^I never understood why Lelouch liked to make funny faces when he was evil or something.
Also, to this day I'm glad I never bothered with the 2nd season.
It's actually photoshopped- it's a lot funnier when you know the original image
and the context of why he was making that face. It's one of the few faces they bothered changing when they released the DVD so even they knew it was a pretty horrible face.Alsoit'snotliketheshowwaseversubtleaboutanything.
I'm sort of curious, what are the parts that people consider to be "good" and the parts that people consider to be "bad". I've watched the series several times and I can't recall any parts that I particularly disliked beyond stuff like the giant pizza party episode. Perhaps I'm just too forgiving on series.
You're going to get highly varied responses since Code Geass is a pretty controversial show as far as that goes. Though, them exaggerating everything is possibly what made it so memorable in the first place- Zero's definitely a character I won't forget. For me, the second season was a lot worse than the first. The event that most people talk about when it comes to the first season is
The Euphinator/Euphenasia incident. There are two sides to this; some people think it makes sense if you see Code Geass as a grand tragedy and others think it's completely ridiculous. I fall into the latter.
Tonally it doesn't work at all, because nobody is going to take your grand tragedy story seriously if you stick it in between every single piece of pandering material that Code Geass had. Code Geass was pandering to basically every single fetishist out there in an attempt to get more views. I heard a metaphor that seemed apt; if you were falling from a plane and was going to be saved from hitting water instead of land thanks to TV physics, the difference between a show with proper tone and Code Geass is that a tragedy is where someone hit land just a couple feet from the edge of the water, whereas Code Geass had you hitting a 10-foot wide piece of land in the middle of the ocean that you couldn't see while you were falling.
Really, the incident was supposed to make me be horrified/cry/disgusted, but all it did for most people was make them laugh their ass off.
Plot-wise it makes little sense because it was basically a get-out-of jail free card for the writers/Lelouch. Instead of actually needing to think about how Lelouch and the Black Knights deal with the situation (There could've been any number of ways it spun out of control given the Emperor's general policy of social darwinism) it was just a way from getting from point A to point B in the plot in the fastest way possible. It's not completely impossible for the situation to occur but it's one of those situations where they stretched the viewer's suspension of disbelief really thin and it broke for a couple people. The questions people typically ask about the scene are "why would his geass go out of control that specific moment" and "why would he make such an unfunny joke to begin with aside from the sake of the plot" which is attempted to be excused by the whole "it's supposed to be tragic" thing, which doesn't for a lot of people as mentioned above.
I should say that despite that I watched the second season because while that situation was pretty ridiculous, I liked the rest of the show just fine past its tendency to go way over the top.
The second season had way more unintentionally funny scenes than the first, but I can think of three things that I found detrimental to my actual viewing of the show in R2:
The beginning of the whole entire season was apparently not intended by the director, but that doesn't really excuse what it ended up being. Given the cliffhanger of season 1 it's ridiculous to go back to more school hijinks which caused a lot of things that broke the stupid meter like making Sayako having a perfect Mission Impossible style mask that made her look like Lelouch. The idea that Charles had a Geass that implants fake memories (that's an awfully restrictive/plot-convienent power) is relate to the second point-
The whole entire story behind Geass and Charles/Marianne's intentions. First, their geass powers were created with specific plot-writing purposes in mind and were simply there for a "surprise" moment. It was pretty transparent this time in comparison to the Euphenator incident, because at least that had Mao to set the precedent of the geass going out of control. If it was what they planned all along they probably should've dropped more hints about Charles/Marianne's powers earlier in the series. I don't really tend to appreciate plot twists that are basically someone asking me to guess a number and the answer turned out to be "penis".
There's also this ridiculous shift in the focus of the show in the span of a single (or was it two?) episode(s). There's a massive infodump about what was going on the whole time as far as Charles/VV/Marianne's plans were concerned but instead of having something to do with the clash of real-life ideologies like the rest of the show had been about, it was a weird discussion of metaphysics that comes from nowhere and goes nowhere. Dropping a discussion like that into one or two episodes of a 50-episodes series doesn't work at all.
For the record this is coming from someone who liked the last two episodes of Evangelion- at least there it was apropos to talk about Shinji's insecurity and feeling of self-worth because it was present throughout the entire series. A discussion about the nature of what life is and what kind of limits we want to set on the "game" really has almost nothing to do with the rest of the show. If it was written properly maybe it would've worked, but it certainly didn't the way it was presented.
Finally the last thing that made no sense to me was the ending, or rather the entire course of the Zero Requiem. The first action Lelouch takes is geass-ing a large section of Britannia. Given how passionate he was about saying he thinks free will is a cool thing and all it doesn't make a whole lot of sense that that was the course that he ended up taking. Secondly the fact that he was just able to walk up to Britannia and take control like that is pretty ridiculous itself (If he was capable of doing something like that you think he would've done it a lot earlier). All things considered it wasn't really shown how Lelouch was in any way a worse ruler than his father, who was probably also perfectly okay with killing anybody that stood in his way.
The Zero Requiem really doesn't work in concept anyway. Many people compare it to the ending of Watchmen, but the reason the Watchmen ending worked (both the comic and the movie) was that the threat defined was something that was outside humanity, and it was a looming threat. The concept of something threatening the entirety of humanity with extinction causing people to come to compromises and work together is actually something believable (This was a genuine concern during the Manhattan Project for example). Leleouch, on the other hand, was just a typical tyrannical ruler, and the deaths of tyrannical rulers in gigantic empire usually just lead to more fractions, especially when you consider that Charles apparently had hundreds of successors.
The last thing I feel like mentioning is a lot more personal, but Nina is quite possibly the most annoying character that's ever been created and attempted to develop.