THE REVIVAL OF LELOUCH

Turtles_Leader said:

He was supposed to permit her to die. So innherit the code. But since it was never specified how to transmit the code, we don't know. By killing people with geass don't work. first, people with code can't be killed, and geass doesn't work on people with a code. The fact VV is still alive, and he says charles stole his code, thus Charles already has it with V.V. alive is a proof dying is not a condition to transmit the code it has to be something else. And Lelouch don't really kill charles, he was erased by the collective consciousness. Plus Charles says his geass won't work on him during the world of C scene, IIRC. We also don't know what happened between C.C. and the none. Why would she kill her, and why would she the one wounded. this doesn't stand. The transmission of the code has to work another way. I like the theory you can steal it, and it activate when you die, it works nearly perfectly, except for 2 little things. how would lelouch know how to steal a code (now, Lelouch could not know he stole it, which keep the purpose of the zero requiem, since he doesn't know he will survive) and how did charles want to activate CC code if he was already immortal (but that, since he already got one, maybe he didn't need to activate the second). Both theories have same problem, how could Cornelia not verify that he is dead onece and for all, when she was already geassed by lelouch, so immune to any trick to let the body disappear.

For the cart driver, you can also say that the reason they don't show him is because he has no importance, and the cart won't drive itself. Once again, I'm not against him, being alive, I'm not even against him being the cart driver, but it's stop saying it's that obvious. It's not. The simplest and more obvious explanation is that the cart driver is just a cart driver. Not that's it's the truth, but still.

PersonaSimon said:


Yes, but that's a remake of a series. That is perfectly fine since it gives a different version of the same material. Plus it is able to differentiate itself from 2003 FMA enough to warrant it's assistance. This, however, is a sequel to a series that clearly ended its run. Plus, there were people craving to see a faithful adaptation of the FMA manga, and I pretty sure no one really wanted to see a sequel of Code Geass

Ruri-san said:
When you realized that this anime came out in 2017, the same year that Zero was "born"...

Fundog said:


I wanted to see a sequel, so did many other loyal CG fans. FMA is different, the 2003 is liked only by elitists. For us normal fans, Brotherhood sufficed and that's why it was made.

PersonaSimon said:


How pompous to assume most people who like FMA 2003 are elitists, but whatever. And why you want to see a sequel of code geass? All the bad guys or really any conflict have already been dealt with.

AForgottenSoul said:


so you think the world would live in peace forever? other people can give out geass not just CC.

PersonaSimon said:


Yes, but this a Code Geass sequel with Lelouch as the main character. Unless you pull some jesus yamato BS, there is no way the series can continue at least with him as the main character

joebr1993 said:


Immortality does exist in the series. It's really not that far-fetched.

PersonaSimon said:


do you know how silly you sound?

joebr1993 said:


Nope not one single bit. But continue on with your whining though. You can't really say I'm wrong anyways. A show that has immortality in it shouldn't surprise you if someone can be brought back to life. You'd have to be senile to think differently.

PersonaSimon said:

Sigh*

One, immortality doesn't not equate to invincibility.
Two, bring people back to life destroys any and really all impact their death had in the first place
Three, bringing people back from the dead destroy all tension in the show. Might as well bring back Rolo and Uphemia or whatever her name is
And finally, how does one equate immortality to Resurrection the dead. Like, how many leaps of logic you must take to come to that conclusion

Turtles_Leader said:
The Jeremiah argument makes sense. the resurection of the code bearer, on the other hand, is proved false. Charles stand up as soon as he is put down.

Panzerkraft said:


He could simply have pretended to be dead. We don't know what happen after his death.

BTW I was thinking about the title. If i understand correctly is "Lelouch of the resurrection" not "the resurrection of Lelouch" so it's not really clear who the subject of the resurrection is.
Is the resurrection of a person ? Or maybe the resurrection of a movement or an ideal ?
Could it be that Lelouch is the one trying to resurrect something, like he was the one leading the rebellion in the original series ? But why should he want to take back something from the old world ?
Maybe he regrets some choice he has made ? It could be that he will be a reactionary force, like a mirror image of the first series when he was a revolutionary ?

Turtles_Leader said:

He was supposed to permit her to die. So innherit the code. But since it was never specified how to transmit the code, we don't know. By killing people with geass don't work. first, people with code can't be killed, and geass doesn't work on people with a code. The fact VV is still alive, and he says charles stole his code, thus Charles already has it with V.V. alive is a proof dying is not a condition to transmit the code it has to be something else. And Lelouch don't really kill charles, he was erased by the collective consciousness. Plus Charles says his geass won't work on him during the world of C scene, IIRC. We also don't know what happened between C.C. and the none. Why would she kill her, and why would she the one wounded. this doesn't stand. The transmission of the code has to work another way. I like the theory you can steal it, and it activate when you die, it works nearly perfectly, except for 2 little things. how would lelouch know how to steal a code (now, Lelouch could not know he stole it, which keep the purpose of the zero requiem, since he doesn't know he will survive) and how did charles want to activate CC code if he was already immortal (but that, since he already got one, maybe he didn't need to activate the second). Both theories have same problem, how could Cornelia not verify that he is dead onece and for all, when she was already geassed by lelouch, so immune to any trick to let the body disappear.

For the cart driver, you can also say that the reason they don't show him is because he has no importance, and the cart won't drive itself. Once again, I'm not against him, being alive, I'm not even against him being the cart driver, but it's stop saying it's that obvious. It's not. The simplest and more obvious explanation is that the cart driver is just a cart driver. Not that's it's the truth, but still.

PersonaSimon said:


Yes, but that's a remake of a series. That is perfectly fine since it gives a different version of the same material. Plus it is able to differentiate itself from 2003 FMA enough to warrant it's assistance. This, however, is a sequel to a series that clearly ended its run. Plus, there were people craving to see a faithful adaptation of the FMA manga, and I pretty sure no one really wanted to see a sequel of Code Geass

G_Spark233 said:
I can't believe this is a thing.

Hylianticipated said:

Lol, says the guy with a signature photo of Naruto and Sasuke making out.

AForgottenSoul said:


now what if that cart scene has nothing to do with how hes revived and he did actually die die

G_Spark233 said:

No idea what's so shocking about the existence of some Yaoi fan art

SeidouTZ said:
Soooo Aldnoah Zero season 2? ^^


OT: Why?... I'm seriously more concern than actually happy about this. CG had a amazing conclusion, so giving it a continuation just sounds wrong...

Caimthehero said:


You mean if he is brought back without having a code from Charles? I'm guessing both sides of the argument would be pissed at the new series then. The he's dead side pissed that they ruined a great ending for nothing. The he's alive with code side pissed because not only didn't Lelouch get the code but they ruined both fucking possible endings and the series is probably going to suck.

CaitlynC said:


Both sides are going to be pissed either way, but the 'he's dead' will be less if they revive him some other way (or have him not planned this outcome).
But so far I haven't seen many 'he's alive' people truly happy for the continuation either.

JizzyHitler said:
I really dont get why people want this, it just undos the ending of the previous entry and makes what is already a questionably written second half even worse. It'd make sense if it were new characters in the same world but to bring back the old cast for it is just stupid.

Grey-Zone said:
I am kind of glad. I had to roll my eyes a bit because it's evident that "uniting against a common big bad enemy" is not as much a long-term "happily ever after" ending as the CG:R2 ending made it out to be. Escpacially not after that common enemy dies.

I always found it quite strange how the anime ended. It was almost like the writers believing that something like an Utopia could exist without ending up being a Dystopia in the end.