Mint)

Marvo — Tue, 08 Nov 2011 10:00:00 +0000

For this video review, I tried the two Mentos UP2U gum varieties Jeff didn’t review in his review. To be honest, at under five minutes, it ended up being a lot longer than I wanted. Anyhoo, enjoy.

Subscribe on iTunes. And while you’re there feel free to rate us and/or leave a comment.

REVIEW: Smart Ones Satisfying Selections (Chicken with Broccoli & Cheese and Chicken & Broccoli Alfredo)

Stephanie — Fri, 28 Oct 2011 10:00:49 +0000

You have me playing a dangerous game, dear readers. A dangerous game, indeed. Preparing these particular bagged, frozen meals in the office microwave is not a feat to be taken lightly. You know that of which I speak. The horrible, pungent odor of steamed broccoli is not the first thing hungry, cranky co-workers want to encounter while trying to salvage a few minutes of their lunch break in their soulless cubicles. What is the deal with this vegetable? Why does it stink so much? I hate to admit it, but maybe George H.W. Bush was onto something. The risk of committing a terrible olfactory crime is great when cooking these broccoli-laden meals. And I’ve had to do it twice. Good thing the meals themselves came out all right.

The Smart Ones Satisfying Selections line includes several hearty meals, including the delicious Chicken with Broccoli & Cheese and the decent Chicken & Broccoli Alfredo. The main question any curious shopper will ask is if the meals live up to the promise so boldly stated on the packaging: Are these selections satisfying?

These new Satisfying Selections do in fact come in larger portions than regular Smart Ones frozen entrees. For comparison’s sake, the Smart Ones Classic Creamy Rigatoni with Broccoli & Chicken comes in a 9-ounce package, while the Satisfying Selections Chicken & Broccoli Alfredo tips the scales at 11.7 ounces. That’s a pretty good start.

The flavor of these two Satisfying Selections and their overall ability to satisfy my ravenous lunchtime hunger would be the real test. Good news for me, the Chicken with Broccoli & Cheese meal was actually pretty darn tasty. There was a lot of rice in the package, but the grains had a nice texture and didn’t come out glue-like and overdone. Also, the chunks of white meat chicken were plentiful and, thankfully, not slimy like chicken chunks tend to be in these types of meals. The broccoli was, well… like your typical broccoli, but astonishingly, the specially-designed microwave steamer packaging seemed to contain the offending aroma of cooked broccoli to the extent that I couldn’t smell a thing. Alas, I would escape the wrath of my murderous office associates and live to microwave lunch another day. Last but not least, the cheesiness of the Chicken with Broccoli & Cheese meal is very nice. It’s mixed with a light and creamy cheese sauce. Subtle, but delicious.

Unfortunately, the same can’t be said of the Alfredo sauce on the Chicken & Broccoli Alfredo. It’s sort of globbed on there, muting the peppery seasoning on the chicken breast. On the other hand, the broccoli is almost perfectly steamed, and the rotini pasta actually comes out al dente rather than limp and soggy. The Chicken & Broccoli Alfredo is a little blander than the Chicken with Broccoli & Cheese. Not its fault, of course. I mean, as far as I’m concerned, Alfredo sauce is involved in a perpetual uphill battle against plain old (delicious) cheese sauce. I say, there is a time and place for butter and a time and place for cheese, and right here, right now, dear readers, it’s cheese time.

So, it looks like my risk-taking did not go unrewarded. I was able to enjoy two lunches without creating a malodorous catastrophe in my office space, and yes, they were satisfying. Appetite-wise at least. My fellow drones couldn’t be happier.

(Nutrition Facts – 1 meal – Chicken with Broccoli & Cheese — 340 calories, 8 grams of fat, 4 grams of saturated fat, 0 grams of trans fat, 1 gram of polyunsaturated fat, 2 grams of monounsaturated fat, 65 milligrams of cholesterol, 730 milligrams of sodium, 37 grams of carbohydrates, 6 grams of sugar, 3 grams of fiber, and 31 grams of protein. Chicken & Broccoli Alfredo — 300 calories, 4 grams of fat, 2 grams of saturated fat, 0 grams of trans fat, 0.5 gram of polyunsaturated fat, 1 grams of monounsaturated fat, 50 milligrams of cholesterol, 660 milligrams of sodium, 39 grams of carbohydrates, 3 grams of sugar, 4 grams of fiber, and 28 grams of protein.)

Item: Smart Ones Satisfying Selections (Chicken with Broccoli & Cheese and Chicken & Broccoli Alfredo)
Price: $2.94 (on sale)
Size: 11.7 ounces
Purchased at: Target
Rating: 8 out of 10 (Chicken with Broccoli & Cheese)
Rating: 5 out of 10 (Chicken & Broccoli Alfredo)
Pros: Satisfyingly big portions. Cheese Time. Living to microwave lunch another day. Not having to eat anymore broccoli because you’re the goddamn President of the United States.
Cons: Globby Alfredo sauce. Tempting fate by cooking broccoli in an office full of ravenous cubicle jockeys. Broccoli stench. Eating lunch in the office.

REVIEW: Cap’n Crunch’s Halloween Crunch

Drew — Thu, 27 Oct 2011 10:00:20 +0000

The largest pumpkin ever grown weighed in at over 1,800 pounds.

There’s a popular theory you’ve probably heard, that humans only use 10 percent of our brains; and if we could only tap the remaining 90 percent, we could do all kinds of crazy shit with our minds, like start fires and levitate objects and figure out why some people find Fergie attractive. In reality, it’s bogus- not the Fergie part (some people actually do… carnies, I suspect), but about the brain. You use 100 percent of your brain, same as I do.

I bring it up because it means that if I’m using all of my brain, then every time I learn something new, I forget something I already know. Don’t argue, that’s science. And thanks to the random factoids from the back of Cap’n Crunch’s seasonal Halloween Crunch, which I’ll be sprinkling throughout this review — and because God knows my brain won’t jettison crucial information like the lyrics to Denver the Last Dinosaur, or the names of the ghosts from Pac-Man (Inky, Blinky, Pinky and Clyde, or Sue for Ms. Pac-Man) — I now don’t remember trigonometry, the date of the Gettysburg Address, or the middle names, technically, of both of my children. (I want to say Alison and… John? Wait, is one of them a boy?)

Jack O’ Lanterns originally consisted of candles placed in hollowed-out turnips to keep away ghosts and spirits.

But to business: Halloween Crunch. The box depicts a cartoon jack o’ lantern with the Cap’n's face carved into it, grinning like he just shivved a Soggy or has a girl waiting for him at the next port. Actually, I have to give props to the design department… they didn’t half-ass it by slapping the word “Halloween!” over a regular box of Cap’n Crunch and calling it a day. No, this is a full-assed production. The font is a kind of eclectic, spooky-ish style, there are demonic-looking pumpkins and eyes all around, the coloring is black and dark green rather than the classic bright red. Really, if not for the Cap’n's distinct face, you could walk by this in a store without having any idea it was related to Cap’n Crunch.

Speaking of which, I know a common complaint of Cap’n Crunch is that it cuts the roof of your mouth. I guess what my dad told me growing up is true and I really AM tougher than everyone else, because I’ve never had that problem. If you do, beware, because the main component of this seasonal variant remains “regular” Cap’n Crunch pieces. They didn’t even change the color, which I would have liked, maybe shifting that classic yellow to a bright pumpkin orange. But since they didn’t, the new pieces are what make the cereal Halloween-y. These additions are pink, slightly larger than the classic pieces, and shaped vaguely like a ghost if you squint, in the same way that a Van Gogh painting of a flower looks like a flower. Some of them are also covered in green speckles, which is almost certainly either mold or an intentional “slime” effect. They’re shown that way on the box, so we’ll assume the latter and just hope the Ghostbusters aren’t feeling particularly litigious.

Seeds that are related to the pumpkin have been found in caves dating back over 7,000 years in Mexico.

But what are the new pieces like? Well, I have this notion in my head that they taste a lot like crunchberries, but I can’t be sure because it’s been about two decades since I last had a crunchberry. They have a tinge of that artificially-fruity-but-not-actually-anything-like-real-fruit flavor. You know the one. And really, it’s just a hint — they definitely don’t overpower the taste of the regular Cap’n Crunch pieces, which is good because frankly that taste is better. Like me in a discussion of current events, the ghost pieces are amiable and pleasant enough without contributing anything of real substance. When the nicest thing I can say about you is that you really do turn the milk green surprisingly quickly, you know you’re destined for the “novelty fad” pile.

I really don’t have much else to say about Halloween Crunch. I’m glad I tried it as a lark, and if you’re a fan of regular Cap’n Crunch, you might as well give it a shot, since it’s fundamentally the same cereal with a cool-looking box and some vaguely fruity ghost pieces. But it’s not going to give the Monster Cereals a run for their money, and the only real activity on the back is a template of the Cap’n's grinning mug that you can use to carve a jack o’ lantern, in case you want your pumpkin looking like it just made a particularly timely “That’s what she said!” remark. Plus the pieces of trivia, of course, but now you already know those. You’re welcome!

Did you know that pumpkins are made up of around 90 percent water?

(Nutrition Facts — 3/4 cup — 100 calories, 15 calories from fat, 1.5 grams of total fat, 1 gram of saturated fat, 0 grams of trans fat, 0 milligrams of cholesterol, 190 milligrams of sodium, 50 milligrams of potassium, 22 grams of total carbohydrates, 1 gram of dietary fiber, 11 grams of sugars, 10 grams of other carbohydrate, and 1 gram of protein.)

Item: Cap’n Crunch’s Halloween Crunch
Price: $2.18
Size: 13 ounces
Purchased at: Walmart
Rating: 5 out of 10
Pros: Using 100 percent of your brain. Bitchin’ box art. Did not cut my mouth. Still tastes as good as standard Cap’n Crunch, with only minor variation. Turns milk green rapidly. Stays crunchy for a while.
Cons: Mostly flash, little substance. Fergie’s grille. New pieces look more like alien blobs than ghosts. Why would I want my jack o’ lantern giving Quaker free advertising? Very little taste deviation from regular Cap’n Crunch.

REVIEW: Mountain Dew 2011 Game Fuel Tropical

Marvo — Wed, 26 Oct 2011 21:17:24 +0000

I’m so ready to get my hardcore gaming on now that I’ve completed my thumb stretching exercises and I have a bottle of the new Mountain Dew Game Fuel Tropical. The 121 milligrams of caffeine in the 20-ounce bottle is enough energy to get me through a few hours of a crazy all-night shooting and carnage marathon.

Mountain Dew brought back their Game Fuel line to help promote the upcoming game Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3. But since it’s currently October and the game doesn’t come out until November, my shooting and carnage marathon consists of playing Angry Birds: Episode 6: Mine and Dine.

The caffeine surging through my body is making me so amped about doing things to wood, ice, and stone that only karate black belts do to demonstrate their skills. And, I’m ready to do things to pigs that only magicians can do — make them disappear in a puff of smoke.

I’m not sure how long it’s going to take for me to conquer every single level, but I imagine I’m going to need every single milligram of caffeine Mountain Dew Game Fuel Tropical provides because Angry Birds is a total time sink and I could easily end up playing for six hours straight and not even notice the sun went down and I skipped two meals.

But who needs meals when I have Mountain Dew Game Fuel Tropical to sustain me. The 290 calories in each 20-ounce bottle is roughly the same amount I can get with a Lean Cuisine meal, so it’s like a meal in a bottle. Sure, it’s what all nutritionists call “empty calories,” but if they’re so empty, why do they make me fat?

The soda’s green color is slightly darker than regular Mountain Dew and its color also makes it look like I can use it to clean my toilet, floors, and countertops, which I wouldn’t recommend, unless you love ants or are curious about what it feels like to be standing in a roach motel, if you use it as a floor cleaner.

The bottle says it has a “charge of tropical flavor,” which, before I drank it, hoped it didn’t mean lime, because that would be super silly since they currently have a lime-flavored Dew with their Taco Bell-exclusive Baja Blast and had a limited edition lime-flavored Dew called Distortion. Well, it turned out to be lime, but not as strong as the other two flavors I mentioned. Its lime flavor was so light that at times, while drinking it, I thought it kind of tasted like regular Mountain Dew. So it’s really not a “charge of tropical flavor,” it’s more like a light petting of tropical flavor.

Mountain Dew Game Fuel Tropical isn’t horrible, but it tastes as if not a lot of effort was put into it. If Mountain Dew put in the same amount of effort I put into completing every Angry Birds level, perhaps they would’ve come up with something better than Mountain Dew Game Fuel Tropical.

(Nutrition Facts – 20 ounces – 290 calories, 0 grams of fat, 110 milligrams of sodium, 77 grams of carbohydrates, 77 grams of sugar, 0 grams of protein.)

Other Mountain Dew 2011 Game Fuel Tropical reviews: 
Drink What
BevReview

Item: Mountain Dew 2011 Game Fuel Tropical
Price: $1.50
Size: 20 ounces
Purchased at: 7-Eleven
Rating: 5 out of 10
Pros: Not horrible. 121 milligrams of caffeine per 20-ounce bottle. Code under the bottle cap can be used to to double XP while playing Call of Duty: MW3. My mad Angry Birds skills.
Cons: Despite its color it’s not good for cleaning floors. Tastes like not a lot of effort was put into the flavor since it tastes similar to others. Doesn’t taste like it contains “a charge of tropical flavor.” Sore thumbs from mashing buttons for hours.

REVIEW: Triple Double Oreo Neapolitan

Marvo — Wed, 19 Oct 2011 11:48:49 +0000

The Triple Double Oreo Neapolitan has been out for a few months, but it only recently showed up at my local Superstore-Behemoth-That-Must-Not-Be-Named. However, I wouldn’t have noticed they carried it if I didn’t have to take a shortcut through the aisle of canned goods, at the end of which I found their stock of these Superstore-Behemoth-That-Must-Not-Be-Named-exclusive cookies.

No, I didn’t find them in the cookie aisle with all the other Oreo varieties. I found them somewhere a person would hide them if they didn’t want anyone to find them. Also, if I was a few inches shorter I may not have noticed them at all because they were on the top most shelf.

Actually, it’s surprising that my local Superstore-Behemoth-That-Must-Not-Be-Named carried it because when it comes to carrying new products, it sucks. For cheap goods, getting bruises from shopping carts being driven by children, and watching people frantically dig through the $5 DVD bin and get excited when they find the movie Double Impact, it’s quite good.

You see, I can walk into a Target and almost always come out with a new product to review. The same can be said about Safeway. But when it comes to the Superstore-Behemoth-That-Must-Not-Be-Named, all I’ve usually come out with is disappointment…and bruised ankles. It’s happened so much that I decided to give my disappointment a name — Blue Balls.

But after finally ending up at my local Superstore-Behemoth-That-Must-Not-Be-Named and trying the Triple Double Oreo Neapolitan, I have to say perhaps they were located at the end of the canned goods aisle because they’re not that great.

The Triple Double Oreo Neapolitan uses three crunchy Golden Oreo cookies and in between those are a layer of strawberry creme filling and a layer of chocolate creme filling. The color scheme looks like they would make an ugly pair of knee high argyle socks, but as a creme sandwich cookie, it’s not bad looking.

The issue I have with the Triple Double Oreo Neapolitan is that the strawberry creme’s flavor overwhelms the chocolate creme. It’s as if the strawberry creme is a Superstore-Behemoth-That-Must-Not-Be-Named and the chocolate creme is an unsupervised child who gets lost in the Superstore-Behemoth-That-Must-Not-Be-Named. Having what is basically a strawberries and creme Oreo is fine and it’s good, but the chocolate creme needed to stand out more in order for the cookie as a whole to stand out.

Overall, the Triple Double Oreo Neapolitan may not be Blue Balls-disappointing, but they are a letdown.

(Nutrition Facts – 1 cookie – 110 calories, 40 calories from fat, 4.5 grams of fat, 1.5 grams of saturated fat, 0 grams of trans fat, 1 gram of polyunsaturated fat, 2.5 grams of monounsaturated fat, 0 milligrams of cholesterol, 65 milligrams of sodium, 15 milligrams of potassium, 15 grams of carbohydrates, 0 grams of fiber, 8 grams of sugar, less than 1 gram of protein and 2% iron.)

Other Triple Double Oreo Neapolitan reviews:
Grub Grade
Fat Guy Food Blog

Item: Triple Double Oreo Neapolitan
Price: $3.48
Size: 13.1 ounces
Purchased at: Superstore-Behemoth-That-Must-Not-Be-Named
Rating: 5 out of 10
Pros: Crunchy Golden Oreo cookies. Three cookies and two different cremes. Finally, finding something somewhat new at the Superstore-Behemoth-That-Must-Not-Be-Named.
Cons: Disappointing. Strawberry creme overwhelms the cookie. Chocolate creme flavor is non-existent. One cookie has 110 calories. Parents who let their children drive shopping carts. My local Superstore-Behemoth-That-Must-Not-Be-Named not getting it sooner. Getting lost in a store.

VIDEO REVIEW: Wildlicious Frosted Wild! Strawberry Pop-Tarts

Marvo — Thu, 08 Sep 2011 09:10:34 +0000

Yes, another Pop-Tarts review, but this time it’s in video form.

This is our 24th Pop-Tarts review and it’s also TIB’s 1,000th review overall.

WOO HOO!

I’d like to thank TIB’s past and present writers, who have helped this quasi-product review blog achieve this milestone. But we wouldn’t have reached this milestone if it weren’t for all of you who read our words (and watch our occasional videos). Because, seriously, if no one read this blog, I would’ve allowed it to join the millions of dead blogs floating around on the internet.

So sit back, relax, and enjoy TIB’s 1,000th review.

Notes:

Dave Matthews image via Flickr user Spector1 / CC BY SA 2.0

Strawberries image via Flickr user coolmikeol / CC BY 2.0

Raisins image via Flickr user bastique / CC BY SA 2.0

Raw meat image via Flickr user VirtualErn / CC BY 2.0

REVIEW: Land O’Lakes Cinnamon Sugar Butter Spread

Nichol — Thu, 25 Aug 2011 10:00:10 +0000

During college, one of my best friends developed a loaf-a-week cinnamon toast habit. It got to the point where she’d leave a softened stick of butter at the ready in the cabinet with the cups and bowls, and a dish of pre-mixed cinnamon sugar out on the kitchen counter the way some people seem to leave out plates of cocaine. When I first got wind of Land O’Lakes’ new Cinnamon Sugar Butter Spread, I immediately thought of her, and wondered if the current residents of our old apartment ever question the inexplicable gritty texture of every surface in their kitchen.

I then also wondered if that poor kitchen still reeks of rotting potato, but that’s a whole other story which I’d rather not relive except to say: Always know the age and quantity of your stockpile of spuds, kids. The consequences of careless potato storage are dire and long lasting. Your friends may never visit again.

But enough with that PSA. Cue the little shooting star icon. Back to the sweet, sweet wonders of butter with bonus goodies.

My first experience with the concept came with homemade honey butter. I loved that shit as a kid. One day, in one of those bowls o’ condiments provided with the complimentary bread at some restaurant, I found a pre-combined version. Gleefully tearing into the little packet I discovered it to be full of disappointment. Bland, overly blended, and too heavy on the butter, it just wasn’t the melty sweet punch I’d fallen in love with. When the same kid, who tried to eat the fake toast in her Fisher Price kitchen years after it could be written off as an age-appropriate mistake, denounces your attempt at something as simple as honey butter, you know you have failed.

I like to envision foods like honey and butter existing perpetually as couples in hopelessly failing culinary marriages. They’d really like to stay together for their consumers, but to do that they need the help of a marriage counselor of sorts in form of some type of weird additive. Unfortunately, more often than not, either that additive is an awful counselor or they find they hate each other so much it ceases to matter, resulting in an inferior product. You can almost taste the contempt.

However, when you, the consumer, bring those same items together for just the brief time it takes to devour them, they sometimes magically rediscover what brought them together in the first place. It’s a child’s depressing little dream come true. For one brief moment they’re happy, nostalgic, and delicious. Everyone is laughing. If we were to give it five more minutes, maybe tack a prologue onto those credits, however, honey would inevitably bring up butter’s affair with apples, sending them back to square one. I worried that would be the case with the Cinnamon Sugar Butter Spread – more fit for Lifetime than for the Disney Channel.

Luckily, as you probably noticed in the initial news blurb on this site, Land O’Lakes managed to keep the ingredient list short (and sweet), offering us a relatively simple amalgam of cream, sugar, canola oil, water, cinnamon, salt, and citric acid. What the tiny print on the back of the package reveals, however, is that this stuff is 19% canola oil – enough to cancel out any of the meager calcium benefits of regular butter consumption while creating a product that melts more smoothly and easily than the most genetically modified margarine commercially available today. It would seem that Land O’Lakes has attempted to achieve ingredient harmony by giving up completely and suspending everything in oil.

The spread itself has a color that’s almost similar to peanut butter. It also has a comparable texture when pulled right out of the refrigerator. Apply it to a room temperature item, though, and the canola oil kicks in. The butter instantly melts down to a spreadable level without being absorbed into the bread (or blueberry bagel or oatmeal cookie if you’re me and trying to be thorough with your sampling). Seriously, it’s like grabbing mercury. I hadn’t had butter that wasn’t in stick form in probably three or four years, so this completely astounded me. What wonders will they think of next? Wireless internet? Pre-sliced frozen pizza?? Individual Kool-Aid packets??? Baffling technology, the lot of it.

If you just eat a dab of the stuff, it’s almost like consuming pure cinnamon bark which has inexplicably melted. It wasn’t nearly as sweet as I expected. In fact, pretty much everything else plays second fiddle. The forgotten background butter flavor only really came through on the bagel. On the toast? So much non-stop cinnamon action! So little anything else. And the oatmeal raisin cookie? In hindsight, I should’ve cinna-buttered a snickerdoodle instead, for maximum redundancy. I will say this for the cookie, though: it was only the contender to tone down the borderline overwhelming cinnamon assault, and it did so with dazzling oatmeally bravado.

Luckily, I’m a cinnamon fan. Hell, I’m drinking Cinnabon coffee creamer right now. In my coffee. I haven’t broken down and started downing the stuff on its own. Yet. If you’re not a cinnamon fan, well, honestly, why would you buy this in the first place? Just know this stuff is for the hardcore cinnaficionados. You want cinnamon sugar butter spread? You can’t handle this spread!

Taken for what it is, the Land O’Lakes Cinnamon Sugar Butter Spread is quite tasty, but it’s understandably a bit removed from the homemade version. I guess it all comes down to this: do you prefer your kitchen counters oily or gritty?

(Nutrition Facts – 1 Tbsp – 70 calories, 60 calories from fat, 6 grams of fat, 2.5 grams of saturated fat, 0 grams of trans fat, 10 milligrams of cholesterol, 30 milligrams of sodium, 4 grams of carbohydrates, 0 gram of fiber, 4 grams of sugar, 0 grams of protein, and 2% Vitamin A.)

Item: Land O’Lakes Cinnamon Sugar Butter Spread
Price: $2.79
Size: 6.5 oz
Purchased at: Albertson’s
Rating: 5 out of 10
Pros: Bursting with cinnamon. “The more you know” PSAs. Not held together by additive whack jobs. Wireless internet. Pre-sliced frozen pizza. Honey on butter. Gave me an excuse to butter a cookie. Oatmeally bravado. Great on bagels.
Cons: Easy to forget it’s technically a butter product. Honey butter packets of indeterminate age. Rotting potatoes. It’s mostly just canola oil. Might be too extreme for medium-core cinnamon enthusiasts. Reaching for a glass in the cabinet and grabbing butter. Sugar has almost completely bowed out of this marriage of convenience.

REVIEW: Subway Oven Crisp Chicken Sub

Marvo — Tue, 16 Aug 2011 22:36:34 +0000

Yes. No. Yes.

Those are the answers to the following questions about Subway’s new Oven Crisp Chicken sub.

Are they really prepared in an oven? Yes, the pieces of breaded chicken are heated up in Subway’s proprietary toasting oven (yes, the same one they toast the bread in).

Are the breaded oven baked chicken pieces crispy? No, they are not at all crispy.

Are they using real pieces of chicken? Yes, they are real pieces of chicken. Although, after eating them, some might disagree.

Preparing the Subway Oven Crisp Chicken sub looks like it’s a pain in the ass for the Sandwich Artists behind the counter. I ordered a footlong on Italian bread with honey mustard sauce, lettuce, tomatoes, and cucumbers, and while it sounds like a simple sandwich, it sure took awhile to make. The guy who made my sandwich had to stick the two pieces of chicken in their super-duper proprietary toasting oven for what seemed to be a long time when you have a slowly growing line of people wanting you to make a sandwich for them.

But all that time spent in an oven that, to be honest, doesn’t even do a good job of toasting bread, didn’t help with making the exterior of the chicken crispy. I couldn’t hear or feel any crispiness. Oh, the sandwich did have a little crunchiness, but that was thanks to the lettuce and cucumbers I put in it and definitely not the chicken.

If you look closely at one of the pieces of chicken in this sandwich, it looks like there are some herbs in the breading. However, whatever flavor is in the breading, it easily gets lost if you add any condiment. Even a bite of chicken, sans honey mustard sauce, had very little flavor. Along with not having much flavor, the chicken is also a bit dry, which is actually par for the course when it comes to any Subway chicken sandwich.

Overall, I think the Subway Oven Crisp Chicken sub is slightly better tasting than Subway’s Oven Roasted Chicken. Although, to be honest, that’s not saying much since I don’t think too highly of the Oven Roasted Chicken sub.

(Nutrition Facts – 6-inch sub – 420 calories, 60 calories from fat, 6.7 grams of fat, 1.5 grams of saturated fat, 0 grams of trans fat, 30 milligrams of cholesterol, 940 milligrams of sodium, 67 grams of carbohydrates, 7 grams of fiber, 13 grams of sugar, and 23 grams of protein.)

Other Subway Oven Crisp Chicken reviews:
Grub Grade
Hungry Thirsty Guy

Item: Subway Oven Crisp Chicken Sub
Price: $7.00
Size: Footlong
Purchased at: Subway
Rating: 5 out of 10
Pros: It’s new. Slightly better than the Subway Oven Roasted Chicken sub. The bread is making my bones strong.
Cons: It takes awhile to make. Not crispy. Chicken didn’t have much flavor. Subway’s proprietary ovens can’t make chicken or bread crispy. Vegetables provided all the sandwich’s crunchiness.

REVIEW: Fiber One 90 Calorie Brownies (Chocolate Peanut Butter and Chocolate Fudge)

Drew — Wed, 20 Jul 2011 10:00:10 +0000

Oh, Fiber One Brownies – how do I love thee? Let me count the ways:

…

…..

Let’s start over. It was the best of brownies; it was the worst of brownies. Well, actually not so much “best”…

…..

Fiber One Brownies, I love you true; you keep me thin, you make me–

Hmm.

You know, sometimes a clever intro just isn’t happening. (Some would argue that for me they NEVER happen.) Let’s just move on.

As past reviews will attest, I’m generally not very good about what I eat. Way too much soda, red meat, and sugary products, and not nearly enough stuff that is statistically less hazardous for you than rat poison. Fiber One Brownies are an attempt at a compromise, finding something that won’t kill me and might actually make me healthier without requiring the slightest change in diet. Because I’m an American, dammit, and if you think I’m not eating what I want when I want, you can get the hell back to Russia, commie. Some of you may consider that jingoistic, but ask yourselves this: where’s my scotch? Come on, scotch, you and I need to get this review done by toml;djknsado;aodnj

While the idea of a low-calorie dessert that also tastes awesome is obviously going to appeal to everyone, I think most of us are rightly skeptical of such products, as 9 times out of 10 they taste like urinal cakes rather than the thing they’re trying to emulate. So I went in with understandable trepidation, yet also hopes that this would be the product to reverse the trend. Visually they look okay — kind of small, but for 90 calories you’re probably not expecting a massive brick of chocolate. But in terms of taste? Put it this way: I’m halfway through each box, and I’ll let you know when I get to a good one.

I think “moist” is an adjective most people would use to describe their ideal brownies and towelettes, and it’s also the last word you’d use in reference to Fiber One Brownies. “Like they mixed coffee grounds in with the recipe” would be a more apt descriptor. They’re basically the dessert equivalent of the saltine challenge. You just might be able to eat six in a minute, but if they don’t dehydrate your mouth, they’ll be dehydrating you in an entirely different way in the near future. If you don’t know what I’m talking about, that means you should definitely try it. Let me know how that works out.

The peanut butter ones do carry a peanut butter taste, but it seems to coexist alongside the chocolate instead of melding together. It’s like a gentrified country club that reluctantly agrees to allow minorities in, but then refuses to talk to them and pretends they aren’t there. And yes, I just compared peanut butter to racist WASPs, which should tell you just how uninspired this peanut butter is. And how very, very far I’ll go to stretch a metaphor.

The chocolate fudge variety is slightly better just by virtue of not trying to mix together two flavors that seem bound and determined to fight each other. There’s just a hint of fudge flavor underlying the chocolate, which I don’t blame them for because for 90 calories, I had assumed one of the packaging machines was operated by a guy who once heard about fudge from a friend. It’s a bit less dry than the peanut butter kind, though actually using the word “moist” on the back of the package is still an exaggeration gross enough to merit at least three lawsuits. Still, I suppose if you’ve only got 90 calories left to spare for lunch and you work at one of those places that frowns on drinking light beer at your desk, there are worse options out there. Not many, but some.

Between this review and Stephanie’s shit fit from the other day, it may seem like we’re beating up on Fiber One lately. But really, it’s their own fault for sucking. Sure it’s impressive that the products are so low calorie and will probably induce you to lose at least half of that, but if they taste bad, I can just eat celery and not pretend I’m getting dessert out of it. I suppose these are useful for people who are mentally hung up on the idea of needing dessert but don’t have the calories to spare, but everyone else can safely take a pass. Your colon may not thank you, but your taste buds will.

(Nutrition Facts – 1 brownie – Chocolate Peanut Butter Brownie – 90 calories, 30 calories from fat, 3 grams of total fat, 1.5 grams of saturated fat, 0 grams of trans fat, 0 milligrams of cholesterol, 110 milligrams of sodium, 17 grams of total carbohydrates, 5 grams of dietary fiber, 7 grams of sugars, and 1 gram of protein. Chocolate Fudge Brownie – 90 calories, 25 calories from fat, 3 grams of total fat, 1.5 grams of saturated fat, 0 grams of trans fat, 0 milligrams of cholesterol, 100 milligrams of sodium, 18 grams of total carbohydrates, 5 grams of dietary fiber, 8 grams of sugars, and 1 gram of protein.)

Other Fiber One 90 Calorie Brownies reviews:
Foodette Reviews

Item: Fiber One 90 Calorie Brownies (Chocolate Peanut Butter and Chocolate Fudge)
Price: 2 for $5.00 (on sale)
Size: 6 brownies
Purchased at: Giant
Rating: 4 out of 10 (Chocolate Peanut Butter Brownie)
Rating: 5 out of 10 (Chocolate Fudge Brownie)
Pros: Low calorie. Small, so easy to transport. Visually acceptable. Tasty hint of fudge. Cheaper than a colonoscopy.
Cons: Non-clever intros. Coffee ground brownies. Moist as a hot sidewalk in July. Racist peanut butter. Fiber dehydration. Stretching metaphors like a woodchuck stuck in a taffy machine.

REVIEW: Hot Sauce Pringles (Original, Chipotle & Roasted Garlic)

Marvo — Wed, 13 Jul 2011 02:51:46 +0000

When it comes to hot spicy foods, I don’t think I ask for much.

When I put it into my mouth, the capsaicin should cause my face to excessively ooze out four different bodily fluids at the same time: sweat to help cool my face, tears of pain, saliva to help cool my mouth, and snot being cleared from my nasal cavity. It should also make my tongue feel like kittens used it as a scratch post.

And then after it’s been digested and the heat is just a memory, it should make the opposite of my digestive system feel like it’s being cleaned by a bidet that shoots molten lava. The heat should make my rear yell out for Preparation H to help soothe it.

Unfortunately, the limited time only line of Hot Sauce Pringles doesn’t attain the level of heat that makes you feel like you’ve been sucking on Lucifer’s teat or a bottle of Sriracha sauce.

Like the number of hot sauces on a table at a decent Mexican restaurant, the Walmart-exclusive Hot Sauce Pringles come in three varieties: Original, Chipotle, and Roasted Garlic. Since new Pringles flavors are rare, I was extremely excited to find these flavors, so much so that I wanted to celebrate their arrival by stringing them up and then bashing them with a bat until their potato crisp goodness fell to the ground. But since Pringles tend to be fragile, I didn’t raise my bat to any of them.

Original Hot Sauce Pringles had a vinegary smell that reminded me of Ketchup Pringles. This flavor was my favorite of the three, probably because it’s the best tasting and spiciest. Its flavor was a combination of red peppers and vinegar. Its heat doesn’t show itself until a good 7-10 seconds after chewing, which I thought was a little strange.

Chipotle Hot Sauce Pringles was the least spiciest of the three, which I thought was unusual since chipotle is rated somewhere in the lower middle of the Scoville scale. But then again, chipotle isn’t listed in the ingredients. Its flavor starts off tasting somewhat like black pepper and then ending with a smoky flavor. The black pepper flavor was a slight turnoff for me, which also made it my least favorite of the three.

Before trying all three Hot Sauce Pringles flavors, I thought the Roasted Garlic Hot Sauce Pringles would be the least spiciest, but they were slightly less spicy than the Original Hot Sauce Pringles. As for how they taste, there’s definitely a garlic flavor to them and I enjoyed them, but as I ate through the can, I couldn’t help think the flavoring tasted like the powder in a McCormick chili mix packet.

Overall, the line of Hot Sauce Pringles is decent, but I think it would’ve been better if they teamed up with Tabasco to create better tasting flavors. As for spiciness, Pringles is definitely capable of creating a spicy hot flavor, but these limited time only Hot Sauce Pringles failed to impress both ends of my digestive system.

(Nutrition Facts – 1 ounce/approx. 16 crisps – Original – 140 calories, 80 calories from fat, 9 grams of fat, 2.5 grams of saturated fat, 0 grams of trans fat, 0 milligrams of cholesterol, 230 milligrams of sodium, 15 grams of carbohydrates, 1 gram of fiber, 1 gram of sugar, and 1 gram of protein. Chipotle – 150 calories, 80 calories from fat, 9 grams of fat, 2.5 grams of saturated fat, 0 grams of trans fat, 190 milligrams of sodium, 15 grams of carbohydrates, 1 gram of fiber, 1 gram of sugar, and 1 gram of protein. Roasted Garlic – 150 calories, 80 calories from fat, 9 grams of fat, 2.5 grams of saturated fat, 0 grams of trans fat, 200 milligrams of sodium, 15 grams of carbohydrates, 1 gram of fiber, 1 gram of sugar, and 1 gram of protein.)

Other Hot Sauce Pringles reviews:
I Love It Spicy
Review Spew

Item: Hot Sauce Pringles (Original, Chipotle, & Roasted Garlic)
Price: $1.50 each
Size: 6.38 ounces
Purchased at: Walmart
Rating: 7 out of 10 (Original)
Rating: 5 out of 10 (Chipotle)
Rating: 6 out of 10 (Roasted Garlic)
Pros: Original Hot Sauce Pringles was tasty. Roasted Garlic Hot Sauce was good. Trying new Pringles flavors. Comes in SuperStack cans. Sriracha sauce.
Cons: Their spiciness failed to impress both ends of my digestive system. Only available at Walmart. Chipotle Hot Sauce’s black pepper flavor turned me off and was the least spiciest. Oozing four different bodily fluids from my face.