REVIEW: Lucky Charms Frosted Flakes Cereal

Lucky Charms Frosted Flakes Cereal

If you think Lucky Charms Frosted Flakes Cereal is some kind of epic Marvel/DC-like crossover between General Mills and Kellogg’s, hold your horseshoes, hearts, stars, clovers, blue moons, rainbows, and balloons.

With its blue box, “FROSTED FLAKES” in all caps lettering, and Lucky the Leprechaun sliding down a rainbow, it appears as if the two companies put down their spoons and bowls to come together. But that’s not the case and I imagine pigs will fly, hell will freeze over, and all cockroaches on Earth will die before that ever happens.

Instead, Lucky Charms Frosted Flakes Cereal looks as if Lucky Charms’ marshmallows have been paired with some generic version of Frosted Flakes with a name like Frosty Flakes, Frosting Flakes, Flakes with Frosting, Frosting Coated Flakes, Flakes Frosted, Frosted Corn Flakes, Corn Flakes with Frosting, Frosting Coated Corn Flakes, Corn Flakes Frosted, and I Can’t Believe It’s Corn Flakes with Frosting.

The flakes in this cereal have a different shape, are smaller, less frosted, and less sweet, making them not as good as Kellogg’s version. But the generic-looking frosted corn flakes are sweeter, crunchier, and all-around better tasting than the oat cereal pieces in regular Lucky Charms.

Lucky Charms Frosted Flakes Cereal 2

Now, I’ve said on numerous occasions that Lucky Charms is a favorite. But Lucky Charms Frosted Flakes has made me question that. The new cereal is crunchier, more sweet tooth-satisfying, and it’s helped me realize the magic in Lucky Charms is the ability to make us eat mediocre lightly sweetened oat cereal we would never eat without marshmallows.

Let me put it this way, after experiencing Lucky Charms Frosted Flakes, I wouldn’t buy a box of only Lucky Charms’ oat cereal unless I desperately needed horse feed. But I would buy a box of these generic frosted flakes. They improve the classic cereal and seem to stay crunchy longer in milk than the oat pieces.

But, even though I feel this cereal is better, it’s also kind of a letdown. If there was no such thing as Kellogg’s Frosted Flakes, which, again, is superior, this might’ve been gr-r-reater than gr-r-reat. But since Kellogg’s Frosted Flakes does exist because we aren’t living in Cereal Earth Dimension Y, I know this could’ve been even better.

Some of you might be saying, “Well then, there’s Kellogg’s Frosted Flakes with Marshmallows.” That’s true, but, unfortunately, that suffers from being the opposite of this cereal. Frosted Flakes are great, but the marshmallows are mediocre. Some may say sugar is sugar, but Lucky Charms’ marbits are better for whatever reason. #magic?

Overall, if General Mills decided to do something drastic and make Lucky Charms Frosted Flakes Cereal THE regular Lucky Charms, I’d be all for it.

(Nutrition Facts – 3/4 cup without milk – 120 calories, 5 calories from fat, 0.5 grams of fat, 0 grams of saturated fat, 0 milligrams of cholesterol, 170 milligrams of sodium, 55 milligrams of potassium, 27 grams of carbohydrates, 1 gram of fiber, 10 grams of sugar, 15 grams of other carbohydrates, and 1 gram of protein.)

Purchased Price: $4.57
Size: 20.9 oz. box
Purchased at: Walmart
Rating: 8 out of 10
Pros: Better tasting, sweeter, and crunchier than regular Lucky Charms. Corn flakes seem to maintain their crunchiness better than the oat pieces.
Cons: Not a collaboration between Kellogg’s and General Mills. Using Kellogg’s Frosted Flakes would’ve made this epic. Makes me question how good Lucky Charms is.

REVIEW: Lindt Lindor Limited Edition Red Velvet Truffles

Lindt Lindor Limited Edition Red Velvet Truffles

Like an escape hatch hidden behind a library bookshelf in the 19th medieval literature section, red velvet cake is so much more than it seems. It is what chocolate cake would be if it were recruited as a spy, stealthily dying its natural brown cake a burnt red and shunning its chocolate frosted exterior for a plain, smooth buttercream, possibly even with some cream cheese added in (scandalous!).

But we know that these red dyes and swirly buttercreams are just fancy looks, right? At its heart, red velvet cake is still just a humble, fudgy chocolate cake, and I don’t mess around when it comes to chocolate cake. These little Lindt truffles are no exception: I want nothing short of chocolate, chocolate, chocolate, chocolate…oh yeah, and a dab of buttercream. Bring forth your cocoa-iest, Lindt!

Lindt Lindor Limited Edition Red Velvet Truffles 2

Let us pause to celebrate Lindt’s interactive packaging. Not only does bursting open the bag bring forth smells of sugar and milk chocolate, but the act of unwrapping and beholding one of the white chocolate orbs provides you with a warm bubbly feeling and sense of accomplishment. It’s similar to the sensation of completing all 256 secret levels in Super Mario Brothers, only without golden coins, Luigi, or the need to defeat a spikey-shelled turtle creature with anger problems.

Chomping down, there’s an immediate crackle from the white chocolate shell, which leans more on the “Buttercream” rather than the “Cream Cheese” side of the Frosting Spectrum (very scientific). The insides are smooth and, I’m pleased to discover, taste like actual chocolate.

Sure, there’s some red dye going on, saturated fat out the wazoo, and vegetable oil helping it all hold together, but it graciously doesn’t obstruct from the rich, milk chocolate flavor sustained here. It ends up being about a 30:70 flavor ratio between the white chocolate “buttercream” flavor and milk chocolate fudgy flavor and, while I’m not sure what recipe, ingredient, or Harry Potter magic made this so intensely chocolate-cakey, I approve of it.

Lindt Lindor Limited Edition Red Velvet Truffles 3

Having had far too many dry, crusty red velvet cakes in recent years, I confess I underestimated these truffles. While this isn’t the truffle I expected, it’s unquestionably a delicious one and I will happily finish the bag. They have crisp white chocolate, fudgy insides, and, when looked at in a certain light, turn your tongue red.

Oh, and they taste solid: sweet, white-and-milk chocolatey, a tad earthy, very sweet with a crunchy shell and smoothy-groovy insides. In this, Lindt proves that there is no need to have such a noisy fuss over cake. Indeed, you can avoid the oven and actually find something not only decent, but absolutely delicious.

So, if you want some cake without the flour, hassle, waiting, or just want to eat something smaller than a manhole cover, now you can join the over five million people who talk to their therapist about their mild addiction to red velvet on a weekly basis.

(Nutrition Facts – 3 truffles – 220 calories, 160 calories from fat, 17 grams of fat, 12 grams of saturated fat, 0 grams of trans fat, 5 milligrams of cholesterol, 25 milligrams of sodium, 16 grams of carbohydrates, 0 gram of dietary fiber, 15 grams of sugar, and 2 grams of protein.)

Purchased Price: $4.49
Size: 6 oz. bag
Purchased at: Target
Rating: 7 out of 10
Pros: Crispy shell. Smooth, fudgy insides. Actual white chocolate used. Turns tongue red (sorta). Cake without an oven. Escape hatches hidden behind library shelves. Warm bubbly feelings attained by completing 256 levels of Super Mario Brothers.
Cons: Will disappoint cream cheese lovers. Questionable red dye. Oodles of saturated fat. Awkward discussions with therapist about red velvet cake addiction. Spikey-shelled turtle creature with an anger problems.

REVIEW: Triple Chocolate M&M’s

Triple Chocolate M M s

I have long imagined Valentine’s Day as the pink, wintry sequel to Halloween.

Both are holidays primarily geared at giving candy to children. Both are “major” holidays where you still have to go to work. Both are gatekeepers of larger eerie/thankful/merry and loving/lucky/springlike holiday seasons.

Four months ago, I was unimpressed with Cookies & Screeem M&M’s, which were a white chocolate center inside a dark chocolate layer.

Triple Chocolate M M s 2

Now, just in time for Valentine’s Day, Mars has stuffed not two but three kinds of chocolate inside a candy shell. Triple Chocolate M&M’s have a milk chocolate center, a white chocolate layer, and a dark chocolate layer, all inside the iconic shell. I guess this is their idea of cramming an entire heart-shaped box of chocolates into one small morsel.

The first thing I noticed about the packaging was the corniness of the picture. Ladies, if a man proposes to you with a ring with half a pink M&M on it, turn him down. You can do better. For one thing, that ring will turn your finger green…after it turns it pink and brown.

Fortunately, these red, pink, and purple candies are better than their spooky predecessor. First of all, they don’t have the chemical flavor of the black food coloring. Additionally, Mars made the right move by putting their flagship milk chocolate —- the flavor they used to call “Plain” -— in the center. Milk chocolate is the star of the show.

Triple Chocolate M M s 3

Don’t give a standing ovation to the white and dark supporting cast, however. I can taste their presence only minimally. If I let an M&M dissolve in my mouth, I can detect the different layers’ textures, but only because I know they’re there. Overall, the M&M is a conglomeration of generic sweetness. If someone snuck in an occasional oversized “Plain” milk chocolate M&M, I probably would never notice.

They’re a tasty candy, and I don’t think anyone will ever turn them down. It’s cool they got all three kinds of chocolate inside, but the flavor isn’t as noticeable or innovative as you would hope.

I would prefer it if the Walmart-exclusive Strawberry Milk Chocolate variety from 2016 was brought back as the St. Valentine’s Day variety, but Triple Chocolate is better than the Walmart-exclusive White Cheesecake. I would be glad if they brought these back next year, but wouldn’t miss them if they didn’t.

(Nutrition Facts – 1.5 oz. – 200 calories, 90 fat calories, 9 grams of fat, 6 grams of saturated fat, 0 grams of trans fat, 5 milligrams of cholesterol, 25 milligrams of sodium, 29 grams of carbohydrates, 1 gram of fiber, 26 grams of sugar, and 2 grams of protein.)

Purchased Price: $3.99
Size: 9.9 oz. bag
Purchased at: Lee’s MarketPlace
Rating: 7 out of 10
Pros: Cool that they got three kinds of chocolate in one. Milk chocolate takes center stage. A yummy candy. Better than Cookies & Screeem.
Cons: It’s hard to detect the dark and white chocolates. Less flavorful, and less Valentine’s-y, than the strawberry flavor of 2016. Ridiculous packaging.

REVIEW: Kellogg’s Birthday Cake and Cookies ‘n’ Creme Rice Krispies Treats

Kellogg s Cookies  n Creme and Birthday Cake Rice Krispies Treats

Both Birthday Cake and Cookies ‘n’ Creme Rice Krispies Treats look good.

Sure, the colorful sprinkles on top of the birthday cake version appears as if it was subjected to unicorn spittle as the magical beast recited “Peter Piper picked a peck of pickled peppers” several times. And, sure, the cookies ‘n’ creme one appears to have been under a leaky laser printer toner cartridge. But, if you don’t have an imagination like mine, they look tasty.

With that said, if you’re expecting them to taste like birthday cake and cookies ’n’ creme, I’m going to snap, crackle, and pop your dreams because they don’t.

Kellogg s Birthday Cake Rice Krispies Treats

The underside of the Birthday Cake Rice Krispies Treat is dipped in a white confection and topped with a sugary drizzle and colorful sprinkles that add a crunchy texture to the party. Having consumed a number of artificially flavored birthday cake snacks that equal the years I’ve been alive, this doesn’t have that familiar flavor. It doesn’t taste like yellow cake with frosting. It doesn’t taste like chocolate cake with frosting. It’s basically a sweeter Rice Krispies Treat with sprinkles.

Kellogg s Cookies  n Creme and  Rice Krispies Treats

Cookies ’n’ Creme also has a white confection bottom and a sugary drizzle, but comes topped with something that looks similar to chocolate cookie bits. I’m not sure they’re actual cookie crumbs because they seem to have a texture that’s more like sprinkles than cookies. The rectangle treat has a whisper of cocoa flavor, but it doesn’t scream cookies ’n’ cream like its appearance does. It tastes like a normal Rice Krispies Treat with several rogue Cocoa Krispies.

Last year, we saw Kellogg’s Rice Krispies Treats jump on the pumpkin pie bandwagon. While it didn’t have a strong flavor, it didn’t taste like a regular Rice Krispies Treat either. I was hoping for, at least, the same result with these, but it didn’t happen. That’s disappointing.

Even though there’s nothing on the boxes to indicate this, these are for the Valentine’s season. But the wrapper around each crispy marshmallow bar has a heart shaped white space with the words “So much to love about—“ printed on it.

Thanks for doing that, Kellogg’s! It allows me to use the wrapper to show how I feel about Birthday Cake and Cookie ’n’ Creme Rice Krispies Treats.

Kellogg s Cookies  n Creme and Birthday Cake Rice Krispies Treats 4

Disclosure: I received free samples of these from Kellogg’s, but that didn’t influence my review in any way.

(Nutrition Facts – 1 bar – Birthday Cake – 90 calories, 3 grams of fat, 1.5 grams of saturated fat, 0 milligrams of cholesterol, 85 milligrams of sodium, 17 grams of carbohydrates, 9 grams of sugar, and less than 1 gram of protein. Cookies ‘n’ Creme – 100 calories, 3 grams of fat, 1.5 grams of saturated fat, 0 milligrams of cholesterol, 90 milligrams of sodium, 16 grams of carbohydrates, 8 grams of sugar, and less than 1 gram of protein.)

Purchased Price: FREE
Size: 10.9 oz. box/14 bars
Purchased at: Received from Kellogg’s
Rating: 5 out of 10 (Birthday Cake)
Rating: 5 out of 10 (Cookies ‘n’ Creme)
Pros: They look tasty. Can give out on Valentine’s Day.
Cons: Doesn’t taste like birthday cake or cookies ‘n’ creme. Both taste too much like original Rice Krispies Treats.

QUICK REVIEW: Dairy Queen Triple Truffle Blizzard

Dairy Queen Triple Truffle Blizzard

Dairy Queen subscribes to the same belief as me that the only thing better than chocolate candy is even more chocolate candy. In that vein, January’s Blizzard of the Month is the returning Triple Truffle Blizzard which consists of vanilla soft serve blended with chocolate topping mixed with fudge, caramel, and peanut butter truffles.

Caught up in the excitement of this announcement, I celebrated by channeling Chunk with my best Truffle Shuffle. Having never seen The Goonies apparently, my wife was less amused and more poised to call an ambulance, clearly unimpressed and rather disturbed by my spasmatic gyrations.

After consulting with my divorce attorney (what monster has never seen The Goonies?!) I chose to sample each of the candy pieces individually before going in for the ménage à truffle.

As a card-carrying peanut butter-holic, the salty, gritty quality of the peanut butter candy is particularly satisfying and well balanced in its chocolate shell. The caramel truffle is no Sloth though as it provides a sweet, syrupy texture that finishes with a deeper but faint coffee note. The fudge truffle is less potent but lingers more than the other Goonies with a pleasantly fudgy aftertaste.

Dairy Queen Triple Truffle Blizzard 3

When multiple pieces converge on one’s spoon, the Triple Truffle becomes, dare I say it, three times as good. The peanut butter and caramel complement each other particularly well while the fudge pieces lend a needed cohesive backdrop. Unfortunately, the chocolate topping they advertise as being included is so faint and has less depth than One-Eyed Willy’s vision.

Dairy Queen Triple Truffle Blizzard 2

In the end, the bites with healthy truffle representation are excellent but infrequent, leaving many a naked spoonful of the somnolent base. While a decent romp through the Goon Docks, this adventure doesn’t lead to a long-lost trove of pirate rich stuff.

Purchased Price: $2.99
Size: Mini
Rating: 7 out of 10
Nutrition Facts: (Mini) 380 calories, 15 grams of fat, 10 grams of saturated fat, 0 gram of trans fat, 30 milligrams of cholesterol, 140 milligrams of sodium, 54 grams of carbohydrates, 1 gram of dietary fiber 46 grams of sugar, and 8 grams of protein.