| I think he's alive. what about you? Mod Edit: Modified title to notify people of possible spoilers. |
DeadlyRavenMay 7, 2019 6:49 PM
In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful. | You know what I hate the most? People who aren't free. They're no more than cattle. |
| He appears in fourth movie which chronologically follows the plot of R2 (more or less). So he is more likely alive. |
 When you get Signature removed once again. |
LelouchviBritMER said: Czarokruk said: He appears in fourth movie which chronologically follows the plot of R2 (more or less). So he is more likely alive. The movie doesn't follow R2. It follows the movies which take place in an alternate universe. And as said above, he was truly dead, but C.C. brings him back to life. That's the whole "what if" of the alternate universe. He got the code. hence the name code geass |
| In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful. | You know what I hate the most? People who aren't free. They're no more than cattle. |
LelouchviBritMER said: Czarokruk said: He appears in fourth movie which chronologically follows the plot of R2 (more or less). So he is more likely alive. The movie doesn't follow R2. It follows the movies which take place in an alternate universe. And as said above, he was truly dead, but C.C. brings him back to life. That's the whole "what if" of the alternate universe. Originally third movie was a follow up to the TV series (but I agree that now it's not much), so I think he would be alive anyways. Plus what about his geass which he got from his father? I'm pretty sure that he didn't die at the end of R2. Edit: They didn't say it's cannon but neither they said it's not. So at the end we can only speculate. |
When you get Signature removed once again. |
changelog said: Czarokruk said: Originally third movie was a follow up to the TV series (but I agree that now it's not much), so I think he would be alive anyways. Plus what about his geass which he got from his father? I'm pretty sure that he didn't die at the end of R2. He died at the end of R2. The anime's key staff have stressed this multiple times. Actually never heard about key staff confirming that.Do you have any links to interviews or something similar? I'm just interested to read it. |
When you get Signature removed once again. |
LelouchviBritMER said: Czarokruk said: Actually never heard about key staff confirming that.Do you have any links to interviews or something similar? I'm just interested to read it. Code Geass Community Information Database. It has ALL the official info. Including links and sources. It has the interviews, articles, live commentaries, official guide book, the 2009 epilogue, the "Geass Memories" anniversary tweets, etc Okay. Thanks a lot. Edit: Damn, there is no original links tho. All of them are translations. |
Kuriko-sanApr 25, 2019 7:54 AM
When you get Signature removed once again. |
| forget about the original timeline that is the TV series because future story will like 99% follow this new timeline created by this movie anyway and in this movie he is alive |
LelouchviBritMER said: deg said: forget about the original timeline that is the TV series because future story will like 99% follow this new timeline created by this movie anyway and in this movie he is alive That is true, but it's still good to be accurate. he is alive again. Even in the movies he was truly dead, no immortality, and C.C. literally resurrected him from the dead and she admits it was against his wishes. He doesn't even get a code in the movie, he gets a different power with different properties than a real code. as i see your replies on this forum you already made up your mind that he is dead on the old timeline base on the staff comments but that same staff is saying right now that they left the ending of that old timeline to be open to interpretations so they are contradicting themselves here i say in the old timeline lelouch is both dead and alive at the same time (schrodingers cat quantum mechanics stuff) |
LelouchviBritMER said: In the movies he's also not immortal and he would have stayed dead forever but they made C.C. resurrect him by the power of asspull because "she couldn't accept his death" The new movie does not confirm Lelouch's immortality status in either direction. It's left in a state of doubt, but not denied. It depends on what are the real consequences of his having the Code in a corrupt or incomplete condition. At the same time, it isn't a real "asspull" within the context of the movie universe, because it has been made compatible with the version of events presented during the compilation movies and with the currently applicable lore. |
GolbeztheGreatApr 26, 2019 1:52 AM
I'd say you are applying the terminology in an incorrect manner, because the possibility of people inheriting codes of immortality was already established in both versions of the story. The original show didn't choose to end with that outcome, but the audience was still told that people like C.C. and V.V. could become immortal after their deaths and had such codes on their bodies. It is a change in selecting the fate of the main character due to a new interpretation as part of a retelling of the story, but the concept had at least some basis in the existing fictional world's lore. It's not like the show had never talked about codes of immortality and they suddenly came up with it now. What is new refers to the corruption of said code, which is a matter of the mechanics, but not the idea. |
GolbeztheGreatApr 26, 2019 3:47 AM
LelouchviBritMER said: The official statements explain that code activation does not exist. When you get the code it's immediately active and thus you are immediately immortal. No death is involved. Such statements are nowhere near as precise and detailed as you claim they are. A lot of questions remain and many scenes are not conclusive. If anything, Code-related matters have always been lacking a full explanation, so your particular way of interpreting them is not some sort of gospel. Death might not be strictly necessary in order to inherit the Code per se. But it often follows the process under the circumstances and is an easy way to confirm if you're immortal or not. We don't know when the mark first appears. This doesn't mean a person would or wouldn't be aware of the Code or know whether they are immortal even before dying. Especially if they didn't take the Code on purpose. |
LelouchviBritMER said: They explained that Charles already had a code before he shot himself. They explained Charles never died and was just messing with his son. How is that not precise? It fully destroys the idea that death is necessary to activate the code. "Explained" is an overstatement. These are referring to offhand remarks about how Charles behaved, not a formal explanation of the process. That statement doesn't talk about whether he already had a visible code at all. It's possible that he did, in theory, but the opposite is also valid. It's not necessarily obligatory to explain the scene. Charles was messing with Lelouch, yes, but that's not my point. He might have wanted to test his immortality by getting shot and resurrecting, which is when the body would recover from the shot. The code could have finally appeared when he was on the ground and the gunshot wound was being magically fixed. That doesn't contradict the staff's remarks. It didn't At best you could argue that C.C. died, but that is by no means certain. More than likely she never died and just went through conconscious recovery like when she got shot in episode 1 The initial scene with the nun is unclear, but C.C. is bleeding a lot in those images. I would say that her being shot is still a case of dying, even if it is also followed by a recovery. In other words, C.C. has died and recovered many times, but sometimes the process seems to take longer. A theory only needs 1 counter example to be fully debunked, and that example is Charles. An example which, in and of itself, is also unclear and can be explained in multiple ways. I'm not even using the old Code theory here, but you're treating me as if I were. Which is hardly arguing in good faith. |
LelouchviBritMER said: This wasn't about "viisble codes", but about activated codes, debunking that codes need to be activated. As for visibility, Charles shows us the mark himself. Only after the fact. This happened at least a few minutes after he's already messed with Lelouch by pretending to follow his Geass order. Visibility is relevant, to the extent it would influence Lelouch's knowledge of having a Code/immortality and his decisions about Zero Requiem, which is something you've brought up recently. he did or didn't what? have the code? he was said to be immortal and immune to geass, so yes Charles had the code No, that the code was visible on his hand. Charles had inherited the code right away, but we don't know for sure if the symbol itself shows up immediately or not. There is a deadly physical wound, a small time gap, a moment of waking up, and we didn't see his hand right away. The point of the whole matter is that Charles had a code before shooting himself, and thus that codes do not require activation; As such lelouch's death can't be used as an excuse for why he didn't have a code before the zero requiem. I am not talking about activation, at least not in the limited sense you're arguing about. Combine that with the fact that it takes at most minutes for the mark to appear after acquiring the code and we get that lelouch must have had the mark long before the zero requiem if he had had the code. This is the issue. We don't know if it always takes the same amount of time for the Code mark to appear, because we didn't see the person's body right away. Charles still received a deadly wound and, after some minutes, he took off the glove once he had recovered. Which allows room to the code to appear at various points during that small period. Given that Lelouch has a corrupted or incomplete Code taken from Charles, which he didn't even voluntarily receive, perhaps in Lelouch's specific case the Code does take longer to appear, because his particular situation isn't normal. It's a special case of imperfect code inheritance. The rules of the World of C and Geass have been altered because Lelouch messed with the system. Which didn't allow him to receive the Code in a normal way. Objectively speaking, Lelouch didn't have the awareness of having a Code at the time of Zero Requiem. This is true, but the question is why. That's where things are more uncertain and complex than what you claim. Your explanation is possible, yet neither conclusive nor exclusive. The weakest argument is that perhaps the mark of the code should have appeared right away even in this case and he simply didn't look at the mirror. Which would be odd and unlikely, so I am not seriously arguing that. More seriously, perhaps it eventually appeared, but only after Lelouch's first (and only, so far) death. We saw Charles die almost immediately after getting a Code and he didn't show us the Code until minutes later, while Lelouch only died months later and we never saw the moment of his recovery. Since recovery times are not uniform in this show, it's possible that Suzaku's attack took longer to heal than Charles recovering from receiving a gunshot. Another option is perhaps the mark didn't appear until Lelouch's body was moved and he was brought back into the doll-like state, but this moment isn't depicted so we don't know how that process took place. It's a big question mark. This leads to the conclusion that lelouch could not have had a mark and thus not have had a code. QED As shown above, the other possibiilties are still logically possible. This isn't "QED" at all. Charles knowing or not knowing he had immortality is not the topic we're debating. Also, it's unthinkable that Charles did not know and needed to test this. Also, there are far better tests than suicide. We see that C.C.'s non fatal wounds also heal, so anyone trying to test immortality and with a grain of sanity would go for a non mortal wound and not a bullet through the heart. But again, this wasn't the topic of debate. It's obviously a purely secondary or tertiary comment, not the main point. I am not saying Charles was being totally serious about it. We know Charles was trolling Lelouch, rather than being upfront about what happened. If he's already being that silly, using his moment of trolling to carry out a little test isn't unthinkable. Immortality is typically defined as the inability to die. but none of this is relevant because thanks to Charles' example and the show staff's explanation we know that death plays no role and codes do not need activation they literally said Charles never died! That's a matter of debate, because it's a normally fatal wound that makes the person pass out and stay still for a while (we don't even know if they have a pulse), but you can replace the phrase with "passing out from receiving a fatal wound" instead. Charles never died and yet he had a mark, that means death plays no part in the mark appearing. He didn't stay dead, but he received a fatal wound and passed out. Like C.C. does. Which is what Lelouch could have gone through. Lelouch cannot have had a mark which only appeared after his death because that's not how marks work, as per show staff. As far as has been shown, the staff has not directly talked about how the marks work. Your interpretation isn't wholly unreasonable in isolation, but trying to present it as the one and only logical possibility...that is, in fact, unreasonable. yes, lelouch's incomplete code works differently, that's why it's not a code. Which is my entire point! I agree that it works differently now, but don't agree with how you classify it. |
GolbeztheGreatApr 26, 2019 1:45 PM
LelouchviBritMER said: GolbeztheGreat said: Only after the fact. This happened at least a few minutes after he's already messed with Lelouch by pretending to follow his Geass order. Visibility is relevant, to the extent it would influence Lelouch's knowledge of having a Code/immortality and his decisions about Zero Requiem, which is something you've brought up recently. Charles is confirmed to not have died. So you can't use the his death as a reason for the visibility of the mark because there was no dead. GolbeztheGreat said: No, that the code was visible on his hand. Charles had inherited the code right away, but we don't know for sure if the symbol itself shows up immediately or not. There is a deadly physical wound, a small time gap, a moment of waking up, and we didn't see his hand right away. Charles didn't die. There was a wound which healed, but he didn't die. Still, there is no indication at all the the healing of random wounds is what makes the mark appear for the first time. postulating that is just as much non-canon as the code theory's postulation that lelouch was special and allowed to keep a geass when acquiring the code in R2. The anime didn't support in the slightets the postulation from code theory. And likewise the movies don't support in the slightest that marks remeain iviisble until the bearer has had a wound. That's just a pure ad hoc speculation to fix a hole in your theory. You might as well postulate that the mark remains invisible until you eat a pizza GolbeztheGreat said: This is the issue. We don't know if it always takes the same amount of time for the Code mark to appear, because we didn't see the person's body right away. Charles still received a deadly wound and, after some minutes, he took off the glove once he had recovered. Which allows room to the code to appear at various points during that small period. that is so ad hoc. What an amazing coincidence that the event which just transpired was the exact and non-obvious trigger to show that charles had the code. And problematic too. If that is truly how marks work, C.C. would probably have known, having been the director of the geass order and having personal experience. And yet she never mentioned that to lelouch? GolbeztheGreat said: More seriously, perhaps it eventually appeared, but only after Lelouch's first (and only, so far) death. We saw Charles die almost immediately after getting a Code and he didn't show us the Code until minutes later, Charles never died, he was merely pretending. Literal words of the show staff If anything could have been the trigger, it would have been a wound healing. But this idea is highy problematic and silly. How big a wound does it need to be? just a bruise? Biting your tongue? A nosebleed from seeing C.C. naked? None of this is sane enough to be plausible. it's obvious that Charles' mark wasn't revealed to the audience because that would have given away the game. GolbeztheGreat said: He didn't stay dead, but he received a fatal wound and passed out. Like C.C. does. Which is what Lelouch could have gone through. That's just moving the goalposts. GolbeztheGreat said: As far as has been shown, the staff has not directly talked about how the marks work. Your interpretation isn't wholly unreasonable in isolation, but trying to present it as the one and only logical possibility...that is, in fact, unreasonable. Marks have always been used as the visual representation of having a code. In the Fukkatsu we learn that this applies to the new power too. There has never been any suggestion that there was more to this than just that, a visual representation. There's nothing in the lore to back this up. He's alive. ok I see thanks! |
| In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful. | You know what I hate the most? People who aren't free. They're no more than cattle. |
| can you change your title pls thank you |
| I've said this many times before but he's dead to me. Saying he is alive would completely undermine his character/redemption arc by removing the ultimate sacrifice and would thus make the story worse. As people have already said, Fukkatsu no Lelouch is AU movie, separate from canon. Any choices made there do not reflect on the TV version. |
NthDegreeMay 6, 2019 3:52 PM
Theoderic said: give a spoiler warning dammit its not actually a spoiler though since this movie is a continuation of the new movie trilogy (thats been out for months now) and not the original TV series the TV series ending is not affected at all and you can forget about the original TV series too since this movie and the new movie trilogy is a new timeline and will be the basis for future Code Geass stories |
Theoderic said: deg said: its not actually a spoiler though since this movie is a continuation of the new movie trilogy (thats been out for months now) and not the original TV series the TV series ending is not affected at all and you can forget about the original TV series too since this movie and the new movie trilogy is a new timeline and will be the basis for future Code Geass stories oh ok thanks for that but i still don't like how the title is phrased even if it really isn't a spoiler ok but the english title of this movie itself is a spoiler then if that is the case |
it happens to the best of us, so dont sweat it |
| Posts #35 to #48 merged from a dupe thread. |
 challenges 🕺 forum sets 🪩 it's friday night 🕺 shrine 🪩 source 🕺 |
| Decided to change my post, it kind of wasn't making sense 8D But just to throw my two cents in it, after having read the posts from the reddit thread I kind of have to admit, since I firmly believed the theories back in the days (didn't want my boy to die), they are really just headcanons and nothing more. With Lelouch now being alive again in Fukkatsu no Lelouch, I do wonder though if he could now be immortal? The movie doesn't really fully explain how Lelouch got back to life and what exactly happened or how it might restrict him, everything is just so vague and seems to contradict itself. First, Lelouch now does have a mark and wasn't it the sign of someone being immortal? Secondly, C.C does speculate about him maybe having inherited Charles' code, but she isn't sure about that (but why include this if it was debunked before...?). And thirdly Lelouch says in the movie "The only people who should kill, are those prepared to die themselves", which was his catchphrase kinda in the series, but here he follows it with "Which is why I am not the one who should mingle with the world" and it just makes me think could he now somehow be immortal? He can still use his Geass though and I am not sure how him killing God in C's world could influence this rule, since it does seem to have some after effects. How exactly this influences (if it even does) anything is also just really vague. But with how the movie handled everything it shouldn't be entirely possible for Lelouch to now be immortal, shouldn't it? |
More topics from this board
Poll: » Code Geass: Fukkatsu no Lelouch Episode 1 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 )Hyuse - Feb 24, 2019 |
225 |
by Laborate
»»
Dec 27, 2024 4:07 PM |
|
» This movie has one of the most emotional scenes of the seriesCickNipolla - Jun 18, 2022 |
20 |
by AnimeVibes_YT1
»»
Dec 24, 2024 3:59 AM |
|
» why it's not considered as sequel to 2nd season of original series???NaughtySempai - May 21, 2021 |
13 |
by Apratim
»»
May 11, 2024 11:14 PM |
|
Poll: » If you were Lelouch, what decision would you choose?Sanjay63773 - Jan 19, 2023 |
10 |
by Leonhart93
»»
Jan 3, 2024 6:26 AM |
|
» Code Geass: Dakkan no Zquercifolia - Sep 19, 2023 |
5 |
by quercifolia
»»
Oct 1, 2023 7:45 AM |