Tag: Candy

QUICK REVIEW: Trader Joe’s Crunchy Cinnamon Squares Milk Chocolate Bar

Marvo 1 Comment

Trader Joe s Crunchy Cinnamon Squares Milk Chocolate Bar

What is it?

A new candy bar that uses milk chocolate and bits of Trader Joe’s Cinnamon Toast Crunch-like cereal, which, as you can guess, is called Crunchy Cinnamon Squares Cereal.

How is it?

I haven’t tried Trader Joe’s Crunchy Cinnamon Squares Cereal, but from what I can taste in this bar, I feel as if it’s more cinnamon-y and less sugary. The bits provide a lot of cinnamon flavor, but that’s mostly it, more of which I’ll get to in a moment. If you’ve enjoyed cinnamon-enhanced chocolate bars or Abuelita Mexican-style hot cocoa, I imagine you’ll dig this. As someone who loves the chocolate and cinnamon combination, but doesn’t get to enjoy it too often, this candy bar was a treat. The chocolate has a nice creaminess and a great flavor, although its aftertaste makes my mouth feel as if I’ve been chewing Big Red gum.

Is there anything else I need to know?

The wrapper says “bits of crunchy cinnamon squares cereal” and that can be considered an accurate description of what’s inside the chocolate. But, apparently, my definition of “bits” is different than Trader Joe’s version because they’re not what I hoped for.

Trader Joe s Crunchy Cinnamon Squares Milk Chocolate Bar 2

I expected nice chunks of cereal, but instead it’s as if Trader Joe’s took the crumbs at the bottom of a Crunchy Cinnamon Squares Cereal bag, smashed them to make them smaller, and mixed the specks with milk chocolate. There’s some texture, but I refuse to call it crunchy.

Also, you should read the nutrition facts on the back because it will come in handy when you want to eat the entire bar in one sitting. The 70 percent saturated fat might get you to stop eating before it all ends up in your mouth.

Conclusion:

Trader Joe’s Crunchy Cinnamon Squares Milk Chocolate Bar is a great tasting candy bar, but I do wish there were bigger cereal bits in it.

Purchased Price: Received from a friend
Size: 2.8 oz. bar
Purchased at: Trader Joe’s
Rating: 7 out of 10
Nutrition Facts: (1/3 bar) 130 calories, 8 grams of fat, 5 grams of saturated fat, 0 grams of trans fat, less than 5 milligram of cholesterol, 45 milligrams of sodium, 15 grams of carbohydrates, less than 1 gram of fiber, 12 grams of sugar, and 2 grams of protein.

REVIEW: Hershey’s Bites

Meghan 1 Comment

Hershey s Bites

It looks like Hershey’s has been on a roll lately. First, it comes out with all those Cookie Layered Crunch Bars. Then, it created those bars of salty-and-sweet perfection appropriately dubbed as “Hershey’s Gold.” And now it’s decided to jump onto the donut-inspired-everything bandwagon with the creation of its new Hershey’s Bites.

Not to be confused with Hershey’s Snack Bites, these are, according to the package, “soft donut bites with a sweet & creamy chocolatey filling.” They seem as if a lava cake and a donut hole met up, had a few drinks together, and ending up with these little guys as a permanent reminder of their drunken love for one another.

Opening the box, I’m happy to see Hershey’s put a flap on it so that you can close it. It always irks me when food companies make multi-serving frozen snacks and then fail to give you any kind of way to re-seal the package. That said, Hershey’s only gets half credit, since it didn’t give you any kind of way to reseal the box’s inner bag, thus dooming the uneaten portion to freezer burn.

Out of the box, the bites don’t look exactly how I expected them to. The sparkly picture gave me the impression that these were going to be rolled in some kind of granulated sugar, kind of like those donuts you find at Chinese buffets. In reality, there’s no such coating, and they look like unappetizing brown lumps.

The box said I could prepare these by either baking them at 350 for eight minutes or by microwaving them for 20-30 seconds. I decided to try both methods so I could give a comprehensive analysis.

Hershey s Bites 2

The ones baked in the toaster oven had a crunchy outer shell, but the “creamy chocolate filling” wasn’t so much of a filling as it was more like a half-baked center.

Hershey s Bites 3

As expected, the microwaved ones were softer, but neither one had the texture of a real donut hole. The baked ones were more cookie-like and have chocolate flavor is, ironically, closer to an Oreo cookie than Hershey’s Chocolate. The microwaved ones reminded me of a microwaved snack cake.

Between the two, I liked the baked ones better since they had a little more texture, but both needed more filling. I was expecting something like rich chocolate ganache, but this tasted like undercooked batter.

Hershey s Bites 4

My primary complaint, though, is that both seem so incomplete without a glaze. Don’t all donuts have it or some kind of sugar coating? I made some to coat mine and it made them taste much more like actual donuts. Hershey’s should have taken notes from Pillsbury on this one and included a glaze packet, like Toaster Strudels.

Valiant effort, Hershey’s, but your newest experiment is a miss.

(Nutrition Facts – 4 bites – 180 calories, 6 grams of fat, 50 calories from fat, 3.5 grams of saturated fat, 0 grams of trans fat, less than 5 milligrams of cholesterol, 310 milligrams of sodium, 29 grams of carbohydrates, 1 gram of dietary fiber, 15 grams of sugar, and 3 grams of protein.)

Purchased Price: $3.29
Size: 18 bites (8.8 oz. box)
Purchased at: Kroger
Rating: 6 out of 10 (Baked)
Rating: 5 out of 10 (Microwaved)
Pros: Lava cake/donut hole love-child! Re-sealable box! Tastes like Oreo cookies!
Cons: Deceptive picture on the box. Inner bag isn’t re-sealable. More poop-looking snacks. Doesn’t taste like Hershey’s chocolate. No glaze included.

REVIEW: Nestle Butterfinger Dark Bar

Marvo 8 Comments

Nestle Butterfinger Dark Bar

Dark and darkness.

There’s the darkness one experiences when there’s no light. There’s the dark colors of evening wear. Then there’s the darkness I keep deep down in my soul that so badly wants to come up but prevent it from doing so with every bit of my energy because I don’t want anyone to ever experience it for fear that doing so shall cause me to be shunned for an eternity by those who get the slightest glimpse at that darkness. And then there’s milk chocolate’s sibling, dark chocolate.

Nestle has been reaching into its own darkness this year by rolling out Crunch Dark and this new Butterfinger Dark. It has the same crispety, crunchety, peanut-buttery center as the original, but with a darker chocolatey coating.

Yes, chocolatey. Not chocolate.

The Nestle Crunch Dark Bar boasts how it’s made with 100 percent real chocolate, but this candy bar doesn’t make that claim. A quick ingredients list comparison shows that while the Crunch bar has dark chocolate that uses cocoa butter, this Butterfinger doesn’t.

But that doesn’t make it a bad candy bar.

After eating a couple, I find it to be a tad better than the original Butterfinger and the reason why is the same as why I love the Crunch Dark Bar. Although it doesn’t have the real chocolate deal, whatever that coating is, it makes the candy less sweet.

I know less sweet candy sounds like a bad thing, like less murderous or nudity Game of Thrones or less Dew-y Mountain Dew, but I find regular Butterfinger to be overly sweet nowadays. Get off my lawn. For example, I had a fun size Butterfinger around Halloween and after eating it I came to the realization that I wouldn’t have been able to finish it if it was a full bar. But with this, I found myself chomping away through the whole thing easily.

Nestle Butterfinger Dark Bar 2

But with that said, while the coating takes away sweetness, it doesn’t add anything because it doesn’t have the bitterness of dark chocolate. Actually, the exterior isn’t too noticeable. The whole thing tastes like what I imagine eating a naked Butterfinger with just the crispety, crunchety, peanut-buttery, crumb-causety center is like, which is still pretty good.

With the Crunch Dark Bar, the chocolate gets to shine because the rice crisps are for texture. But with this bar, the crispety, crunchety, peanut-buttery, teeth-stickety center is bold enough that it hides the coating’s flavor as well as I hide the darkness inside of me.

Nestle’s Butterfinger Dark is a pleasant variation of the classic candy bar. While I’m fine with the peanut buttery flavor standing out, I would’ve liked it more if the chocolatey layer added something. But if you enjoy Butterfinger, this candy will brighten your day.

DISCLOSURE: I received free samples from the folks at Nestle. As always, receiving free samples did not influence my review in any way.

(Nutrition Facts – 260 calories, 10 grams of fat, 5 grams of saturated fat, 0 grams of trans fat, 0 milligrams of cholesterol, 100 milligrams of sodium, 39 grams of carbohydrates, 1 grams of fiber, 23 grams of sugar, and 3 grams of protein.)

Purchased Price: FREE
Size: 1.9 oz. bar
Purchased at: Received from Nestle
Rating: 8 out of 10
Pros: Less sweet than regular Butterfinger. Perhaps a better Butterfinger. Will brighten your day. Crispety, crunchety, and peanut-buttery.
Cons: Dark chocolatey coating’s flavor doesn’t stand out. Doesn’t seem to use dark chocolate. Still crumb-causety and teeth-stickety. The darkness inside of me that I have to battle with every moment in order to prevent it from seeing the light of day, which it will turn into darkness.

REVIEW: Nestle Crunch Dark Bar (2018)

Marvo 5 Comments

Nestle Crunch Dark Bar 2018

If rebooting movies and TV shows will continue to be a thing, I guess rebooting candy bars is possible. While the wrapper says “NEW,” the Nestle Crunch Dark Bar made its debut as a limited edition candy way back in 2005.

Unlike dark chocolate bars that come from smaller chocolatiers with fancy names I’m not 100 percent sure how to pronounce, like Vosges, Dagoba, and Chuao, the Nestle Crunch Dark Bar doesn’t show off its cacao percentage. It keeps us in the dark by saying it’s just “dark.”

But unlike its 2005 version, this one tells us it’s made with 100 percent real chocolate and contains no artificial flavors or colors. So does that mean the original version wasn’t made with 100 percent real chocolate and contained artificial flavors and colors?

Wait! Don’t tell me! I don’t want my memories of the 2005 Nestle Crunch Dark Bar tainted because I loved it and was a little sad when it went away.

Nestle Crunch Dark Bar 2018 2

As you can probably guess, Crunch Dark is darker in appearance than the regular Crunch bar. But it’s not as dark as chocolate bars from companies whose names I’m not 100 percent sure how to pronounce that go into the 60-70 percent cacao range. The rice crisps are just as crunchy as those in the regular Crunch bar.

Nestle Crunch Dark Bar 2018 3

Its flavor straddles the line between milk and dark chocolate. It may disappoint those who love dark chocolate’s bitter bite, but it doesn’t disappoint me. To be honest, I probably would’ve liked this bar less if it was more bitter. What Crunch Dark does is make me realize that regular Crunch bars are too sweet. The darker chocolate tampers down the sweetness, but that positive brings up a different problem.

They’re easier to eat. Well, if you consider that a problem.

I don’t know if I’ve had so many regular milk chocolate Crunch bars over the years that my taste buds are tired of them, but Crunch Dark is better tasting. I enjoyed it in 2005 and I’m enjoying it in 2018.

Disclosure: After I purchased this from 7-Eleven, Nestle sent me a box filled with Crunch Dark Bars and a couple of bags of Buncha Crunch Dark that I didn’t know it was sending. I just thought I’d be transparent about that and let you know – now everyone say it with me – that it didn’t influence my review in any way.

(Nutrition Facts – 1 bar – 220 calories, 12 grams of fat, 7 grams of saturated fat, 0 milligrams of cholesterol, 30 milligrams of sodium, 28 grams of carbohydrates, 2 grams of fiber, 21 grams of sugar, and 2 grams of protein.)

Purchased Price:
Size: 1.55 oz. bar
Purchased at: 7-Eleven
Rating: 9 out of 10
Pros: I think they’re better than the original Crunch bar. Straddles the line between milk chocolate and dark chocolate. Reduced sweetness makes them easier to eat. The wonderful crunch from the rice crisps.
Cons: Might disappoint those who like their dark chocolate bitter. Reduced sweetness makes them easier to eat.

REVIEW: Neapolitan M&M’s

Rachel 3 Comments

Neapolitan M M s

When I read that M&M’s were making a Neapolitan variety, my first thought was “Is that still a thing?” I haven’t had Neapolitan ice cream since I was a kid in the 80s. My mother would bring home tubs of the cheapest store-brand tri-colored treat and daintily shave off layers from all flavors equally. Then I would excavate every molecule of strawberry ice cream until it looked like David Copperfield made it disappear with jazz hands and a hypnotic stare.

Never mind that chocolate was actually my favorite ice cream; I had to take the strawberry. This irritated my mother to no end. But she kept buying Neapolitan and I kept eating a neat one-third of it.

Now it’s 2018 and I don’t think I’ve heard Neapolitan referred to as a flavor in more than 20 years. I wanted to try the M&M’s, but wondered if I could resist the urge to only eat the pink ones.

Neapolitan M M s 2

The aroma inside the bag was mostly chocolate. The visual was a bit of a surprise – the vanilla pieces were a rich cream color instead of white. Yes, I know, the bag clearly depicts them as cream-colored, but I was taken by the overall packaging color scheme – which was WHITE. Just sayin’.

Despite there being three colors, the flavors of the pieces are the same. Yes, I know, the bag clearly says all three flavors in every piece, but I thought the pink ones might be strawberry-dominant, cream more vanilla, etc. This disconnect didn’t affect my feelings about them overall, but again – just sayin’.

Neapolitan M M s 3

My first taste impression was a strong strawberry and chocolate flavor. But instead of taking me back to the freezer with an ice cream scoop, Neapolitan M&M’s brought me back to the breakfast table. They are the solid orb version of a bowl of Frankenberry and Count Chocula cereals combined. The strawberry was a pretty spot-on facsimile of Frank, my personal strawberry flavor touchstone. My memory of Neapolitan strawberry is a much more subtle flavor than Frank. The chocolate was close enough to The Count to make the comparison, although hardcore Chocula fans might disagree. I’d expected a real ice cream experience, but my love of monster cereals made it still a successful combo in my opinion.

I couldn’t immediately find the vanilla. But as I plowed through the bag and thought about the cereal comparison, the case of the missing vanilla was solved. It’s the milk in the cereal bowl. It made total sense because most M&M’s vanillas taste like milk to me. It took a bit to find because it’s a supporting actor here – Frank and The Count are center stage, which was alright by me.

Neapolitan M M s 4

Overall, I thought these were fun and tasty. Kids will love them because of the child-friendly flavors, as will nostalgic adults. I think M&M’s are most successful when they’re tinkering with fillings/textures (nuts, caramel, crispy), but these are on the higher end of the flavor-only M&M’s varieties. Bella Napoli!

(Nutrition Facts – 1 oz./16 pieces – 140 calories, 7 grams of fat, 4 grams of saturated fat, 0 grams of trans fat, less than 5 milligrams of cholesterol, 15 milligrams of sodium, 20 grams of carbohydrates, less than 1 gram of dietary fiber, 18 grams of total sugars, 17 grams of added sugars, and 1 grams of protein.)

Purchased Price: $3.19
Size: 8 oz. bag
Purchased at: Target
Rating: 8 out of 10
Pros: Nostalgic flavor combination that smacks of Monster Cereal goodness. All three flavors in every piece kept me from eating only the pink ones
Cons: Not really ice cream-ish (if that’s a deal breaker for you). Showing/telling me things on the packaging that I ignore and am later surprised by.