Gentle Giants: Hagrid vs. Chewbacca

These two gentle giants serve as similar characters in their own epic sagas. Both are, physically, much bigger than the other characters surrounding them; both are tough, yet surprisingly gentle; often both of them serve as comic relief.

As far as their likeability goes, this is like choosing between cake and ice cream; you can’t go wrong either way (unless you’re lactose intolerant, but if that is the case, pick a different metaphor with two things you like). Rubeus Hagrid is twice as big as an average man and three times as wide. Add that to his rugged, shaggy beard and his moleskin overcoat, he looks like he could have been raised by wolves, then grown up and wrestled them into submission with his bare hands. Yet, he is one of the kindest and gentlest characters in Harry Potter and, as we see in his debut in the first book, is not hesitant to tear up when he gets emotional. Chewie is a Wookiee who stands over seven feet tall, covered in brown, shaggy fur and freely expresses his emotions (happy, sad, angry, etc.) through unabashed howls and growls. Like a dog, he causes fear in his enemies, yet follows his friends with unwavering loyalty and devotion.
It's not wise to upset a Wookiee, especially if you don't have earplugs.

Each of these characters is as good a friend as you can find. Hagrid has a soft spot for Harry, Ron, and Hermione, with whom he often shares thoughts, advice, and his cooking (which isn’t the greatest, but his heart is in the right place). He would do anything for them, just as they would return the favor. And though many are a bit skeptical of the bumbling giant, he’s got friends in high places. Dumbledore declares that he would trust Hagrid with his life, and as we know from Hagrid’s encounter with the Dursleys (“Never insult Albus Dumbledore in front of me”), he holds a fair amount of respect for the Headmaster as well. Hagrid’s loyalty is undeniable and having the utmost respect from Dumbledore is about as high praise as you can get. But Chewie’s not much different in this regard. Like Hagrid, Chewbacca is a loyal companion of a trio of heroes – Han, Luke, and Leia. When his best friend Han is about to be frozen in carbonite, Chewie flips a sh*t and starts chucking Stormtroopers left and right (not to mention choking Lando for his betrayal). And sure, Hagrid’s tight with Dumbledore, who’s like the Yoda of Hogwarts. But as we see in Episode III, Chewie rolled with Yoda himself back in the day, so much so that Yoda used to ride on Chewie’s shoulders back in the Clone Wars. Good relations with the Wookiees Yoda had, indeed. So they’re pretty evenly matched here.
Nice, Harry, but send me an owl when that thing does 0.5 past lightspeed

So, as such similar characters, I have to ask: who would win in a fight? Hagrid, though big and scary, is actually not the most formidable foe. Having been expelled from Hogwarts, he was banned from performing magic. Instead of a wand, he carries around a pink umbrella, like a poor-man’s Penguin. Though he squeezes some magic out of that, he’s not a fully qualified wizard and never will be. Chewie, however, was a high ranking soldier on Kashyyyk (yep, three y’s) and fought in the most pivotal battles in two wars. Hagrid probably has a slight height and weight advantage on Chewie, but if it ever came down to hand-to-hand combat between the two, well I don’t think Hagrid would have any hands because Wookiees are known to pull people’s arms out of their sockets. And that’s just when they lose at chess. I’ll say this for Hagrid, his friendliness with dangerous magical creatures (Buckbeak, Aragog, Fluffy, the Centaurs, etc.) could give him an edge in battle. But a three-headed dog or a big spider is probably not too intimidating when you’ve got pinpoint aim with a Wookiee crossbow. Plus, Chewie flies the Millennium Falcon, which flies higher and faster than Buckbeak (Have you ever seen a hippogriff make the Kessel Run in less than 12 parsecs? I didn't think so). And you want to talk about dangerous creatures as companions? Chewie’s an honorary member of a tribe of Ewoks. Yeah, yeah, they look all cute and cuddly. But that's not what any Trooper from the 501st would tell you. Ewoks are vicious, man, I’m telling you. If they don’t like you, they will stab you, stone you, cook you and eat you. Just ask Han Solo. Not only is Chewie a better fighter than Hagrid, but his affiliation with Yoda and the Ewoks guarantees him a victory anyways, thanks to their Hall of Ballin’ status. As loveable as they both are, my money’s on Chewie in a fight, so I give him the victory here. But as they say, it’s not wise to upset a Wookiee. So even if I didn’t think Chewie was the winner, I’d pick him anyways because I like my arms where they are – in their sockets.

PS: Did you know George Lucas’ inspiration for Chewbacca was his own dog? His dog used to ride shotgun with him in his car and Lucas thought of him as his copilot, hence Han Solo’s hairy copilot. That dog’s name, by the way, was Indiana. Can you guess what other famous Lucas character got inspiration from this dog?

I'm Going to Miami: Will Smith vs. LeBron James

"I'm going to Miami" are the words famously spoken by the Fresh Prince, Will Smith. Now, they are linked with the self-proclaimed King, LeBron James. So, today's post is dedicated to these two members of South Beach-bound royalty: the Prince vs. the King.

In 1776, America's founding fathers declared that they no longer recognize the sovereignty of England's King, mainly because the concept makes no real sense. The right to rule a nation of people is given to a monarch upon birth. In other words, a King has to do absolutely nothing to deserve the title. If that is the case, then LeBron James gained his title just as earnestly as any other monarch in history: by doing nothing. I witnessed ESPN force-feeding the nation the King's propaganda since he was a junior in high school, broadcasting high school games on national television. By the time the guy was drafted, they had already given him an endorsement deal worth $90 million or so, not to mention the nicknames "King" and "Chosen One."

Just as a king grows up groomed for power, so was James. Born in Akron, Ohio's own son seemed destined to do great things in Cleveland when the Cavaliers drafted him. For a city that hasn't won a major sports championship since 1948, the notion of a local-bred prodigy starting a dynasty on the banks of Lake Erie seemed to good to be true. And as Cleveland just witnessed last night, it was.
...because I couldn't find clips from the first movie

The signs were there since back in '07. When the Indians and Yankees matched up in the ALDS, Cleveland's favorite son showed up at Jacob's Field to show his support for...the Yankees? Wait a second, Kings don't do that. Not only was he employed by the Cavs, adored by all of Cleveland, but he grew up in Northeast Ohio! And his excuse was, "I'm a Yankees fan." But that doesn't answer the question, "Why?" Yes, the King of Cleveland claims that his favorite teams growing up were the New York Yankees, Chicago Bulls, and Dallas Cowboys (these teams coincidentally won a total of 12 championships in the '90s, when James was growing up. So much for hometown loyalty). Turns out LeBron is a bandwagon fan. And just like any bandwagon fan, they're happy when things are good, but will be the first to desert for greener pastures when they get the chance.

Though he gained his power like any other king, James did nothing to deserve keeping it. Kings aren't supposed to abandon their own lands. Can you imagine King Leonidas showing up to the Olympics rocking a Persian Empire hat? "What, I like the Persians," he'd say. "I'm a huge Xerxes fan." No, that wouldn't fly. What if Odysseus said, "You know what, my home's filled with suitors and I really don't see a winning future in Ithaka. I think I'll sign with Calypso. Besides, her place is on the beach." Kings don't do that. Leonidas gave his life for his land, and Odysseus spent twenty years fighting the strength of Poseidon to return to his throne at home. King James abandoned his home because, despite how good he is, he wasn't quite good enough to win in the playoffs.
This. Is. Sparta! Until my contract expires, then I'm out of here...

Yes, this post is more about bashing LeBron than it is about Will Smith. And yes, Smith is just a Prince. But what are the very first words of the Fresh Prince's Creed? "In West Philadelphia, born and raised..." Though Smith may live in Miami now, he's always been proud of his hometown, Philly. As he states in his song, Miami is his "second home," not the place he runs to when things get a little rough (keyword: a little).

A king isn't supposed to abandon his kingdom to sign elsewhere. Kingship is a lifetime commitment. But LeBron James has spent a lifetime denying his Midwestern roots, so why should we expect him to commit the rest of his career to his home? James' behavior is not that of a king, but more like the Governor of South Carolina, running and hiding when the going gets tough. It's time for him to leave his royal title behind, making the Fresh Prince the winner of this match-up. Ohio waited for seven years for a championship, but instead only witnessed disappointment, selfishness, and abandonment. This is an easy victory for Will Smith.

PS: Tom Izzo, you absolutely made the right decision. When given the choice for more money and glory, you chose to stay at home where you belong.

Lord of the Championship Rings: Scottie Pippen vs. Pippin Took

They're two of the best sidekicks ever, and they both happen to have the same name. So, how can I not make this comparison? In the league where amazing happens, it's pretty much universally accepted that Michael Jordan was the most amazing. It's also universally accepted that Jordan wouldn't have been as amazing without his right-hand man, Scottie Pippen. Pippen was the Robin to Jordan's Batman, the Watson to his Sherlock, or the Jazz to his Fresh Prince. On the other hand, there's Peregrin "Pippin" Took, the cheerful and sometimes careless Hobbit, who served as a loyal companion to Frodo's mission and a valuable member of the Fellowship of the Ring.

To properly compare sidekicks, you have to compare the leader whom they devote their services to. In this case, it's Jordan against Frodo. Like I said, MJ is pretty much as good as it gets in terms of basketball. While you can make arguments for people like Russell and Wilt, no one's going to think you foolish for proclaiming Jordan to be the greatest. In terms of Middle-earth, though, you can hardly make the same claims about Frodo. While Jordan made big shot after big shot, Frodo tended to fall down or faint every time something stressful happened. Although to be fair, Frodo's situations were usually much more intimidating (and life-threatening) than MJ's. But in the end, Frodo did accomplish the most difficult task of all: while Jordan was racking up rings, Frodo destroyed the One that he had. While Jordan was more dominant in his field, Frodo's quest had much grander signficance as the destruction of the ring meant the end of corruption and an "evil that does not sleep."
Call him Alicia Keys because he keeps on fallin'

But this is not about Jordan and Frodo, it's about Pippen vs. Pippin. And Scottie P was Jordan's go-to guy for all six championships. Outside of these two, the Bulls didn't really have the kind of players that made you think six championships in eight years. I mean, have you ever played with the Bulls on NBA Hangtime (which features no Jordan)? Steve Kerr, Toni Kukoc, and Luc Longley are starters on the game! With that many white people, they look more like a scene out of Middle-earth than a championship basketball team. It goes to show the value of Pippen, and validates his seven All-Star appearances and Hall of Fame induction. But Pippin Took was no slouch, either. Sure, he liked to get drunk and got the Fellowship into trouble half the time, he proved to be quite a worthy companion.
Hello, my name is Peregrin Took, and I'm an alco-hobbit.

We may never know if Jordan could have won six rings without Scottie, but we know that Scottie couldn't win any without Jordan. For MJ's two year hiatus (when he played baseball/journeyed to Looney Toon Land), the Pippen led Bulls failed to reach the Finals both years, not to mention a run-in with Phil Jackson that got him seated on the bench for the final play in the Eastern Conference semifinals. Pippin Took, however, did some of his best work in Frodo's absence. He escaped from an army of Orcs, talked to a few trees (how many people can say that without being psycho?), and he even killed some Orcs and a troll by the end of the trilogy.
Jordan journeys to Looney Toon Land during his two year retirement

Both Pippin and Pippen play the sidekick role perfectly well, so the difference to me is how they performed on their own. Scottie failed to win it all in Chicago and kind of fizzled out with the Trail Blazers, while Pippin Took blazed his own trail and did his best work on his own. In the end, destroying Frodo's one ring was bigger than winning six championship rings, so this victory goes to Peregrin Took, the best Pippin of all.

PS: Now, correct me if I'm wrong because this may be purely speculation, but from what I hear, they're taking the hobbits to Isengard.

House of Pain: Thomas Paine vs. T-Pain

It's Independence Day and you all know what that means: it's the anniversary of that Will Smith movie. Also, it's the United States' birthday (as well as my Uncle Sam's), so it is only right that this post is dedicated to our nation's great history. I was going to make it "United States vs." but let's be honest, the U.S. wins everything (except the Korean War, Vietnam War, the Men's Basketball gold medal in '04, and every World Cup, but I digress). Instead, let's see how far we've come as a nation and compare one of our own founding fathers to one of this generation's elite. Thomas Paine was an author, inventor, journalist, and a critical participant in both the American and French Revolutions. He is known to many (okay, just me) as "T-Paine." Faheem Najm is a singer/rapper and record producer better known as today's T-Pain. But though two share the name, only one can emerge as this blog's victor.

Thomas Paine was a rebel throughout his life. He came from England to the Colonies only a couple years before the Revolution, yet he was one of the strongest advocates of American independence. He wrote arguably the most popular pamphlet of the time, Common Sense, which emphatically beleaguered King George and insisted upon America's immediate independence from an abusive motherland. He supported the French Revolution against many critics. Later in life, he condemned slavery decades before its abolition. He also criticized the contradictions found in organized religion, namely Christianity. These criticisms lost him most of his public support - so much so that when he died in 1809, only six people attended his funeral.

Paine inspired countless Americans with his honest, straightforward rhetoric. T-Pain reaches his fans through his words as well via music. So, let's compare their most famous words. Thomas Paine once wrote, "When men yield up the privilege of thinking, the last shadow of liberty quits the horizon." T-Pain once said "I'm N luv wit a stripper." In The Crisis, Paine wrote, "These are the times that try men's souls." In "Bartender", T-Pain sang the lyrics, "She made us drinks to drink; we drunk 'em, got drunk." Thomas Paine said "An army of principles can penetrate where an army of soldiers cannot." T-Pain said "I'm on a boat, motherf***er."

Though Paine dabbled in the affairs of the affluent and powerful, his writing was intentionally plain and simple. As he said, "It is my design to make those who can scarcely read understand." Judging by the lyrical content of songs like "I'm F***ed Up," T-Pain is apparently aiming for the same demographic. So, who reaches their audience more effectively?

Common Sense was sold just under half a million copies. T-Pain has sold plenty more albums than this, and that is despite Internet pirating. But though T-Pain has a wider audience than Thomas Paine did, Paine's words have had a much greater impact. He stirred the citizens of this continent, both rich and poor, towards the seizure of independence from tyranny. The Crisis was read to George Washington's troops at the Battle of Trenton before crossing the Delaware. How different would history be if, while crossing the Delaware, Washington had instead sung to his troops, "I'm on a boat!" They'd have said, "No sh*t, Washington." That would have taken the phrase "common sense" a little too literally.
Self-explanitory, I suppose

As an author and revolutionary, Thomas Paine was as good as any. As a singer/rapper, T-Pain falls into the middle of the pack. Even compared to the rest of modern hip-hop, Pain's music is surprisingly unintelligent (No, I wasn't that impressed with "Take Your Shirt Off"). So, you would expect his natural vocal talents to make up for his lyrical deficiency. Instead, T-Pain's only real claim to fame is constantly using auto-tune or, in other words, cheating. Pain has demanded credit for inspiring countless other artists to cheat, err, use auto-tune. Fine, T-Pain, I give you credit. I give Jose Canseco credit for pioneering steroid use in baseball, too. Not only were Thomas Paine's words more profound, but he penned his works without even using spell-check.

It's a sad thing that a life like Paine's, of such courage and intelligence, ended will such ill-favor, as he was hardly mourned at his own funeral. As Paine wrote, "What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly; it is dearness only that gives everything it's value." For a man whose life ended among such contempt, consider this the righteous redemption of Thomas Paine, because this well-deserved victory over the other T-Pain will give Thomas the dear recognition he finally deserves. Say what you want about T-Pain, but a Thomas Paine victory here is only common sense.

PS: Happy Fourth, and welcome to Earth...

Feel the Rhythm, Feel the Rhyme! Doug E. Fresh vs. Doug E. Doug

Sanka, ya dead?

In the 80s, the hip-hop community was introduced to Doug E. Fresh a.k.a. The Human Beat Box. With the coming of the 90s, the world discovered that pop culture was only big enough for one "Doug E," because as Fresh's popularity diminished, the torch was passed to actor and comedian Doug E. Doug. But now that we are a decade away from either one's popularity, the time has come to assess just who is the greatest of the Doug Es.

Not only was Doug E. Fresh an MC, but he was one of the earliest talents in rap to shape the Game. He was "Fresh" before the Fresh Prince. The Show is one of the best hip-hop songs of all time (yes, Taylor, Imma let you finish). Back in the day, Doug E. Fresh rolled with Slick Rick, whose childhood accident forced him to wear what would become a trademark eye patch. I give serious props to anyone with enough swag to rock pirate fashion (i.e. eye patches, hooks, peg legs, and puffy shirts), and the fact that Fresh was down with the patch means that I am down with the Fresh. Plus, his uncanny ability to beat box was innovative, not to mention awesome, making Fresh kind of like Sound Effects Guy from Police Academy.
No, it's not Inspector Gadget

Doug E. Doug reigned in the 90s, with roles in a couple below average Disney movies (That Darn Cat, Operation Dumbo Drop). He also shared the screen with comedic pioneer and legend Bill Cosby on Cosby. But as cool as working with the Coz probably was, saying "I was on Cosby" and not The Cosby Show is kind of like saying "I played with Michael Jordan - on the Wizards."
His Airness was a little low on fuel

But despite the lackluster nature of some Doug E. Doug roles, the dread-locked funnyman holds the trump card with his role as the lovable Sanka from Cool Runnings, undoubtedly the best movie ever made about Jamaican bobsledding. Like Rick Moranis said in Little Giants, "even if you lose 99 times out of 100, that still leaves one time." And in Doug E. Doug's case, it only took one moment of greatness to secure his spot as the greatest Doug E that the world has ever known. In the movie, the four man bobsled team fits the same mold as The Great Foursomes: The Beatles and Turtles. That being the case, Doug E. Doug's Sanka is basically Michelangelo with dreads. Need I say more?

Doug E. Fresh may have had a more enduring career, but in the end, which rhythms and rhymes do you remember more? Fresh's The Show or the immortal verses of the Jamaican bobsled team? The Jamaicans have it.
You know you have a crazy group when John Candy's the straight man

PS: Cool Runnings meets 300

Return of the Blog

For reasons based mostly on boredom, I have deemed that it is time to resurrect this blog. I do it for the fans, and thanks to Google Analytics, I know I have gotten a total of 3 visits in the past month (I think those were me). But it's time to change that. Look for a new post in the next couple of days and, consequently, a new hope....

Empire State of Mind: Jay-Z vs. the New York Yankees

You really can't go anywhere these days without hearing Empire State of Mind by Jay-Z and Alicia Keys - can they play this song any more? (Forgive the double negative, but I can't not mention the incredible parody, Galactic Empire State of Mind. But I digress) In the song, Jay-Z claims "I made the Yankee hat more famous than a Yankee can." You can make what you want of this lyric, but it's obvious to me that Jay-Z is calling for a new blog post on Who Would Win? Well, Hova, here's what you wanted.
More famous than the Yankees? The kids from The Sandlot will have something to say about that

We might as well skip the obligatory context paragraph because I'm pretty sure everyone has heard of these two. Usually, I try to make the case for both sides, but this time, I'm not messing around with that. The Yankees are more famous than Jay-Z. Period. Actually, scratch that: exclamation mark. He may be the god of rap, but taking on the entire New York Yankees franchise is like the title of his song from the Blueprint 3: it's "so ambitious." One man can't take on the entire Evil Empire, unless you're Luke Skywalker (and technically, he didn't take down the Empire by himself, he only blew up their space station. But again, I digress).
If freezin' safe for Han, doin' Luke the same way...

Jay-Z is a household name, but you know who else is? Derek Jeter, Alex Rodriguez, and George Steinbrenner. That's three names from the Yankees off the top of my head that are as famous (if not more) than jigga man. And here's the thing: that's only the current Yankees. Jay-Z has been in the Game since the early 90s, but the Yankees have been running the nation's pastime since the early 1900s. If you want to say that rap is bigger than baseball, then why is Hova borrowing from baseball terminology with his 40/40 Club (which, by the way, A-Rod is a member of)? Yes, Jay-Z is a business tycoon, having been estimated to be worth $150 million. But let's remember, he's competing with the Yankees - whose payroll alone in 2010 is over $200 million.

I haven't even gotten into the history of the greatest sports franchise in the world. Let's play a game called Name Yankee Legends More Famous Than Jay-Z: Lou Gehrig, Joe DiMaggio, Yogi Berra, Roger Maris (who, if not for the juiced up McGwire, Sosa, and Bonds, would likely still be the single-season home run king), Whitey Ford, Casey Stengel, Reggie Jackson...need I continue? These names are so famous, I don't even get that red underline for misspellings when I type "Gehrig" and "DiMaggio" (You're just going to have to trust me on this one). I mean, Lou Gehrig has had a disease named after him. This means that there are people who may not even know what baseball is but have heard of Lou Gehrig. On the other hand, there are people who listen to Jay-Z and don't even know his real name (Shawn Carter).

As a reminder, Jay-Z has dropped ten number one albums in a row, second only to the Beatles. I'm not trying to be a hater. But you don't even have to be a baseball fan to know that the Yankees have 27 World Series titles, more championships than any franchise in American sports. Just for good measure, what's the biggest rivalry in American sports? Yankees-Red Sox. Who's thrown the only perfect game ever pitched in the World Series? Don Larsen, a Yankee. And who's the greatest baseball team ever assembled? Most agree it's the '27 Yankees.

Jay-Z, I'm glad you were thoughtful enough to ask for this blog post (because I know this is what you were referring to in your song, and I'm sure you're reading this). Let me say that I love your music and I think you're great. And to be honest, I don't even really like the Yankees, but everyone knows that the pinstripes and the "NY" cap are theirs, not yours. And yes, everybody knows that Jay-Z rocks the Yankee hat. But at the end of the day, it's still called a Yankee hat for a reason. But when they start calling it a "Jay-Z hat," let me know.

I realize you've had a hard knock life, Big Pimpin, so I'll give you this: you're a lot more gangsta than the Yankees. But more famous? Well, you're going to have to brush your shoulders off and move on to the next one, because Thaaaa Yankees win this debate.

PS: Oh yeah, I forgot to mention a certain inconsequential Yankee from back in the day named George Ruth. Some people called him "Babe." I know, I know, you've probably never heard of him. Just thought I'd throw that out there.
I told you they had an opinion

Fly Casual: Han Solo vs. Indiana Jones

I know I tell a lot of jokes on this blog, and I make a lot of posts that are goofy, but more or less meaningless. But today, I want to discuss something very serious - something very near and dear to my heart. Today, I discuss which Harrison Ford role is better: Han Solo or Indiana Jones?

Normally, I start these with a quick summary of the subjects being compared. But if you aren't familiar with either of these names, then this blog really isn't the place for you. Both of these roles are played with a typical Harrison Ford swagger: Solo being the mercenary, smuggler pirate-pilot (that's hard to say) while Jones is the archaeologist with no rules, killing any Nazi or Thuggee cult member that gets in the way of precious artifacts and the museums they belong in. Jones reputation is legendary; from the fedora that he never loses to his handy whip to his rugged attitude, his cultural impact is undeniable. Having recovered the Ark of the Covenant, the Holy Grail, and a few glowing rocks in the second movie, there's a reason Indy's name has become synonymous with adventure. Solo, however, is just as iconic of a character as the pilot of the Millenium Falcon and having one of the most famous co-pilots of all time, Chewbacca. Solo has an equally impressive resume (if not more impressive) - he had a hand in destroying both Death Stars - the galaxy's ultimate weapon. Though he technically didn't destroy either, neither one would have been blown up without his contributions (I guess he gets the assists - call him Steve Nash).
No one watches Star Wars in English, anyways

One disadvantage Solo has against Jones is the fact that he's technically a sidekick. As whiny and annoying as Luke Skywalker may be, he is ultimately the one responsible for helping his father fulfill his destiny and restoring the Jedi Order. Jones, on the other hand, gets to lead whatever adventure he's on, and pretty much making it up as he goes, like he tells Sallah and Marion.

Both have a memorable cast of friends and partners. Indy gets to roll with people like Sean Connery and Short Round (to whom I apologize for not calling him Dr. Jones). Solo gets to roll with Chewie, though, and who wouldn't want to do that. He also made friends with a whole tribe of Ewoks, something that we all want to do. He's also cool with Lando Calrissian, and Lando + Colt 45 = a good time (can you imagine when Solo, Lando, and Chewie get together? That must be a wild time). And each has some less desirable companions: Indy has Kate Capshaw; Solo has Luke, Jabba, and just about every bounty hunter in the galaxy.

However, the one thing that separates Han Solo from Indy is his ability to get the girl in the end. Although Indy has a different female companion in each of the 3 movies, he can never seem to keep them around. Solo, however, ended up with Princess Leia without even trying. He spent most of the trilogy mocking her, and when she finally confessed her love for him, he simply replied, well you know what he said. Even though he was constantly disrespectful, it worked anyway. You may be thinking, "Wait a second. In the fourth movie, Indiana Jones and Marion reunite and get married." But as far as this blog is concerned, the fourth Indiana Jones movie never happened and, therefore, doesn't count. So to that, I say, "I don't know what you're talking about." Solo gets the girl and the win.
And Leia doesn't scream every five minutes

PS: Call me a nerd, but I'm going there. Not only does Han shoot first, but Indy does as well.

Abandon all hope, ye who read this blog: Dante's Peak vs. Dante's Inferno

Ever since Dante's Peak was introduced to the world so long ago (1997), the comparison to Dante's Inferno has been inevitable. One tells the story of the devastating effect of a volcano's eruption on a small town; the other tells of a man's journey through the depths of Hell.

Dante's Peak has been praised for its scientific accuracy. Okay, so it's not exactly accurate, but compared to most disaster movies (remember Tommy Lee Jones in Volcano?), this movie actually made an attempt to portray how volcanoes actually work. This beats the accuracy of Dante's Inferno, which describes the continents all on the Northern Hemisphere, while Hell cuts through the center of the earth, where you can climb out Satan's legs and end up in the Southern Hemisphere, which is where Purgatory is. Clearly, Dante's Peak has the edge here. But honestly, no one watches disaster movies to see good science, nor do you read the Divine Comedy to get a better understanding of geography and astronomy.

One thing you have to consider is star-power. Dante's Peak gets its star-power from Pierce Brosnan playing the lead role. Pierce is easily recognizable as he has played James Bond five different times, as well as starring in The Thomas Crown Affair. And who could forget his performance in Mamma Mia? I mean, I've heard he was in that, too. Also, Pierce's likeness was used in GoldenEye, one of the coolest N64 games ever. So there's that.

Dante's Inferno has a bit of star-power of its own. First of all, Dante Alighieri puts himself in the place of the main character. While he doesn't come out and say it's him, naming your main character after yourself isn't exactly subtle. But for a story about a literal journey through Hell, Purgatory, and Heaven, subtlety was probably not Alighieri's intention. Beyond that, there's his guide, Virgil, legendary Roman poet who wrote the Aeneid. Dante and Virgil travel through each of the rings of Hell, encountering all kinds of star-studded cameos. On their journey, they encounter Homer, author of both the Iliad and the Odyssey. Then they meet Greek mathematician, Euclid. They run into a few other familiar faces, such as Socrates, Aristotle, Julius Caesar (notice there's no Mike Ilitch), Saladin, Dido, Helen of Troy, Paris, Achilles, and Agamemnon. Dante also encounters creatures from Greek and Roman mythology like the Minos, the Furies, Medusa, the Minotaur, Harpies, and Centaurs. Dante also runs into Lancelot and Guinevere, Alexander the Great, Odysseus, Ulysses, Diomedes, the prophet Muhammad, and a handful of Popes. There may or may not have been a Pontius Pilate sighting. (There's also a medieval mathematician named Michael Scot, who would undoubtedly be played by Steve Carrell if this was going to be made into a movie in the next couple years.) I almost forgot, Brutus and Cassius are there too. And Judas. Dante also sees the devil himself, and not only does he see him, but he climbs his legs out of Hell. These are a few of the recognizable names that show up in the Inferno (did I mention this is only the first part of a three part story?). Even though Pierce Brosnan was in Robinson Crusoe, I think Dante's Inferno wins the battle of star-power.

While we're on the subject, let's think about the implications of all these famous figures in the Inferno. Let's not forget that all these characters' appearances insinuates that they are in Hell. Who has the balls to do that? The same kind of people who write themselves as the main characters, that's who. Not only does Dante's Peak not have the star-power of the Inferno, they missed the opportunity to mess with some famous people's personas. Dante put Popes in Hell - that's quite a statement. If Dante's Peak had done the equivalent, they could have had more contemporary authors, philosophers, and world leaders getting rocked by a volcano. Can you imagine if they had put Stephen Hawking trying to escape the eruption, or having Bill Clinton killed by a rush of lava? (He'd probably end up in the same ring as Lancelot and Guinevere). What if they put Pope John Paul in there? It could have been real controversial. Instead, they played it safe, and because of that, I have to give props to Alighieri because his epic poem beats what imdb calls "not a bad disaster movie." Dante's Inferno wins.

PS: I mentioned Centaurs appearing in Dante's Inferno. I just thought I'd point out that Pierce Brosnan played a Centaur in that new Percy Jackson movie. Just something to chew on..

Get Crunk in Nottinham: Little John vs. Lil Jon

Naming himself after such a recognizable literary figure, Lil Jon is really begging for this comparison to be made. That's where I come in.

Little John and Lil Jon do have some similarities; both belong to an esteemed "band." Little John of Robin Hood fame belongs to the band of Merry Men, while Lil Jon is a member of Lil Jon & the East Side Boyz. While they both have high rank in their respective group, Lil Jon has a position of greater authority as he is the leading member of the East Side Boyz. Little John, however, is second in command to Robin Hood. The advantage here appears to go to the rapper. But when considering their positions in their groups, we must also consider what exactly each group does. Lil Jon and the gang get together and make songs that pretty much are all about some combination of shawties, skeet skeet, and/or getting crunk. While you have to admire his unique diction, the subject-material is a bit repetitive and, frankly, unintelligent (according to Wikipedia, Lil Jon admitted that people must dumb themselves down to listen to his music). Little John accompanies Robin Hood on noble adventures to do things like rob from the rich and corrupt, give to the poor, and overthrow the disastrous John, younger brother of former King Richard I. Though he's just a sidekick, it seems a lot cooler (not to mention more important) to be Number 2 in a group devoted to stamping out tyranny and restoring justice rather than taking all the glory for albums like Crunk Juice.

Chappelle's Show
A Moment in the life of Lil Jon - Oprah
http://www.comedycentral.com/
Buy Chappelle's Show DVDs Black Comedy True Hollywood Story

Lil Jon's greatest enemy is himself

Though Lil Jon's music career has been somewhat short-lived and seems to be fading, he has made a positive impact simply because he's so easy to make fun of. His tendency to repeat the same exclamations ("What?! Okay!") has led to lots of great parodies (like this YouTube classic), most notably the "A Day in the Life of Lil Jon" sketches on Chappelle's Show. But Little John is no stranger to parody, as Robin Hood: Men in Tights is arguably one of Mel Brooks' best satires (Initially, it appears that Lil Jon's affiliation with Dave Chappelle should secure his victory, since Chappelle is a member of the Hall of Ballin'. But since Chappelle was also in Robin Hood: Men in Tights, the Chappelle factor cancels out). Plus, Little John has been popular since the 14th Century, while Lil Jon was popular for a handful of years. Today, he's not even the most relevant rapper with the "Lil" prefix (Congrats, Lil Wayne).
This may traumatize children who watch Lazy Town

Looking at the Robin Hood legend - and when I say legend, I mean the Disney cartoon - we see Prince John portrayed as a self-involved leader who sits on a throne sipping from his diamond-studded chalice and sucking his thumb. His reign does not last long in the movie. Lil Jon, leader of the East Side Boyz, is known to sit on giant chairs with bling, a crown, and a sparkling pimp cup of crunk juice. His reign did not last long, either. Though he shares a name with Little John, the Robin Hood character he most resembles is Prince John. This is an easy victory for Little John and the Merry Men.
Gotta love mash-ups

PS: If being Sean Connery's son was enough to edge Indiana Jones over Dora the Explorer, then let's add insult to injury. In 1976, Sean Connery starred as Robin Hood in Robin and Marian opposite Audrey Hepburn (weird, right?). If Sean Connery is Robin Hood, then Little John is friends with Sean Connery, automatically making him the cooler one (As Connery might say, "Suck it, Lil Jon"). But while we're talking about it - try to imagine a Robin Hood adaption where Connery stars as Robin and Lil Jon plays his trusty companion, Little John. My head almost just exploded from sheer juxtaposition.

PPS: According to Wikipedia, Lil Jon's phone number is the same as Miley Cyrus' old one. Imagine your surprise if you were a 12 year old girl trying to call Miley and Lil Jon picked up.
Caller: Hello, is this Miley?
Lil Jon: What??
C: Can I speak to Miley?
LJ: Whhhat??
C: Miley. Cyrus. Is she there?
LJ: .....whhhhhhat??
C: All right, I think I have the wrong number..
LJ: Okayyyy!!

Et tu, Pizza Pizza? Caesar vs. Ilitch

Yup, that's actually today's match-up. But considering the fact that Mike Ilitch, founder of Little Caesar's Pizza, decided to name his company after the great Roman rulers, I really can't resist this discussion.

It's safe to say that the Caesars were a pretty influential family. Obviously, the two most prominent Caesars were Julius and his nephew, Octavius (Augustus). Julius was the first ruler of the Roman Empire, one of the most powerful civilizations in history. Augustus picked up where his uncle/adopted father left off and also ruled the Empire (although he wouldn't call himself a dictator, but we know the real story). Much like the Caesars, the Ilitch family is involved in leadership. Like Caesar founded the Roman Empire, Mike Ilitch founded a fast-food empire - Little Caesars. Eventually he created Ilitch Holdings which encompasses all of his companies, such as the pizza chain, Olympia Entertainment, and the Detroit Red Wings and Tigers. And like Augustus took over where his uncle left off, Mike appointed two of his children, Christopher and Denise, as co-president and CEO of Ilitch Holdings. Denise has since stepped down from her position of power (more than any Caesar can say), leaving Christopher in charge.

Undoubtedly, both families have left remarkable legacies on their respective locales. Walk around Rome and you'll still see examples of this - the Forum of Julius, Temple of Saturn, as well as plenty of statues and aqueducts. Around Detroit, Ilitch's effect can be seen in Comerica Park or the renovated Fox Theatre. And like James Earl Jones (first-ballot inductee to the Hall of Ballin), Mike Ilitch has received the key to the City of Detroit. But then again, so has Saddam Hussein, so scratch that. Both Caesars have had months named after them, cementing their legacy into our everyday lives over 2000 years later. But neither of them can claim to have their name etched on the Stanley Cup.

Ilitch's victories are notable - four Stanley Cups and an American League Championship (although he fell short of the World Series). Julius Caesar conquered Gaul and invaded Britain (although fell short of British occupation). Augustus, however, continued Julius' expansion into areas such as Spain, Portugal, and defeating Mark Antony and conquering Egypt.

Of course it hasn't been all good for either party. Though Julius Caesar is the first ruler of the Roman Empire, the ugly side of that is how he dismantled the Roman Republic in order to keep his emergency powers. He felt the consequences of this, seeing as how he was assassinated and all. Augustus Caesar claimed to be the leader of a restored Republic, but really maintained the power of a dictator. Ilitch has struggled, too. First of all, look at Little Caesar's commercials. Also, the Tigers had 12 losing seasons out of 13 under his ownership. However, they have since become more respectable, winning an ALCS and coming a game short of the division championship last year. Before Ilitch owned the team, the Red Wings were known by the unsympathetic nickname, "Dead Wings." Since he took over, though, Detroit now has the nickname "Hockeytown," a significant turnaround.

The fact that Mike Ilitch called his franchise "Little" Caesars seems a bit emasculating. You'd certainly never see the OC (Original Caesar) give themselves such a moniker (although if either of them were to return today as a rapper, it's likely their stage name would be Lil' Caesar).

However, when it comes to thinking of the Roman Empire, we have to consider its size. Phrases like "The sun never sets on the Roman Empire" or "Rome wasn't built in a day" indicate the immense expansion of the Empire. Covering almost all of Europe and stretching to northern Africa and the Middle East, its size is formidable, to say the least. However, Ilitch has done some expanding of his own empire. Though Little Caesars is most prominent in Michigan, the franchise has expanded globally. From Japan to Peru to Egypt, Little Caesars has locations in 26 countries that span five continents (North America, South America, Europe, Asia, Africa). Rome at its height touched three (Europe, Asia, Africa). As formidable as the OC's Empire was, it never expanded as widely as Ilitch's empire. Considering that expansion is what Rome is best remembered for, it should be able to surpass Little Caesars, but it does not. With the first store in Garden City, Michigan, the Little Caesars empire certainly wasn't built in a day. But one thing is for sure: the sun never sets on Mike Ilitch's empire. Ilitch wins.

PS: All right, so Little Caesars pizza (Pizza!) isn't actually that good. But how convenient is the Hot-N-Ready? Five dollar pizzas ready to go? You walk out with change. Brilliant. As annoying as their commercials are (and as mediocre as the product itself is), I can't pass up that Hot-N-Ready. Too bad Caesar never came up with anything that revolutionary.

Who let the dogs out: Snoop Dogg vs. Underdog

It's the bow to the wow; who's the best dog in the pound? As the star of the highly popular cartoon from the 60s and 70s, Shoeshine Boy is a humble dog who spends his nights as the mighty superhero, Underdog. Calvin Broadus is one of the most recognizable rappers in the game under his alias, Snoop Dogg. But how can you possibly decide which dog(g) is better? Well have no fear, Who Would Win? is here to solve your dilemma.

Rappers today are often bragging about their success and their rhymes, but also they also spend a lot of time shamelessly admitting to criminal activity. Snoop is one of the pioneers of this. Whether it's cocaine possession or his past with the Crips, Snoop is a gangsta who's no stranga' to illegal activities and has served time. Underdog, on the other hand, fights crime and battles gangsters, such as Riff Raff. Underdog has handled all kinds of criminals, from mad scientists to aliens. Technically, being a superhero means taking the law into your own hands, so Underdog has no moral high ground in this case, as this makes him a criminal too. However, in terms of a fight between the two, Underdog has the advantage. Even though Snoop has rolled with the likes of the Crips as well as 2Pac and Dr. Dre (from the streets of Compton), he has no tactical advantage over Underdog, who can fly, has super strength, and is invulnerable to any heat the Crips are packin'. Besides, Riff Raff is a wolf, so Underdog already has experience fighting canine gangsters. When it comes to dog fights, Underdog wins (and Michael Vick loses).

But though they may have different views on justice, these two hounds have surprisingly similar style - considering their tendency to drop rhymes. Underdog consistently introduces himself by saying, "there's no need to fear, Underdog is here!" or "Not plane, nor bird, nor even frog. It's just little old me, Underdog!" Snoop Dogg obviously has made a career of rhyming, and he often uses it for self-promotion as well ("With so much drama in the LBC/ It's kinda hard being Snoop D-O-double G"). Underdog, however, limits his rhymes severely by sticking to the subject matter of crime fighting. Snoop doesn't hinder himself this way, opening his rhymes up to more than just one topic. You may make the argument that it's easy to rhyme when you put the suffix -izzle at the end of everything, but you have to give Snoop credit for more or less inventing that (And technical-izzle, it's actually surprisingly difficult-izzle. See? That sounds terrible). If the two decided to settle the feud by way of rap battle, Snoop's freestyling ability would give him the edge over Underdog's simpler, pre-composed rhymes (and likely both would resort to a rap battle before violence). As far as canine cadence is concerned, Snoop has the edge with the more euphonious pooch poetry.
Snoop can even call out Shoeshine in German

However, this comparison has only considered Snoop Dogg vs. the Underdog cartoon. But when we bring the 2007 live-action movie into play, the dog's reputation is severely hampered. Voiced by the guy from My Name is Earl, this surprising cast starts the movie with a strike already against it. Casting Jim Belushi as a starring role is another strike, as he is the virtual opposite of Sean Connery cool. And as a general rule of thumb: any time you see Patrick Warburton in something that's not Seinfeld, you should stay away. And I also can't think of a time when a live-action talking dog was a good idea, so that's four strikes. The third one was a foul ball, I guess. So, that being said, Snoop Dogg is the best Dogg, which I guess makes him man's best friend. Had the question come up before 2007, this would have been a tougher debate. But in light of the Belushi-tainted legacy, Snoop drops Underdog like he's hot. In other words: it's Snoop D-O-double Gizzle for the wizzle, fo' shizzle. Get ready for the next episode.
Drop it like you forgot your oven mitt

PS: Hold up! Heyyy, before I move on, let's not forget that Snoop Dogg is cousins with Nate Dogg, one of the smoothest voices in the business (rap apparently runs in the Dogg family) . Having Nate Dogg on your side basically gives you an automatically catchy hook. It even worked for Shaq.

I did not have relations: Tiger Woods vs. Bill Clinton

Tiger Woods has quickly become the current most notorious cheater in the country. But it wasn't long ago since another very influential figure got busted for infidelity (think Presidents). So who's the better cheater: Bill or Tiger? Let's think about how each adulterer reacted to getting caught. Woods kept quiet for a day or two until he decided what he was going to say, and then came out with dull and calculated apologies: a classic, conventional move for an athlete. Tiger's reputation was one of the cleanest in sports - not only was he one of the most dominant athletes in history and the first billion dollar athlete, he always seemed to say the right thing. So when he fell from grace, he fell hard; his portrayal in the media changed quicker than Michael Jackson's after he died. Clinton decided to blatantly lie to the entire nation, which is usually frowned on for people of his profession. Clinton's cheating was bigger in the sense that he was the leader of the free world, but it probably wasn't as surprising considering some of the questionable things he had said before (Like when he said he tried marijuana but didn't inhale - yeah, and he didn't have sexual relations with that woman, either). As for punishments, Clinton seems to have taken the bigger blow, becoming only the second President to be impeached while Tiger spent a few weeks in a fake rehab center. Tiger spent his whole career giving cookie-cutter, impersonal interviews. It's ironic that his debacle was so personal and humiliating - with the images of his wife smashing in his wrecked car's windows were on every news, sports, or celebrity gossip channel for about a week. Obviously, Clinton's cheating was humiliating, but we didn't get any stories of Bill passed out in a crashed motorcade while Hillary smashed the windows in with JFK's golf clubs (but wouldn't that have been awesome? How awkward would it be for the Secret Service working that shift?) As far as public perception goes, Tiger is currently one of the most unpopular figures in pop culture, but Bill keeps popping up on campaign trails and PSAs for relief programs. People seem to have forgiven the Clint'. However, it may just be a matter of time before the whole Tiger thing blows over and he does his best Michael Vick and plays the redeemed athlete.

What we can judge now is the uniqueness of the act itself. It turns out that Tiger was sleeping with women wherever he went around the country. It's definitely newsworthy, but it's not something that we've never seen before with athletes/celebrities. Clinton, however, committed his adultery in the Oval Office. That's either the dumbest idea ever or the ballsiest (sorry for the awkward word choice). Regardless, that's a story that doesn't come around that often. I don't even know how a President can sneak around to have an affair. Aren't they like always being watched? You'd have to be a ninja or something. The fact that he's regained public favor after this recklessness is appalling, especially because I can't remember when it changed or how (JFK did the same thing and is now revered. Obama, take note). Tiger slept around and got attacked by his wife on national TV (Fail). Bill Clinton defiled the Oval Office, lied to the American public, and is now somehow in the nation's good graces (FTW). He gets points for originality and sticking the landing. Clinton beats Tiger like he beat Bob Dole.

PS: These are two of the most famous recent cheaters, but there have been scores of cheaters worthy of being in this discussion (JFK, Hester Prynne, Lancelot, King David, Cleopatra, Helen of Troy, Henry VIII, Brad Pitt). This debate feels a bit like the BCS: only giving two parties the chance to win when there are so many other worthy candidates. To properly address this question, I may need to build up a larger list and make a playoff bracket for history's best philanderer. Maybe for March Madness. Any requests?

Fedora, whip, and backpack: Indiana Jones vs. Dora the Exporer

From Magellan to Columbus, the world has known many great explorers. But the two that most exemplify the adventurous spirit of the last century are, of course, Indiana Jones and Dora the Explorer. Standing in the face of the fiercest enemies - Nazis, heart-ripping cults, and a fox named Swiper - these adventurers let nothing stop them from reaching their destination. But which one is the greatest explorer? Initially, it appears to be Jones. Looking at the tools of their trade, Indy is known for his whip, pistol, and his trademarked fedora. Dora is known to carry a map and a backpack. While Dora's may be more practical, it's not nearly as cool. I thought she was supposed to be an explorer, not a lost first grader. Indiana Jones makes split-second choices in life-or-death situations, while Dora can't make any decisions without asking the audience at least three times what she should do. As far as the scope of their adventures go, Indy's feats are far greater. While Dora's half-hour hunt for blueberries was impressive, it doesn't quite have the same ring to it as the Ark of the Covenant or the Holy Grail. But despite the initial reaction, there are some things Dora can do that Dr. Jones can't. For example, Indy always gets himself into situations where he has to kill at least like 10 people just so he doesn't die. Dora, on the other hand, typically gets what she's looking for without having to kill anyone. Usually, she finds a way to cooperate with the characters she meets. She can always stop the devious fox, Swiper, just by repeating "Swiper, no swiping," until he gets sick of hearing her wretched voice. This worked once for Jones ("Sallah, no camels!"), but it isn't a very effective strategy against angry Nazis. Also, if she ever encountered a snake, it would probably be no big deal. Indy, though, would likely pack it up and call it quits at that point. And Dora's writers never decided to incorporate aliens into the plot out of the blue, nor did she ever have to share a screen with the kid from Even Stevens. So that's a plus.
Unfortunately, this doesn't work on Nazis

Despite this, though, the debate was over before it began: Sean Connery is Indy's dad. Game, set, and match. The only way Dora could compete is if her father was either Christopher Walken, Morgan Freeman, or Harrison Ford. Unfortunately for Dora, her father is none of those people, and Harrison Ford is Indiana Jones, so that's a double whammy. A combination of cool as powerful as Connery and Ford is something that no amount of flying saucers or Shia LaBeouf can negate. Fedora > Dora.

PS: While we're on the subject, can you imagine what Indiana Jones would have been like Dora-style? The climax of Henry the Explorer and the Lost Ark would have been Indy looking at the camera saying, "Looking at the Ark will conjure the wrath of God. What should I do? (pause, blinks) Close my eyes! You got it!" followed by a sing-along. What a different place the world would be.
Speaking of juxtaposition

Happiness is a Warm Pizza: Beatles vs. Turtles

For the inaugural post, I find it only fitting to begin with the debate that's been raging since the beginning of time...or at least since the beginning of this particular blog. Which is the better foursome: the Beatles or the Ninja Turtles? One battled fearsome enemies like the Foot and the Shredder. The other got a leg up on the competition and shredded the charts, redefining the music industry. But before we get into their differences, let's take a minute to examine these two Fab Fours' similarities.

Basically, the groups break down in an eerily similar fashion. Both have two de facto leaders: for the Beatles, it's John Lennon and Paul McCartney, while the Turtles have Raphael and Leonardo. Of the two respective leaders, one has a more straight-laced, follow-the-rules kind of approach. Leonardo always seems to be training more than his brothers and bases most of his decisions on what Master Splinter told him to do. This approach is often causing him to butt heads with Raphael. With the Beatles, Paul McCartney's music tends to fit more mainstream, popular conventions like "Hello, Goodbye." John Lennon once criticized him for making silly love songs, so Paul responded with his hit, "Silly Love Songs," similar to how Leo clashes with Raph.
Yep, John Lennon wasn't shy about doing things his own way

As a contrast to the more straight-laced leader, there is the more stubborn, do-it-your own way approach that is taken by Raph and John Lennon. Lennon's songs like "I am the Walrus," "Across the Universe," and "Happiness is a Warm Gun" were more avant-garde and experimental than McCartney's. Raphael is often ignoring the warnings of Splinter and Leo, and tends to leave the group and try to fight the Foot on his own (John Lennon, anyone?). Between both groups' two leaders, there is a healthy balance of following conventions and breaking them.
Leo and Raph at their essence

The Beatles have George Harrison who doesn't write many songs, but whenever he does, they always seem to be good (Something, Here comes the sun, While my guitar gently weeps). Donatello rarely takes over a fight, but has the potential to when he chooses. Both are the technical masters of their foursome - Donny being good with gadgets and computers while Harrison is the group expert on guitar, sitar, or whatever instrument the band needs. These two are the quiet technicians. And then there's Ringo and Michaelango, the jokesters who are both basically just there for comic relief.
Ringo's funny even when he's not trying to be

When you break it down, the Beatles and the Turtles are pretty much the same, in terms of group dynamics at least. So that still leaves the question: which group is better? What does this group dynamic work better in: music or crime-fighting? To address this, we must consider each group's longevity, accolades, and adversaries.

Though the Beatles are one of the most famous and influential bands in the history of popular music, the band wasn't actually together for too long. They lasted 10 years (1960-1970). The Ninja Turtles, on the other hand, made their first appearance in 1984 and have been going strong ever since. With comic books, video games, two animated TV series, and four movies, the Turtles have been a part of pop culture for the last 26 years - and they're not done. There are talks of a new live-action TMNT movie scheduled to hit theaters in the next couple of years. Advantage: Turtles.

As far as accolades go, the Beatles have been nominated for 26 Grammys, and won 13 times. They've had 24 Multi-Platinum albums and 15 number one albums on the UK chart: more than any other artist. Queen Elizabeth II appointed them Members of the Order of the British Empire. They have multiple albums (like Abbey Road and Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band) which are often argued to be the best album of all time. For the sake of time, I won't list the rest of their accolades, and I won't even get into the Turtles' (but that's more because Wikipedia doesn't have an "awards" section on the Turtles' page). Advantage: Beatles

Like Sasha-Baron Cohen said in Talledega Nights, every great hero needs a great villain. Superman has Lex Luthor. Luke Skywalker has Darth Vader. Octomom has shame and integrity. Over the years, the Ninja Turtles have overcome many villains: the Foot, Tatsu, Karai, Bebop and Rocksteady, Tokha and Razar, etc. But their greatest and most iconic foe is obviously the Shredder. From his intimidating mask, to the spikes on his arms and shoulders, and his sparkly purple shirt, Shredder is a source of fear and a profound symbol of evil (at least he was when I was a kid). The Beatles' biggest competition in the 60s was the Rolling Stones. Both invaded from England and lit up the charts, making music with a slightly different approach: the Beatles being the Fab Four while the Stones were more like the bad boys of rock. As arguably the best rock and roll band of all time, the Stones seem like a greater foe than Shredder. I exaggerated a bit before. That purple outfit isn't nearly as intimidating as it was when I was a kid. You really have to question why he thought it was a good idea to leave the house dressed like that (But then again, you can say the same thing about pretty much anything that Mick Jagger/Keith Richards ever wore). And what's up with the name? The Shredder? Way to be original. The Rolling Stones' name is not only catchy but metaphorical as well (I'm usually sold on metaphors). Besides, if you're going to call yourself the Shredder and dud up with spikes all over your armor, you would think shredding things would be a part of your mantra. But I can't remember ever seeing the Shredder actually "shred" anything. It's more for looks. Advantage: Beatles.

By this rubric, the Beatles have the advantage 2-1. But that is based on external factors. What's more important is how the group functions internally. We already talked about how the group dynamics are similar, but whose group functions better? Though the Beatles were able to defeat their external foes, their greatest threat came from within themselves. Like I said, the Beatles lasted 10 years together, and then they broke up. To be considered the better group, I think you actually have to keep your group in tact. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it's 26 years later and the Ninja Turtles still haven't broken up. Though Raphael has often stormed off in anger, his brothers always convince him that it's for the best that they remain intact. John Lennon walked away once and the Beatles never recovered. Maybe it's because Raph never had a Yoko (which is probably because there are no teenage mutant female turtles). But the reason the Turtles will never break up and the Beatles couldn't withstand inner-turmoil is Splinter. Through the ups and downs, Master Splinter remains the emotional and intellectual rock of the foursome. He's there to offer advice when the Turtles need it, and he teaches them to fight together and utilize each other's strengths as well as their own. Though the Beatles have awards to stretch from here to Liverpool and back, Splinter's steady presence is the one thing they didn't have. Ultimately, their lack of a strong, uniting presence is what allowed their downfall to occur.

Though the Beatles have more awards and a more formidable foe, the Turtles' have the X-factor. As Leo and Mike said in Turtles II,
"You forgot Shredder, we carry insurance."
"Yeah, Mutual Splinter, dude!"
This insurance is what keeps the Turtles together, and is the difference that sets the heroes in a half-shell apart from music's Fab Four. Turtles win.

PS: Oh, and before you ask - yes, I quoted Turtles II from memory.