Shakespeare vs. Chrono

[ZealKnight]

I don't know how to make it so you can actually vote, but anyway. People love Shakespeare, particularly English teachers, but to me the Chrono Series's story was much more worth while. Most of the time I hear that his writing wasn't great he just knew his audience, which was retarded. Not that he couldn't write he has some great poems, but his plays usually suffered from plots that I thought were stupid (like Othello's motivation was some black guy got the job he wanted and the plot was like Gossip Girl Extreme). In Chrono Trigger Lavos is a biological creature who has to do that. And in Cross it was a thing of war but in an extremely unique way. Plus the romance of Romeo and Juliet can't compare to Schala and Serge,even if you don't think Serge and Kid were in love just role with it. Romeo and Juliet couldn't be in love because of their countries' war, probably something extremely new for western literature (I say that because my friend took Middle Eastern Lit and found stories of the same nature written before Shakespeare). But in Cross Kid and Serge couldn't be toghter for many reasons. 1. different time periods 2. Different time lines 3. Schala's a princess and he's a fisherman 4. he dies before she can meet him so on and so on. I'll admit it's not really the same thing being two different genres. But still I'd rather watch the story of someone's playthrough on Chrono Cross or Chrono Trigger than any Shakespeare play. Anyone else feel the same way?

[alfadorredux]

If your teachers are claiming that Shakespeare's plays are of value because of their plots, said teachers need to do a bit of studying of their own. It's known that Shakespeare's plots were derivative--he even plagiarized other contemporary plays! What makes his work literature is his skill in characterization and with the language. On those bases, I'm sorry, but the Chrono series, wonderful though it is, can't compete.

(Yes, this is a quick and sloppy answer. Bite me.)

[ONSLAUGHT]

Personal opinion, Shakespeare can go jump in a lake.

Chrono hands down. Excellent story that conquers for many reasons. Characterization, I don't think they were THAT deep. I still say Chrono there. Call me ignorant, I stand by my decision.

Edit: This also seems like a wierd Chrono VS Topic. I've seen plenty, and this has to take 2nd place for wierdest but good idea! (sorry you're not 1st, that one goes to Chrono VS the EMPIAH! WTF?)

[ZealKnight]

Yeah characterization seems more likely to be better in Shakespeare but I'd debate some of his plays on that. But script means nothing to me. I care more about plot.

[V_Translanka]

To the right of "New Topic" is "Post New Poll", which is what you needed to click in order to create a poll topic (go fig). If you want you can create a new poll and we can merge them I suppose...

Anyways, I'm not a Shakespeare fan, myself. He needed to stick with comedy, everything else seemed rather groan-worthy and left me rolling my eyes. Though, to be fair, I'm not as familiar with his works as I am with Chrono, I still gotta give it up for the series...*shrugs*

Hamlet 2 was cool, does that count?

[Zephira]

Shakespeare is pretty funny. Most of what he wrote was sexual innuendo, and his work wasn't even considered good until after he died.
I think the mediums and styles of Chrono and Shakespeare are far too different to really compare them like thought. I prefer CT myself, because I'm not really up to date with older english phrases.

[Truthordeal]

I think the mediums and styles of Chrono and Shakespeare are far too different to really compare them like thought.

I'd have to agree.

I liked Julius Caesar and Macbeth(probably because I'm a history nut) and Hamlet, but that's about it. Shakespeare was way too boring for me otherwise.

If you're asking me which one I'd rather read a story/script by....Kato.

[GenesisOne]

I recently took a Shakespeare class.  The dialogue made it difficult (for me, anyways) to discern a lot of the plot.  I like his plays, don't get me wrong on that.  I really liked "A Midsummer Night's Dream" and "Much Ado About Nothing".

On the other hand, the Chrono series, with its titillating characters, its equally titillating storyline, and its multi-verse worlds, caught me up more than any Shakespeare play has done to date.  Guilty as charged, I suppose.

[ZaichikArky]

Are you serious? You are saying that the Chrono series is better than Shakespeare?
....


That is really odd. I'm not going to be rude and call you an ignorant dumbass, but comparing the two is just... well, incomprehensible to me. I think it's because you are young and don't appreciate true literature.

[V_Translanka]

Yeah...or maybe it's all relative. Shakespeare isn't the be-all & end-all perfect example of literary wordsmithery or anything, but maybe me using 'wordsmithery' proves your point somewhat.

[FaustWolf]

...RUN THROUGH FIRE WILL I, FOR THY SWEET SAKE!

That was a scene from "Lysander does Japan," the upcoming work of Masato Shakespeare, the artist formerly known as William Kato. Featuring Kid in Tokyo, with a dimensional-crossing Bottom serving as her guide for comic relief. Supposedly there is a cast of thousands, though critics are already panning their lack of character development in the play and the amount of story shoved into the third act.

[GenesisOne]

I'm not going to be rude and call you an ignorant dumbass, but comparing the two is just... well, incomprehensible to me. I think it's because you are young and don't appreciate true literature.

I'm not calling the Chrono series greater than Shakespeare's work.  I just found the Chrono series more enticing to my literary palette than Shakespeare.  Sometimes, I like to muse upon his comedies, like "Taming of the Shrew".

As for being young... well, you're as young as you feel. 

"True literature"?  By what standard are you placing this statement?  My idea of great literature may not equal your idea of great literature, but as an English Major, I have that much more confidence in my judgment of literary critique.

Disagree if you must, but I would never second-guess my ability to appreciate literature, true or otherwise.

[ZaichikArky]

I didn't even know you were a lit major. Sorry. I hate most lit. Anything written before the turn of the century (as in the 20th), I most likely really dislike. I make a noble exception for Shakespeare : ). I love everything of his that I've read... though some more than others. I don't like most of his comedies as much as the tragedies. Maybe it's just cuz I like melodramas a lot.

[GenesisOne]

Well, ZaichiArky, here are a list of books that inspired me to become somewhat of a sci-fi enthusiast:

Journey to the Center of the Earth (1871)
20,000 Leagues Under the Sea (1872)
Around the World In 80 Days (1873)
The Time Machine (1895)
The Invisible Man (1897)
The War of the Worlds (1898)

All of which have captivated me more than any novel written in the 21st century (to date) or 20th century.

Isn't classic literature fascinating or what?

[V_Translanka]

20,000 Leagues is great...or, well, Nemo is anyways (Journey disappointed me because it didn't seem to have a character near as great, but I need to give it another chance sometime)...I thought War of the Worlds was incredibly boring though I want to give The Invisible Man a chance...