Not that big of a fan, to be honest.
Their pop band phase does nothing for me though Paul was great at churning out catchy tunes. Meanwhile, rock was progressing very well in England by bands that basically ignored the Beatles.
Let's be honest. Most English rock bands were on a separate evolutionary track than the Beatles and were inspired by American Blues. That was the basis of rock for a very long time. The Beatles didn't flow into that until it was WELL established.
Then Bob Dylan gave the Beatles some weed and the Beatles machine switched gears. After that, they did produce some good music but they also produced some self-indulgent fluff. John just was not that good. Most of his solo albums are terrible. Ringo shouldn't really even be famous. Paul is a fantastic writer but it's mostly souless stuff. George Harrison is by far my favorite and I think he was better without the others.
As for the Beatles being most influential, maybe, if you include pop. Rock? No. They were only rock, themselves, for a small period of time. There aren't all that many bands that tried to replicate the music the Beatles were making, other than their pop stuff, which died out rather quickly. Led Zeppelin, Jimi Hendrix, or the Rolling Stones, among others, had more impact on actual music over the next few decades.
The reality of the Beatles is that they hit HUGE as a pop band, which made everyone interested in their other phases. They'd done an incredible job of marketing "The Beatles" and they were world-famous as an entertainment act. Much of their second phase stuff would not have received nearly as much attention had they not already been "the Fab Four."
