Why ‘03 over Brotherhood?

PikaboyTK said:
The videos by Lowart had an opposite effect on me. I despised the changes of Brotherhood, from the get-go! That pilot is such an incoherent mess, I tell you. But after watching his videos, I started to appreciate the differences between the two shows, and now I like them for what they are.

Warning, spoilers follow for FMA03.

As for why I still prefer the original show over Brotherhood, there's plenty of reasons. Mostly due to the fact that it sticks to showing the perspective of Elric brothers. They are the centerpiece and the show doesn't bother with the worldview of the side characters, atleast not as much as Brotherhood, where you can spend long time periods without the protagonists.

The overall grim tone, melancholic soundtrack, the lighting and composition and the old-school artstyle are what draw me closer to this one.

Certain characters are better done here. Hughes and Nina get more time with Elrics. Hughes basically becomes a father figure for them. Sloth, Lust and Scar are much more interesting as characters here, instead of just being plot devices. The homunculi formation process is quite haunting, and I love it that way.

Most importantly, I prefer the personal stakes and nature of this show. There is no world ending event, atleast not in Amestris. The twin world aspect was also decent in my opinion. I like that Edward has to fight all alone at the end, it's his fight and he even loses! It's all done in a sensible way, and stays coherent for the most part.

There's certainly more, but it's been a while since my last viewing. Memory doesn't hold well. Thanks for reading!

PikaboyTK said:

I read through your post in this thread and I completely agree with you! I wish there were more people talking about FMA03. Perhaps that was the case back then, but it definitely isn't now. So I'm glad someone asked the reasons why people like us prefer the original over the re-adaptation.

AkiraMiyazaki17 said:
Want to clarify first that this is just my opinion and I think it’s perfectly valid to disagree (last time I expressed my opinion on this I was met by dozens of Brotherhood fans who refused to accept that I didn’t feel the same way as them).

Personally, I think the original series is the more mature show. I’m not really a huge fan of action shounen usually, and while obviously Brotherhood goes far beyond thee types of series, I think it has too many elements that just feel overly dramatised and tropey; everything from the more bombastic soundtrack to the more extended fight scenes and more frequent humour. I love Brotherhood, but my tastes dictate that I love the more sober tone of the original far more; I think the quiet character moments carry more weight—the music is much more melodic and atmospheric, and the slower pacing allows for a more poignant, slow burn experience. Moments such as the death of Hughes are significantly more impactful, taking place much later in the series and handled with much more subtlety. I can understand why people gravitate more to the rapid pacing, tighter narrative and epic scale of the remake, but it just doesn’t suit my tastes as much.

Moreover, I think the thematic material present in the original is far more interesting. The genocide of the Ishbalan people carries so much more weight in the 2003 series; it’s far more influential in the shaping of the series, especially as Scar sticks around as an antagonist until the final few episodes, and the brutality of it is emphasised much more. For example, the fact that Mustang—rather than Scar—is the murderer of Winry’s parents not only add’s depth to his character, but also to the show’s deconstruction of the military industrial complex.

On another note, I really love how the homunculi are the result of failed human transmutation in the 2003 version. It gives each of the homunculi so much more character—Lust becomes a more compelling villain, as she’s given space to exhibit the show’s themes about what makes us human (following on from Al’s existential crisis). It also allows Ed and Al to come into conflict with the homunculi of their mother, which progresses their development by having them face their sins and let go of their past.

I think I’m going on a little bit here, but there’s just so much I want to say. I’m really passionate about the 2003 series, even if the latter half (the last few episodes in particular) are a complete mess. Ultimately it just comes down to what kind of series I prefer, as 2003 and Brotherhood are different beasts.

ShamankinguYoh said:

Fullmetal Alchemist is a shonen battle manga. It just is. I know people love to ignore the manga’s existence because there are two full anime adaptations, but it is a shonen battle manga first and foremost. And there’s nothing inherently wrong with that. Saying you’re not a fan of shonen battle manga is basically a non point, as these series can run the gambit from Fairy Tail to Hunter X Hunter. It’s a meaningless generalization. FMA 03 just is not Fullmetal Alchemist. It’s some odd thrown together offshoot that they had to piece together because the manga was never intended to be adapted in full. It completely butchers the story and disregards some of the best characters from the manga, like Bradley and Hohenheim. I could go on about how much of a mess the original anime is. Frankly after finally watching it a couple years ago I never understood why it has any sort of following anymore. The manga is the best version of the story, but if you don’t read manga, Brotherhood is the next best option.

AkiraMiyazaki17 said:

Yeah it felt nice to talk about it. I think a lot of the FMA-related posts always have a barrage of Brotherhood fans who like to suppress any discussion favourably comparing the original with Brotherhood, so it’s great to have the opportunity to discuss.

AkiraMiyazaki17 said:

Look, I’m not gonna debate you on which one is better—I have my opinion and you have yours, and I don’t care enough to continually argue. That being said, I want to make it clear that I do not care AT ALL which version adapts the manga better. Yes the 2003 version is messy and strays from the manga’s vision, but there is absolutely no reason why I should have to believe that the manga’s vision is the one I should care for most. I never once said that 2003 was the better at adapting the manga, I just said that I enjoyed my experience with 2003 more than Brotherhood, and so for me it’s the definitive version of the story. If that bothers you so immensely, then I don’t know what to say. This will be the last time I read any of your responses, so I hope you can agree to disagree and leave it at that.

ErogakiPatches said:

Ahhhhh, I can't agree more! I hate, hate, HATE when people use the argument of "Well, it adapted it better". I don't care if it adapted it better if I don't care for how the manga went; I just care for the story that gives me the most happinesses.
For instance, the Utena anime changes a lot of things about the manga but I enjoy the anime more than the manga with the changes it made. However, something like the "Carrie" novel by Stephen King is a great book and many important plot points are left out of the movies entirely, which is something I don't like because I like the novel. But I never liked the FMA manga, so whether it adapted it "best" or not doesn't matter to me if I don't enjoy it.

grys12 said:
‘03 for the initial part that brotherhood then condenses. I think it was a good decision to condense the beginning parts to avoid repetition so as to avoid boring the part of the audience that had already watched ‘03, but it did make things confusing for those new to FMA in general.

Agree with the poster above who singled out Hughes - he’s my favourite character and there’s indeed more of him in ‘03. Otherwise, i’m a stickler for canon stuff and see little point in ‘03. Over all i think it would have made more sense to only produce 1 series, ie., only produce the anime when they were sure they would be able to adapt the entire manga.