Calendar

November 2014
S M T W T F S
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30            

Mockolate

Jan
26



Skittles Chocolate Mix Package

I can’t help but feel I’m beating a dead horse with this review. I did a taste test for them a bit ago during my time at CandyAddict.com and it wasn’t favorable. Granted, Skittles are not a go-to candy of mine at all, but this still didn’t prepare me for the nastiness that is contained in the chocolate mix.

Where do I begin with these? I will do my best not to rant, but I feel like I have to stress a few things about these. Firstly, why would such a successful fruity candy like Skittles try and make something chocolatey? And it’s not even real chocolate, it’s a removed, fake chocolate one. That doesn’t even sound appealing to me. Secondly, they’re not pretty to look at. Where’s the rainbow we all love to taste? Candy should do it’s best to be attractive if it can be helped, and these sadly don’t cut it. I could go on, but I won’t.

So these are neither tasty nor appealing to the eyes. But considering my last taste of these was months ago, have my taste buds changed? Only one way to find out.

 

Skittles Chocolate Mix

Vanilla: This has a buttery bourbon vanilla taste. My thoughts turn to yellow cake mix.

Chocolate Pudding: Immediately very sweet and empty tasting, like bad cocoa. It’s bland, nasty and artificial. Not even remotely chocolatey.

Chocolate Caramel: This one tastes flat and very chemically. This doesn’t even get to the level of a tootsie roll it’s so fake and removed.

S’mores: Has more of a sweet graham marshmallow vanilla flavor

Brownie Batter: Something about this does read as brownie. It’s starchy and reminds me of the powder in a boxed mix. Fake, fake, fake.

So, the best flavor in this chocolate mix is the vanilla. That makes sense right? I can’t stress enough how much these are to be avoided.

Oh, and I don’t even like that Pinata Man in the commercials. He’s creepy.

Rating: Inedible

 

Inedible

Links
Skittles Webpage


Jan
15



Zero Bars All Three

I’ve wanted to get my hand on these ever since I caught wind of their existence. If you’ve been a reader from the beginning, you’d know that my favorite candy bar is Hershey’s Zero Bar, that rare bar that’s basically a white chocolate Snickers. I couldn’t help but wonder if the Canadian Zero’s were going to be anything like that. I could find little information about them on the internet, so I was beside myself with joy when a friend of mine offered to send me some.

Once in hand, I was dazzled by the glitzy packaging. They definitely give off that “cool” vibe with their metallic wrappers.

Zero Dark: Looking at the ingredients list, I’m disappointed. Essentially, this bar is a block of mockolate. Oh joy.

It’s terribly messy to eat. It doesn’t hold it’s shape so it’s melty and therefore gets everywhere. The mockolate is cool on the tongue and it’s very, very sweet. The flavor is lightly of cocoa and hints of nuts and vanilla.

On the whole though, it’s unexciting and just lacking any satisfaction.

Zero Milk: Same off, greasy, cool feeling to it. The flavor is sweeter than the dark, with more milky notes, but no complexity. This fake milk chocolate is better than the dark one.

Zero White: Interesting. This bar actually has as a little cocoa butter in the ingredients listed after coconut and palm kernel oil. Yay? Well, at least it’s not hydrogenated…

I’m immediately surprised when I unwrapped this, since there’s milk and white “mockolate” in here. Huh, what? The bottom is milk and the top is white. I was expecting a full white bar.

Like the others, it’s greasy and cool to the touch. Surprisingly it tastes the most authentic of the three. It’s very creamy and slippery in the mouth, there’s lots of milky and tangy yogurt flavors in there. True to the white chocolate fashion, there’s also a strong sweetness to it too. It’s a very convincing mockery of the real thing.

Id’ (sadly) eat these again if there’s nothing else available. And I mean nothing.

Rating:Not Worth It

 

Not Worth It


Dec
19



Sugar Babies  Holiday Edition Box

Sometimes the strangest holiday candies are released. Most make sense like the mint flavors I’m seeing everywhere; Mint Truffle Kisses, Hershey’s Bliss Creme de Menthe, Hershey’s Mint Miniatures, and the Mint M&Ms, just to name a few.  Then I spot these two oddities: Holiday Edition Sugar Babies and Inside Out Junior Mints. I was perplexed right away, but since I hadn’t tried them, and are a fan of the originals, I picked them up.

From the outside of the box, the Holiday Sugar Babies don’t seem to be very different. The selling point is that they’re covered in a “candy shell” in holiday colors: white, red and green.

 

Sugar Babies  Holiday Edition

They look terrible. They’re matte and flat looking. Nothing about them feels inviting or attractive. Which leads me to ask, why color them to begin with? If you were going to put the in a bowl for guests or anything, so you can “see” them in there festive colors, why not make them look…nice.

The candy shell is indeed a shell as opposed to a soft, colored coating as I suspected. It actually cracks when I bite down and it softens from there, turning into a regular Sugar Baby. The taste is the same: intensely creamy, burnt caramel flavors with a sticky, grainy chewy texture. I don’t see a point to getting these over the regular ones…unless you have a thing for food coloring.

 

Junior Mints Inside Out Box

The Inside Out Junior Mints I was excited about. They’ve been a limited edition candy for years, yet I haven’t seen them until now. I did see the new edition of Junior Mints Peppermint Crunch that were released last year and I reviewed for CandyAddict.

These have white outside and a chocolate interior, just the opposite from the originals. Reading the description on the back where it calls the outside a “white topping”, I knew something was amiss. Uh oh. Mockolate.

 

Junior Mints Inside Out

The exterior is slightly hard and it “cracks” a little when you bite into it. The intense minty flavor we associate with Junior Mints is there, but it’s hard to say exactly where it’s coming from. I just sucked on one for a bit and I got no mint from the exterior. So my guess is the center is doing double duty here. Other than the appearance, I don’t really see the draw of these. Nothing says to me that these are any improvement or especially unique, so I don’t get the point.

Both these candies don’t do anything to improve or tweak the original enough for me to justify buying them. I just had to satisfy my curiosity. Learn from me and stick with the originals.

Rating: Not Worth It

 

Not Worth It

Links
Junior Mints Webpage
Sugar Babies Webpage


Oct
17



Pay Day "Chocolatey" Avalanche

This is going to sound odd coming form someone who hates nuts in their chocolate, but I love Payday. All jokes aside, I am referring to the candy bar. For some reason, taking the nuts out of the chocolate works for me, and that’s what a normal Payday is. So imagine my surprise when I saw this Payday Chocolatey Avalanche bar, I was curious to see how I liked chocolate in my nuts, for once.

Notice the wording “chocolatey” here, we’re obviously not looking (and soon to be eating) the real thing here. Oh, no. We got mockolate here peeps, which is always disappointing. Regardless, this is a Payday, and Payday is more about peanuts than anything else, so I will try and not let it sway my opinion too much. In hand, the bar looks like a normal Payday, just enrobed in the “chocolately” coating. I’m curious as to where the “avalanche” is though. Hrrmm.

My first bite was hard, literally. My teeth had to crack down on this sucker. It was really that hard! I have no choice to assume it’s not fresh, and judging from the code on the back (32Mr3E7f) so that would be…3rd week of 2002? Yikes, I hope not. Anyways, the center of the Payday is what’s rock hard and is giving me the tough time. The rest of the bar is great, and I’m relieved that the peants are still the star here: fresh with a good hit of salt. The chocolatey coating isn’t adding much, it does have an extra little sweetness to it overall, but flavor wise, I get nothing.

Unless you’re like me and are insistent trying every candy on the planet, I’d skip this and keep getting the regular Paydays. You always win with those!

Rating: Not Worth It

 

Not Worth It

Links:
Payday Website

 


Oct
14



Nestle Violet Crumble

My sister discovered this bar during her freshman year of college and kept begging me to try one for the longest time. I finally did and though this was a few years ago, I still remember being impressed by the texture and flavor of the honeycomb center. I think it was my first experience with the stuff.

I was really interested to see how this compared to the Cadbury Crunchie I had earlier. The bar was already cracked when I opened it, so I immediately took a look at the cross section. There’s no burnt sugar stripe in the center like in the Crunchie, which is a defining feature in my opinion. The texture is lighter and crispier and doesn’t have the foamy melt in the mouth.

As for the flavor, it’s sweet and has a really good burnt sugar caramel flavor that’s reminiscent of how a perfectly toasted marshmallow tastes on a graham cracker. There’s also a subtle smokiness to it (perhaps why I’m thinking marshmallow) that’s very addicting. The coating is unfortunately mockolate, and therefore it doesn’t add any chocolate flavor but instead more sweetness. The mockolate also provides a cool, smooth texture contrast to the crunchy center.

Half way through the bar I started to get the sugar throat burn, which is unusual for me. The sweetness started to take precedence on my taste buds. Still, that smokiness followed through in the aftertaste and kept me interested enough that I finished the bar.

If I had to choose which honeycomb bar to eat next time, I’d rather have choose a Crunchie.

Rating: Might Eat Again

 

Might Eat Again

Links:
Violet Crumble Wikipedia Page

 


Page 3 of 4 pages  <  1 2 3 4 >