All right, in the true spirit of American comparitive shopping, and as part of National Lampoon’s endless search to bring you the best in quality product awareness, I put my health on the line to do a Burger taste test.
In the last 16 hours I have eaten three burgers from two of America’s biggest fast food chains.

First off, I ended my night with McDonald’s new “angus” burger (the bacon and cheese variety). I will begin by saying, out of all the burger’s I ate, the Angus burger seemed to have the most integrity as an actual “burger” in the classic sense. It’s All-American, evoking images of something Hemmingway might eat.
The meat straddled the line between fast food patty and actual ground beef; though, it seemed like this may be more of an aesthetic statement - a visual trick aimed at confusing the consumer into thinking they’re eating real meat. However, placebo or not, the burger convinced me it could have been ordered at a low-grade tavern rather than a drive through. The toppings still had the usual McDonald’s ketchup and pickles feeling, grounding it as a golden arches staple - however, I would say it was at least 45 percent more edible than the standard quarter-pounder. I would add this to the top of your mental McD’s menu; unless you’re a fish-sandwich type, in which case you’re better of sticking with you classic tartar topped treat.

Next, was breakfast, and here’s where we bring out the real competition.
12 o’clock brought out the big guns:
The Whopper (classic) VS. The Angry Whopper

Now, we’ve all seen the ad; a bull whip carrying farmer whips an onion in a field, causing it to grow up with an inferiority complex and a vengeful goal in life, all inspired by it’s abusive childhood. It’s a tale as old as time (a tale about onion farmers who carry bull-whips). The question is, does the angry whopper truly pack a punch? Or, more importantly, how does it stack up against it’s cousin, the whopper classic (who’s parents moved from the farm while the onions were still at a young age, in order to rear their children in a better neighborhood, in a good school zone, far from the abusive, bull-whip toting land baron).

In order to understand the comparisson, I’ll start off by reminding everyone about the whopper.
It includes: one quarter pound patty, lettuce, onions, tomatos, pickles and mayo.
(Simple yet elegant as far as burgers were concerned at the time of it’s inception into society.)

Now, the angry whopper is a different beast all together.
It includes: one quarter pound patty and lettuce (this, so far, is the same but that’s where we vear off course).
The new toppings are: onion rings, jalapeno peppers, chipotle mayo, pepperjack cheese and tomatos.
(Also, I’m not sure that that sauce is chipotle mayo so much as mayo and BBQ sauce mixed together, possibly with some tobasco.)

Obviously, the first difference that can be noted between the two whoppers is that the Angry Whopper is spicy. However, on a deeper level, the new “sandwich”/”burger” poses a much more philosophicle question: what defines a whopper?
I always saw the whopper as an ideal; a fast-food burger that stood for everything McDonald’s burgers did not. No mustard; tomatos instead of just ketchup; a burger that challenged the conventions of fast food simplicity and asked ” where can we go from here” and “is this really the best we can do”?
In this way, I think the Angry Whopper may have even surpassed the Original Whopper. However, as we stated originally, the new whopper is spicy; which means it’s a more exclusive sandwich. It’s more defined, pushes boundaries - but it’s sheer existence embodies an amount of elitism.
We’re pushing the boundaries of fast food; but it’s not for everyone and it was never intended to be. Personally, I think this makes the Angry Whopper more than simply a meal; I think it makes it an statement (though, there are those who would disagree - the foodinatti, in particular).
In the general market, there are some who like the QP or the Angus and some who prefer Whoppers, but (for the most part) the burgers are universal - all inclusive. The Angry Whopper breaks this convention. Rather than designing a product that will offend as few people as possible while appealing to the majority, the Angry Whopper is designed to offend the majority while perfectly addressing the needs of a specific minority, focusing on expressing one goal - a spicy, mouth-water, flavor attack that takes no prisoners.
Now, is this pretentious? One could argue “yes”. However, I think it’s a step towards a new world in the fast food industry. Whereas the classic Whopper was entertainment, the Angry Whopper is an art form.

Now, having defined these standards, we can look outside of the two-chain forerunners.  Wendy’s Baconator sandwich, though of an arguably lower quality, definitely straddles the line between art and entertainment; while it is specified in it’s audience, the topping’s chosen are time tested and relatively popular to the majority of people; making it more like the Tarantino of the burger community.

But, the real question is: “where do we go from here”? “What will the future bring to the fast food world”? “When will Culver’s expand into a nationwide chain”? And “why does my heart hurt so much”?