In a review of Katy Perry: Part Of Me, New York Times writer Anthony O. Scott signed his own death sentence.

No, really. Scott comitted the unthinkable. He claimed that someone was more talented than Justin Bieber. Here’s the excerpt from the review that invited a world of pain into A.O. Scott’s existence:

“There are several reasons that ‘Katy Perry: Part of Me’ is more interesting than similar movies about Justin Bieber, Miley Cyrus and the Jonas Brothers. Most simply, she just has more talent than any of them.”

Though we searched high and low on Twitter for threats against A.O. Scott’s life, we came up empty handed. I guess there aren’t too many Beliebers who read The Times.

At its core, the argument is comparing apples to oranges. To argue that one artist appears to be more talented in their little piece of pop propaganda is moot, when you consider that either the artist or his/her management is sitting in on the editing session, spit-shining all of the less-than flattering shot choices for quality control.

Could it be more pertinent to discuss which film is better, then? That’s somewhat inconsequential, too, because both Never Say Never and Part Of Me were made by the exact same studio and are carried by the same distributor.

Even though the films aren’t really in competition with each other, a comparison could be valuable before arguing that one is “better” than the other. While Katy Perry’s Part Of Me certainly seems to follow the Never Say Never model, how do the two films differ in terms of production and critical response? Use our patented Never Say Never vs. Part Of Me fact sheet to inform your viewing and subsequent evaluation.

Katy Perry: Part Of Me 3D hits theaters today (July 5th, 2012).