When it comes to your writing how do you see the differences between the reboot interpretation of Dante and Vergil versus their classic counterparts? What parts stick out to you as similar or as different?
So, I'm in the minority camp that thinks Ninja Theory did kind of an interesting thing when they opted to switch storylines and birth order (for whatever that's worth with identical twins) between Dante and Vergil in the reboot.
I know a lot of people hate the idea of Vergil being the "little brother" in the equation and thought it made no sense and was a meaningless change, and I get where they're coming from, because it probably was - what I mean is, it likely wasn't intentional on NT's part, for any other reason than an attempt to instead make Dante the "cool older brother" and to differentiate themselves in one more way from OG DMC.
But what's interesting about both the shift in birth order and the storyline swap is that rather than undermining their innate characters, it actually reinforced them, and proved that no matter the formative circumstances, Dante will act like Dante and Vergil will act like Vergil:
Dante, whether he's the one protected by Eva or disenfranchised from society and family, will become secretly wounded, insouciant, irreverent, sardonic, flippant and cynical. He will be in denial about the true danger posed by Mundus, and determined to avoid his father's legacy, but reluctantly protect humanity when called upon - though not for free, of course. The toilets need flushing.
Vergil, whether he comes from rubble or privilege, will always be ambitious, idealistic striving, driven, calculating but rash, with the overconfidence of youth and a reach exceeding his grasp. He will have an Icarusian fall, and ultimately a phoenix-like redemption. (We presume a DmC sequel would/have follow(ed) the same reconciliation trajectory, because what else would make sense/serve the story?)
It also rather neatly answers and dovetails with the retroactive rhetorical question classic Vergil asks himself at the top of the Qliphoth, whether things would have been different if he'd had Dante's life, and Dante had his.
And the answer we already have from reboot is, no, not really. The outcome could only have been different if the individuals involved were totally different people - but their core character traits, I think, stay true and remain intact in both versions.
Still, obviously there are variations in character within those greater macro aspects, things that make the expression of these personality traits different, which we can attribute to formative experience, and the swapped backstory.
For instance, Classic Dante hides his profound psychological damage by being a party guy and a rock n' roll rodeo clown whereas DmC Dante wears his inside out; we can see his sullen punk-rock defensiveness, his bitterness, and we do not doubt his damage for a minute. Being the disenfranchised one has left its mark on him, and he has no ability or willingness to mask his trauma. Both keep others at arms' length, but ironically, ReDante actually is more receptive to intimacy and connection, possibly because he doesn't have a false front, or a whole circus-like façade, just a default defensive stance he holds as a last resort, after being embattled his entire life. He has been given the classic Vergil backstory, and while he becomes similarly defensive and embittered, he reacts like Dante, not classic Vergil.
Neither Dante is ever canonically shown as having any particular interest in humans or humanity as a whole, so much as a keen interest in killing demons (which is why the ending fraternal conflict of reboot rings so false, non sequitur and hollow). Both shrug off human collateral damage, and if classic Dante is ever bothered by the mass casualties incurred in the raising of the Qliphoth, he never mentions it as he trips over their bodies to run to his brother. ¯_(ツ)_/¯
Of the two, I think Vergil is the more different, with more personality contrast between interpretations - though his core traits remain: curiosity, intrepidity, enthusiasm, perfectionism, impulsivity, absolutism. With the strife removed from his life, Vergil is able to be emotionally open, to express his love for his brother, and his ambition comes from a proactive place instead of a reactive one.
However, like Dante, all his youthful flaws remain intact. He will always be the one who falls - and Dante will always be the one who fails to act at the crucial moment. The tragedy is thus complete.
The greatest difference, I think, is that classic Vergil has even less use for humans than Dante, whereas ReVergil is arguably the only one who actually has any appreciation for humanity as a class (even if he regards them as lesser beings) - which actually puts him more in line with classic Sparda, ironically, than anyone else. Reboot Sparda is never shown as having any particular interest in humans or their fate, and he and Eva are essentially depicted as just hiding out in the human world like it's witness protection.
That said, I'm sure I'm missing something, so I'm actually interested in hearing other people's opinions on this.
