Code Geass R2 - Episode 25 Discussion / Poll [END]

[pokeu]

Originally Posted by lovecakecookies

You dont have to make me undestand your "logic" anymore.. I understand your points come from the fact that Jermiah Smiled as Lulu died....so Lulu must be alive..

So leme ask you this question. Things fall to the floor, why?

Your logic says "Because they do that all the time".

Jeremiah smiled, why? "Because he does it all the time, Lelouche dies or not doesn't matter"

Thanks, we understand your logic now. =D You no longer have to make me understand 'anything' now. =D

[lovecakecookies]

Originally Posted by Dream_Traveller

Well, gee, if Lelouch detailed the plan to Jeremiah and if Jeremiah, though MAYBE unwilling, agreed with Lelouch that his death was good for the world and if Jeremiah saw that his plan succeeded, thereby making a better world, I'm sure he would fucking smile.

Dream, just give up.. who cares.. everyone has their different beliefs on why Lulu is alive, his is because Jeremiah smiled as Lulu "died"

its nice to hear all the different views on why ppl think Lulu is alive isn't?

[pokeu]

Originally Posted by Dream_Traveller

Well, gee, if Lelouch detailed the plan to Jeremiah and if Jeremiah, though MAYBE unwilling, agreed with Lelouch that his death was good for the world and if Jeremiah saw that his plan succeeded, thereby making a better world, I'm sure he would fucking smile.

Wouldn't it be better for his to show more exasperation at that time when Lelouche died to play his part properly? Or maybe it would have been easier as well to do that?

Now it has come to "Lelouche died" because "Jeremiah smiled" as he died.

Now thats a little creepy.

[pokeu]

Originally Posted by lovecakecookies

Dream, just give up.. who cares.. everyone has their different beliefs on why Lulu is alive, his is because Jeremiah smiled as Lulu "died"

its nice to hear all the different views on why ppl think Lulu is alive isn't?

Btw, this seems to sound logical for some reason.

Now that I'm looking at it in a different light.

Jeremiah smiled as Lulu "died"

, makes it seem as though Lelouche lives. Thanks for agreeing with me on this part.

[Rising Dragon]

Pokeu, I only have one thing to say to you.

The forum gives you an edit button for a reason, so STOP DOUBLE POSTING.

[Kang Seung Jae]

Originally Posted by Dream_Traveller

Or it could be because Jeremiah, whose loyalty was unflinching, accepted the plan.

The truth behind the smile.



I personally believe that if Lelouch is alive, NOBODY within the inner circle thought of the possibility.

[Lie]

Originally Posted by Kang Seung Jae

I personally believe that if Lelouch is alive, NOBODY within the inner circle thought of the possibility.

Likeliest possibility. I also doubt he'd be with anyone at the end, since I highly doubt he's the cart driver of all people.

You can make a very colorful interpretation if you want and say that C.C. was talking to him through her Geass connection, and that Kallen was actually talking to him directly with him doing something, I guess. Maybe taking care of her mother while she was at school or something.

The possibilities are absolutely endless.

[Kang Seung Jae]

Originally Posted by Lie

Likeliest possibility. I also doubt he'd be with anyone at the end, since I highly doubt he's the cart driver of all people.

You can make a very colorful interpretation if you want and say that C.C. was talking to him through her Geass connection, and that Kallen was actually talking to him directly with him doing something, I guess. Maybe taking care of her mother while she was at school or something.

The possibilities are absolutely endless.

This is my theory:


If Lelouch is alive, it's because his Code is from Charles, which he got when Charles rocketed towards him. The Code activates only when one dies, and thus no one suspected that Lelouch would be alive after his ultimate plan.

[Momosan]

Oops, meant to edit this post with my next post but I must've accidentally hit post reply.

[Sol Falling]

Wow, what incredible spammage. I guess I somehow got you angry.

Originally Posted by pokeu

Gah, lets look at Orange kun here Sol.

I take by this line that you're addressing your argument(and/or failure of a 'parody', nice try) specifically at me. In that case a quotation of the specific statements you are responding to would be appreciated, else you could be accused of strawman.

...stuff about EQ...

I find it hilarious that you're accusing me of lacking EQ when the only 'logical' explanation for Jeremiah's smile you can imagine is that Lelouch isn't dead.

Do you know why Suzaku and C.C. were crying? Because they actually liked Lelouch. Also, they directly contributed to casting Lelouch onto this path of sacrifice--he died bearing the weight of their own sins also.

Do you know why Jeremiah was smiling? Because Jeremiah held only loyalty for Lelouch. Jeremiah did not push Lelouch onto his path, and he did nothing to add to the hatred he carried. Jeremiah merely understood Lelouch--his most decisive actions and sincerest intentions. And in seeing the fulfillment of those actions and intentions, how could he do anything but smile in affirmation of his loyalty?

edit:

Originally Posted by Kang Seung Jae

This is my theory:


If Lelouch is alive, it's because his Code is from Charles, which he got when Charles rocketed towards him. The Code activates only when one dies, and thus no one suspected that Lelouch would be alive after his ultimate plan.

Note two things about your theory:

First, Charles was shown to have Geass resistance before he died, indicating that his Code activated (for all logical purposes) immediately when he recieved it.

Second, if you go by this interpretation, then you can't say Nunally saw visions due to Lelouch having Code. As was pointed out to me by lovecakecookies, since Lelouch hadn't died yet, and thus his Code supposedly hadn't activated, he couldn't have used any Code related powers (such as memory transfer, which we've only confirmed for C.C.'s Code anyway (V.V. had teleportation)).

[Droplet]

Seriously, to those who've been linking to Amazon.co.jp

By the end of R2, we all agreed at one point in time that it was really ambiguous and you couldn't clearly decide whether to think Lelouch is alive or Lelouch is dead.

Then one day, someone gives you information on a magazine that lists down the dead characters in Code Geass.

One of the names included in that list is Lelouch. So Lelouch is dead, eh?

Wait a minute. If you read that,

Would it even feel like closure? Would it make you feel anything? Would it even be as meaningful as the scenes you've seen in Code Geass? I wonder. Personally, I consider that very far from being good enough for the fans.


@Sol Falling

Huh?

Seriously, I don't know what your problem is. I didn't even mean to argue when I posted my post that used some screenshots.

You don't have to attack ALL the people who want to say that they think Lelouch is alive, just because you think he's dead.

No one really minds that you think Lelouch is dead. What people do mind is the abrasive and sometimes condescending tone when you argue your points. You argue sometimes as if you you were doing it with a vengeance. What have we done you wrong for you to act like this?


People who argue with you on this topic, from my limited observation, have become less and more infrequent. I wonder why. One theory of mine is that perhaps they realised that you're not worth arguing with anymore. I'll be honest, it does get tiresome after a while.


I do understand that you're passionate about some of your beliefs. However, it's no fun talking with someone who's obviously both a master of debate and a very authoritative source for information that Lelouch is dead.


People are moving on from this argument that became more like bickering over time. Perhaps we ought to follow.

[Momosan]

Originally Posted by Sol Falling

Momosan, is it? Listen, generally when you want to join in on a conversation, it's important to understand the context. What this means is you should actually read and understand what has already been said, and what is currently being discussed. Then, once you have fully grasped the state of the situation, you can contribute new ideas which haven't been stated before.

For example. Here you are trying to disprove my point that Lelouch was a jackass. The thing to understand, then, is when I said Lelouch was being a jackass: and I was, obviously, referring to his time during the Zero Requiem. Read over the past couple pages if you have to for some explicit examples; however, this fact really should be blatantly obvious, if you remember that it was Lelouch's plan to do jackass things so people would hate him (e.g. make a mockery of democracy, Geass a whole army to be his slaves, kill anybody who spoke up against him, make Nunally fall down a flight of stairs).

I assume you glanced at my join date and assume I'm some kind of timid anime fanboy? Drop the condescending BS. Had you read anything I posted you would have noticed I reinforced every aspect of my arguments with material from the series. It's fine if you want to disagree but do it with a proper rebuttal to my argument and not some lame attempt to belittle me.

As stated before, in both R1 AND R2 throughout the ENTIRETY of the series Lelouch NEVER needlessly sacrificed ANYONE who was a part of his life. In fact, Lelouch went out of his way to make sure that the people he cared about were spared from as much turmoil as possible. I never once said that he didn't act heartlessly. He volcano'd his own men, geass'd people to kill themselves, etc etc. He NEVER harmed the people close to him. If you honestly think he was being sadistic towards Nunnally at the end then obviously you didn't even bother to read what I wrote *SURPRISE* because I fully explained why he geass'd her. Additionally, he didn't geass her to fall down the steps.

Wow, this whole thing was really offensive.

Spoiler for Shirley:

Where the hell are you getting this 'indecisive'. Shirley was one of the most 'decisive' characters in the show (note: this is an exaggeration, but the following points aren't), who always had faith in Lelouch when it counted and never hesitated at all about what was important to her. You're also completely off your rocker about Lelouch deciding to abandon his 'Lamperouge' identity, when he made it quite clear in Turn 7 that his own wish for tomorrow's happiness was having all his friends back together at Ashford. When Shirley died, Lelouch didn't 'slip further from his Ashford characteristics', he turned into an irrationally vengeful little ball of fury which we only saw again with the 'death' of Nunally. If you think Lelouch 'knew' he had to sacrifice these relationships for his plans then you are sorely mistaken.

Spoiler for Kallen:

Again, where the hell are you getting this 'decisiveness' crap. Remember Kallen's abandonment of Lelouch in Stage 25? Remember her holding him at gunpoint in Turn 2? How about abandoning him again in 19? Claiming Kallen's the 'antithesis' of Shirley because of decisiveness is the largest crock of bull I have ever heard. Your whole line about 'Lelouch never lied to her' is also directly contradicted by that scene in 19.

Spoiler for C.C:

This whole paragraph was dripping with only seeing what you wanted to. "No one understood Lelouch's methods better than C.C., not even Lelouch himself"? Yeah, I guess that's why she was frowning as Lelouch took the throne as li Britannia and even cried while he accomplished his life's greatest goal, while Jeremiah whose definition is loyalty managed to smile approvingly in satisfaction. "C.C. was the only constant to reinforce his motives in the times when he was uncertain"? You seem to have forgotten that Lelouch's motives were wrong (Nunally didn't want a new world brought about by bloodshed, his mother wasn't dead), and that her 'reinforcement' involved manipulating him by keeping vital information from him for her own interests. And if you think the only reason C.C. could've possibly 'spared' Lelouch was because she 'fell in love' with him, then I guess the fact that C.C. didn't push her Code onto Charles either must means she fell in love with him too.

--Shirley--

Shirley was decisive? How so? Oh that's right, how she confessed her love for Lelouch instead of hiding it all the time? Or how about after learning Lelouch indirectly killed her father she hesitates and PURPOSEFULLY MISSES when holding Lelouch at gunpoint. How about when she discovers she's been geass'd and decides not to confront Lelouch directly but roundabouts through Suzaku? Oh yeah, I forgot how decisive she was my bad.

--Kallen--

Kallen's decisions never falter. She remains steadfast to The Black Knights because she feels they represent the best chance against an oppresive regime. Her goals are to liberate the island of Japan no matter who tries to get in her way. Had Shirley been piloting the Guren against Lancelot you think she would've smoked Suzaku? No, Shirley would've sat there in an inner dialogue weighing her friendships instead of committing to her beliefs. Kallen turns against Lelouch when she thinks he's betrayed the cause SHE fights for. Those convictions represent DECISIVENESS. She doesn't hesitate to shoot friend or foe if they obstruct her path. He lies to her in episode 19? You mean where he tells her she's a pawn and then within 5 seconds afterwards tells her to stay alive which obviously tells her he was putting on a show? Give me a break.

--CC--

Uhhhh, what? If I understand this correctly you think C.C. didn't understand his motives? Please, show me the episode where Leloouch has to fight against C.C. because she doesn't understand his plans. C.C. was constantly helping and providing support to Lelouch's goals. No shit his motives were wrong that was why he was UNCERTAIN. He wanted to make a peaceful world for Nunnally but after killing Shirley's father, Euphy, and all the other innocents, he questioned whether his path was correct or not. In times like that the one who offered counsel was C.C. She never once manipulated him concerning HIS goals, only her own and therefore were NOT vital information to him.

So C.C. must've loved Charles by not giving him her code? Is that really the best you can do? It's clearly explained that the goal was for Charles, Marianne, C.C., and V.V. to work together to create a new world with no lies. The only reason C.C. went along with the plan was because it created 2 new ambitious Geass users who might attain a fully developed state. Charles had been in that state for quite some time and never took V.V.'s until the timing coincided with the plan. Once Charles was going to take her code she gladly pushed Lelouch aside and was going to give it to Charles. I believe C.C. had a hard time reconciling the conflicting emotions she had about receiving and passing on her Code. I don't think she had as many reserves when it came to giving her code to a jackass like Charles. I believe she was far too attached to Mao and Lelouch to give her code to them.

Moving away from this:



C.C. didn't seal her memories. She sealed her Code. This is explicitly stated by Marianne in Turn 20. And yes, this proves that Code is associated with one's memories.



A fellow poster has already pointed out the much more convincing likelihood of character development.

Now to move onto why the V.V.'s Code interpretation is wrong:



"Both eyes being Geass" does not necessarily denote a fully developed Geass user. This was shown with Mao. If you consider the only two confirmed cases of Code Transfer, the Nun didn't push hers onto C.C. until she'd had her Geass for ~6 years, while the Emperor held onto his for decades while additionally being able to turn his on and off. Aside from this, note also that Charles lost his Geass upon attaining Code (note Lelouch's: "You can't use Geass" from Stage 07, Charles' "I traded my Geass for greater power" in Turn 15 as confirmation you can't have both). Lelouch used his Geass five minutes after your supposed transfer scene.

There is no evidence suggesting that memory loss is associated with code loss. There is evidence suggesting memory retains after code is lost. Example, V.V. loses his code to Charles but discusses geass with C.C. prior to his passing away. Additionally, in the C.C.'s world during episode 20 we can see multiple forms of C.C. which are not explained. Personally I believe they represent a multitude of things such as memory, geass, personality, etc. While this is mere conjecture, I take solace in the fact that there is no evidence showing otherwise.

Now I assume your argument is, "Double Geass eyes doesn't denote fully developed Geass. Additionally one cannot bear Geass code and Geass at the sime time. References are Mao for double eyes and C.C./Charles for Geassless codes."

Simple, C.C. felt she had tortured Mao enough and as could be seen following his death she treated him more like a son than a tool for escape. I believe Mao had the capability to receive her code but she didn't want to transmit her curse to him. Some would argue that she didn't care for Mao since she killed him but realize that death was a better alternative than being immortal in C.C.'s eyes. As for Charles losing his geass, that's because V.V. gave Charles his Geass. Once V.V. lost his Code Charles loses the Geass that V.V. gave him. This is the same thing that happened with the Nun and C.C. Now Lelouch is different. His Geass comes from C.C. so as long as she retains her code then he retains his Geass. Lelouch's code comes from V.V. so there is no cancelling effect. Think of the code as a static generator. Once you move the code, the generator fails and you reboot the system from scratch. I find this to me the most plausible solution.

'Mao or whatever'? You're going to need better proof than that to back up your statements. Lelouch has always believed 'those who shoot must be willing to be shot', and he even said 'life without action is like a slow death' to justify killing himself in Stage 07. From chatting conversationally at gunpoint (numerous instances), to strapping a sakuradite bomb onto himself, Lelouch has never shown any fear or hesitation about putting his life on the line. You know if Lelouch actually had immortality there's no way he wouldn't use it to his advantage; rather than just run away after Tristan destroyed Shinkurou, why not let Gino think he killed him? That way there'd be less people chasing him and he wouldn't have had to bother with some lame video trick to Geass (note again why this makes him having Code impossible) Schniezel.

Those who shoot must be willing to be shot? So that means what? Lelouch never INTENTIONALLY endangered his life. I don't really feel like sifting through 50 episodes to find each time his was pissing his pants at the prospect of dieing. Lelouch always played his hands carefully and this was even commented on multiple times that "If Zero shows his face then he means he's confident in his escape route." Lelouch was willing to die for his cause but he never desired it and always worked ways to keep his chances as low as possible.

"If Lelouch had immortality there's no way he wouldn't use it."

Oh really? Kind of like getting the world to hate him so he could fake his death and leave a better world for Nunnally to live in? Yeah Lelouch never took advantage of immortality. Tristan destroys his KM frame so he should what? Stick around watching Suzaku beat the crap out of him in some attempt to fake his death for what? Lelouch had his plan already set out prior to entering. I doubt sacrificing his KM frame to some random nobody to fake his death was a probablity he was going to risk the operation on.

But hey, if you want to you can just dismiss me as some idiot who didn't read anything whilst ignoring nearly my entire post. Suit yourself.

[Koshimizu]

Seriously.
That magazine isn't even published yet.
No death list exists.
The Amazon link tells us "there will be a list". There is no list.

Really, whoever says that page gives Lelouch=dead is simply backing up his personal opinion with a false "reference", which is conveniently written in a language most people couldn't read, so no one will find out his statement isn't actually in that page.

[Kang Seung Jae]

Originally Posted by Sol Falling

First, Charles was shown to have Geass resistance before he died, indicating that his Code activated (for all logical purposes) immediately when he recieved it.

There is no solid proof on that point. It's ambiguous whether Charles was Geassed or not.

[Droplet]

@Momosan

I think all this debate was never always about facts but had to do more with whose reasons for believing are better justified.

But hey, why should we have to prove our convinctions to people who obviously reject them? In a case like this, it could prove more fruitful to talk with a like minded person instead.

[Sol Falling]

Originally Posted by Droplet

Seriously, to those who've been linking to Amazon.co.jp

By the end of R2, we all agreed at one point in time that it was really ambiguous and you couldn't clearly decide whether to think Lelouch is alive or Lelouch is dead.

Then one day, someone gives you information on a magazine that lists down the dead characters in Code Geass.

One of the names included in that list is Lelouch. So Lelouch is dead, eh?

Wait a minute. If you read that,

Would it even feel like closure? Would it make you feel anything? Would it even be as meaningful as the scenes you've seen in Code Geass? I wonder. Personally, I consider that very far from being good enough for the fans.

You've got a pretty curious definition of 'all'. Plenty of people saw Lelouch's death as closure, no magazine needed at all. Why we're glad official confirmation is coming is so that you guys can realize this as well.

Spoiler for length...:

@Sol Falling

Huh?

Seriously, I don't know what your problem is. I didn't even mean to argue when I posted my post that used some screenshots.

You don't have to attack ALL the people who want to say that they think Lelouch is alive, just because you think he's dead.

No one really minds that you think Lelouch is dead. What people do mind is the abrasive and sometimes condescending tone when you argue your points. You argue sometimes as if you you were doing it with a vengeance. What have we done you wrong for you to act like this?


People who argue with you on this topic, from my limited observation, have become less and more infrequent. I wonder why. One theory of mine is that perhaps they realised that you're not worth arguing with anymore. I'll be honest, it does get tiresome after a while.


I do understand that you're passionate about some of your beliefs. However, it's no fun talking with someone who's obviously both a master of debate and a very authoritative source for information that Lelouch is dead.


People are moving on from this argument that became more like bickering over time. Perhaps we ought to follow.

Spoilered for length. My personal theory for the drop in responses is a lack of material for rebuttal. I don't mind, because my aim isn't to 'have fun talking', but to ensure adherence to facts. Personally, I'm glad that there are less people discussing this because it means I get to be less argumentative; that doesn't mean I'll hold back once the debate starts up again however.

Originally Posted by Momosan

I assume you glanced at my join date and assume I'm some kind of timid anime fanboy? Drop the condescending BS. Had you read anything I posted you would have noticed I reinforced every aspect of my arguments with material from the series. It's fine if you want to disagree but do it with a proper rebuttal to my argument and not some lame attempt to belittle me.

It wasn't an attempt to belittle you. It was actually some genuine advice. You do realize that it's arrogant to waltz into a 200+ page thread and assume what you're going to say hasn't been said already, don't you? Although I won't fault you for that, as that kind of self-centric behaviour is actually fairly common, I will fault you for responding to one of my posts without understanding the context, and this is twice now.

As stated before, in both R1 AND R2 throughout the ENTIRETY of the series Lelouch NEVER needlessly sacrificed ANYONE who was a part of his life. In fact, Lelouch went out of his way to make sure that the people he cared about were spared from as much turmoil as possible. I never once said that he didn't act heartlessly. He volcano'd his own men, geass'd people to kill themselves, etc etc. He NEVER harmed the people close to him. If you honestly think he was being sadistic towards Nunnally at the end then obviously you didn't even bother to read what I wrote *SURPRISE* because I fully explained why he geass'd her. Additionally, he didn't geass her to fall down the steps.

Since when do you get to define the meaning of 'jackass'? 'Needlessly' has nothing to do with it, though you're wrong on that count too. Zero Requiem wasn't necessary, it was what Lelouch and Suzaku decided was right: Suzaku because he wanted Lelouch to atone for Euphie and Shirley, and turn his lies into reality; Lelouch because he'd lost everything he'd ever lived for, and because he wanted to be the one who destroyed and recreated the world.

You also completely missed the point that the whole reason I said that, was to contrast Lelouch's genuine assholeness at the end with the fake messiahness he was going to pull against Euphie back in Season 1. I was illustrating Lelouch's character development from someone who'd manipulate millions into thinking he was Jesus so they'd kill themselves for his own personal war, to someone who'd genuinely become a villain and make the world hate him so that he could bring them tomorrow.

I trust you understand now? Nonetheless, I'm still going to trash on you for failing basic reading comprehension: I never said Lelouch was sadistic to Nunally, nor that he Geassed her to fall down stairs. I said Lelouch felt no remorse for either (or refraining Schniezel's subordinates, or using his slave army as fodder for Fleia, or using Fleia in turn on the Black Knights) because he was willing to do whatever it took to make people hate him. And all because he personally wanted a world where the strong wouldn't force their will onto others, when a number of more stable political configurations could have been obtained with less bloodshed. I'll repeat, Lelouch didn't do any of that shit because it was necessary; he did it because he wanted to.

--Shirley--

Shirley was decisive? How so? Oh that's right, how she confessed her love for Lelouch instead of hiding it all the time? Or how about after learning Lelouch indirectly killed her father she hesitates and PURPOSEFULLY MISSES when holding Lelouch at gunpoint. How about when she discovers she's been geass'd and decides not to confront Lelouch directly but roundabouts through Suzaku? Oh yeah, I forgot how decisive she was my bad.

Shows how much you understand Shirley. 'Hide' her love? Hell no, Shirley always demonstrated remarkable initiative. You obviously have no idea about anything Shirley because she didn't PURPOSEFULLY MISS Lelouch, she PURPOSELY SHOT Viletta. And if you think choosing to contact Suzaku over Lelouch when he has been lying to her for the past year and, on top of that, is actually Zero is being indecisive, the I honestly question your capacity to make rational judgements at all.

--Kallen--

Kallen's decisions never falter. She remains steadfast to The Black Knights because she feels they represent the best chance against an oppresive regime. Her goals are to liberate the island of Japan no matter who tries to get in her way. Had Shirley been piloting the Guren against Lancelot you think she would've smoked Suzaku? No, Shirley would've sat there in an inner dialogue weighing her friendships instead of committing to her beliefs. Kallen turns against Lelouch when she thinks he's betrayed the cause SHE fights for. Those convictions represent DECISIVENESS. She doesn't hesitate to shoot friend or foe if they obstruct her path. He lies to her in episode 19? You mean where he tells her she's a pawn and then within 5 seconds afterwards tells her to stay alive which obviously tells her he was putting on a show? Give me a break.

'Kallen's decisions never falter'? lol. Just look at how desperate she is for direction after discovering that Lancelot's pilot was actually Suzaku. Saying she's loyal to Japan/Black Knights doesn't address any of my previous criticisms either, seeing as: 1)abandoning the critical battle for her country's freedom to retrieve a leader she admired utterly only to abandon him just as utterly upon learning his true identity; 2)holding said leader at gunpoint after struggling a year to retrieve him direactly as a result of her past abandonment, and then deciding not to shoot him; 3)then finally, saying she'd protect said leader from her allies with her own life, despite them acting in her country's best interest, only to abandon him again half a minute later upon hearing him say he only thought of her as a pawn; 4)each fall under the very definition of undecisiveness.

Your lack of comprehension for Shirley's character also demonstrates itself once again.

Finally, you completely missed the point of Lelouch lying to his loved ones, didn't you? It's to protect them. That is why Lelouch lied to Shirley, that is why Lelouch lied to Nunally, and yes, that is why Lelouch lied to Kallen, as Turn 19 clearly demonstrates.

--CC--

Uhhhh, what? If I understand this correctly you think C.C. didn't understand his motives? Please, show me the episode where Leloouch has to fight against C.C. because she doesn't understand his plans. C.C. was constantly helping and providing support to Lelouch's goals. No shit his motives were wrong that was why he was UNCERTAIN. He wanted to make a peaceful world for Nunnally but after killing Shirley's father, Euphy, and all the other innocents, he questioned whether his path was correct or not. In times like that the one who offered counsel was C.C. She never once manipulated him concerning HIS goals, only her own and therefore were NOT vital information to him.

See Turn 15 and C.C.'s subsequent seclusion for precisely an example of C.C. not understanding Lelouch. And if you agree that Lelouch's motives were wrong so vehemently, what's so great about C.C. enforcing them?

As for her manipulation, seriously you're getting incoherent. You think knowledge about his mother's survival wasn't vital information to Lelouch, when he spent almost two seasons lusting for her vengeance? C.C. helping and supporting Lelouch's goals? Yeah, I guess letting him refrain himself up because "I only need him alive" in Turn 7 falls exactly into that category.

So C.C. must've loved Charles by not giving him her code? Is that really the best you can do? It's clearly explained that the goal was for Charles, Marianne, C.C., and V.V. to work together to create a new world with no lies. The only reason C.C. went along with the plan was because it created 2 new ambitious Geass users who might attain a fully developed state. Charles had been in that state for quite some time and never took V.V.'s until the timing coincided with the plan. Once Charles was going to take her code she gladly pushed Lelouch aside and was going to give it to Charles. I believe C.C. had a hard time reconciling the conflicting emotions she had about receiving and passing on her Code. I don't think she had as many reserves when it came to giving her code to a jackass like Charles. I believe she was far too attached to Mao and Lelouch to give her code to them.

Your failure to understand the plot astounds me. Charles took V.V.'s Code because "Brother, you've lied again". C.C. was with Charles and Marianne because they wanted to open the World of C (i.e. the past, i.e. C.C.'s memories); C.C. was initially cooperative, so no one wanted or needed to take her Code in the first place. Finally, your imaginary conceptions of C.C. making Charles suffer for being a jackass are completely pointless since by the time C.C. knew he could take Codes, he was already immortal anyway.

There is no evidence suggesting that memory loss is associated with code loss. There is evidence suggesting memory retains after code is lost. Example, V.V. loses his code to Charles but discusses geass with C.C. prior to his passing away. Additionally, in the C.C.'s world during episode 20 we can see multiple forms of C.C. which are not explained. Personally I believe they represent a multitude of things such as memory, geass, personality, etc. While this is mere conjecture, I take solace in the fact that there is no evidence showing otherwise.

Again, way to fail to follow the plot. Actually pay attention to V.V.'s dialogue, and you'll notice that V.V. refers to obtaining Code in the future tense and is speaking from the perspective of his flashback. You also neglected in any manner to contradict Marianne's explicit question "Why did you seal your Code", spoken precisely in your precious episode 20, which directly links C.C.'s lost memories with the inactive state of her Code.

Now I assume your argument is, "Double Geass eyes doesn't denote fully developed Geass. Additionally one cannot bear Geass code and Geass at the sime time. References are Mao for double eyes and C.C./Charles for Geassless codes."

Simple, C.C. felt she had tortured Mao enough and as could be seen following his death she treated him more like a son than a tool for escape. I believe Mao had the capability to receive her code but she didn't want to transmit her curse to him. Some would argue that she didn't care for Mao since she killed him but realize that death was a better alternative than being immortal in C.C.'s eyes. As for Charles losing his geass, that's because V.V. gave Charles his Geass. Once V.V. lost his Code Charles loses the Geass that V.V. gave him. This is the same thing that happened with the Nun and C.C. Now Lelouch is different. His Geass comes from C.C. so as long as she retains her code then he retains his Geass. Lelouch's code comes from V.V. so there is no cancelling effect. Think of the code as a static generator. Once you move the code, the generator fails and you reboot the system from scratch. I find this to me the most plausible solution.

References aren't to C.C. and Charles for Geassless Codes, they are to explicit dialogue which confirms that obtaining Code involves giving up/not having Geass. Your claim as to Geasses 'rebooting' upon Code transfer is also directly contradicted by Rolo.

Btw, you still haven't explained, if double Geass denotes Code bearing capacity, why C.C. didn't force her Code onto Charles ages ago and only realized that he could do it after he'd already taken V.V.'s.

Those who shoot must be willing to be shot? So that means what? Lelouch never INTENTIONALLY endangered his life. I don't really feel like sifting through 50 episodes to find each time his was pissing his pants at the prospect of dieing. Lelouch always played his hands carefully and this was even commented on multiple times that "If Zero shows his face then he means he's confident in his escape route." Lelouch was willing to die for his cause but he never desired it and always worked ways to keep his chances as low as possible.

And your example with Gino demonstrates this changed how? I'm sorry if I don't see getting out of an exploding Knightmare as INTENTIONALLY endangering his life. And no, you don't have to sift through 50 episodes to provide every example; it would be appreciated, however, if you could bother sifting through long enough to provide even one.

"If Lelouch had immortality there's no way he wouldn't use it."

Oh really? Kind of like getting the world to hate him so he could fake his death and leave a better world for Nunnally to live in? Yeah Lelouch never took advantage of immortality. Tristan destroys his KM frame so he should what? Stick around watching Suzaku beat the crap out of him in some attempt to fake his death for what? Lelouch had his plan already set out prior to entering. I doubt sacrificing his KM frame to some random nobody to fake his death was a probablity he was going to risk the operation on.

Yeah? Why not make out like he's Jesus who can resurrect and grant miracles, and walk the earth preaching peace/tomorrow instead? Zero Requiem is a stupid plan if he's immortal; there's no need to make Nunally, Kallen, C.C., Kaguya, Tamaki, and Suzaku cry.

Note also Lelouch's needlessly elaborate plan with Schniezel, where if he knew he couldn't die he could have just walked straight into that escape pod, armed bodyguards and all. I already said this last time.

But hey, if you want to you can just dismiss me as some idiot who didn't read anything whilst ignoring nearly my entire post. Suit yourself.

If you want me to believe you read, then demonstrate it.

edit:

Originally Posted by Kang Seung Jae

There is no solid proof on that point. It's ambiguous whether Charles was Geassed or not.

Define solid evidence. Instead of the usual blue neural pathway, a red wall of light is shown when Charles is 'Geassed'. He is shown rejecting Geass via red light later again in the same episode, and these animations for Geass are never shown subsequently. Furthermore, Charles also lacked red circles around his eyes after being Geassed. There's very little ambiguity, at all.

[Droplet]

@Sol Falling

I admire your persistence on this issue, but I'm just saying that you could spare the ad hominems (i.e. Your failure to understand the plot astounds me.). My reason for this is that ad hominems doesn't strengthen any premise; and to quote, "Ad hominem attacks on one's opponent are a tried-and-true strategy for people who have a case that is weak." Unless you consider your cases weak, then you shouldn't have to question anyone's intelligence or say things to make them feel stupid, right?

About the 'fun part' in debating, I meant that to say that debating is much better when you just give objective counter points without ever being antagonistic. Maybe at the start of this thread, you weren't as abrasive too--and just maybe, you've been nicer.

So my point is: You're capable of making good points and counter points. Therefore, I think you'll get by without using underhanded insults.

Anyway, I'll try to argue with you again some time soon. Not to convince you that I'm right of course, but so that you could 'sharpen'/'refine' the arguments. I'm not keeping track of all the premises people use so far, so I may repeat some of them or just summarize.

I had the same stance as you just after watching Turn 25. Sunrise couldn't have made the death scene more obvious. At that time, I was at least expecting a funeral or an emergency rush to a hospital after he got fatally stabbed.

Instead, a scene where Nunnally suddenly realizes everything happens. Deduction that exceeds that of L, ESP, or Geass Effect? Honestly, I can't tell. Or rather, I can't just discount the possibilities that I disagree with.

There's alot of other scenes that requires viewer's interpretation like this. Interpretation in itself is biased so it's no easy matter debating on those grounds.

Basically, this debate could just be settled with one scene:

-They should just show whether Lelouch is with C.C. or not after the death scene.

Now I wonder why Sunrise opted not to show that particular scene. How bothersome.

Well, I'll try to get back at you soon when I have time to rewatch and reassess CG R1&R2 for literary devices and etc.

[Anh_Minh]

I wouldn't say that if she guessed, it was that great a feat. It was just a matter of reconciling the kind Lelouch she knew with the ruthless emperor. She knew he was a great planner, and that he was Zero. If she accepts that his death was planned, it all makes sense - including his sudden bout of "evil".

[Witacume]

damn it Sol falling.
I really think your on the ball on most points here but here is the kicker.
LElouch is the main character and people don't want to see his downfalls.
I agree that Lelouch was a jackass.
But i will take things further.
I am considering writing a long post about it.

@Droplet
I got to be honest please argue his points.
Your turning this into Sol falling is being mean and i can't argue his points.
These aren't arguments instead you are avoiding the topic on hand.
Its best you delete your post as it serves no purpose.
You should probably pm him what you wrote because it brings nothing to the table in terms of relevance to the topic.

[Alchemist007]

Well if there's supposed to be a death list, I don't see how its possible that they would say "interpret it yourselves." Unless that's some sort of temporary state :|
Unless of couse at the bottom of the list it says "LL - what do you think?"