Fullmetal Alchemist Brotherhood

[TGLS]

I searched a for an existing FMA thread and couldn't find one.

The trick is there are plenty of hits for "Full Metal" but no hits for the OP's preferred "Fullmetal".

[Dae tone]

OP is correct. The previous thread should have been corrected when it went up initially. Chuck also has it spelled correctly on the review page.

[Rasp]

You know... I did get around to watching Brotherhood not that long ago and I have to say.... I don't like it... especially the ENDING it just... felt awful. like I don't wanna spoil anything for those who havn't seen it but those that have... am I out of my mind or was the ending as bad for you was it was for me?

[MithrandirOlorin]

The ending seems to be a big factor in whether people prefer Brotherhood or the original show.

[Dae tone]

You know... I did get around to watching Brotherhood not that long ago and I have to say.... I don't like it... especially the ENDING it just... felt awful. like I don't wanna spoil anything for those who havn't seen it but those that have... am I out of my mind or was the ending as bad for you was it was for me?

Maybe it was just because I watched Fullmetal Alchemist as it was being released, and then read the manga for FMA:B, but I entirely disagree.

I was so frustrated by how FMA ended up feeling so small, the story felt like it made no use of the world created (FMA series only the post series movie adds different wrinkles to this discussion) It felt like exactly what it was, someone who had taken a beginning and ran with the story having no idea where it was going. Only to leave me sitting there asking what about all this stuff that was started, none of it tied in or made any sense.
To avoid spoilers let me make a comparison; to me it's a bit similar to something like the Han Solo movie, when all of the story revolves around such a small group of people or activities, the entire world feels small. and I thoroughly enjoyed FMA:B ending because it was all building towards it, the pieces are there, they make use of the world and all the previous story beats to make it become something entirely new when viewed as a whole. Can you imagine if all you knew about Han Solo was from the Solo movie? is kinda how I feel about FMA and is why I'm thankful for the original trilogy of star- i mean FMA:B

[AuRon]

As a long time fan of the first FMA series, I feel kind of feel like I should stand up for it. I don't expect to change anyone's mind, but maybe this can at least help illustrate why some people prefer the first series over Brotherhood. First of all, I feel that comparing FMA 2003 to Brotherhood (or the manga for that matter) is the wrong way of looking at it. I feel its best to look at it as its own thing, an alternate take on the story and characters.

As far as the story feeling smaller... Yeah, it was. But that isn't necessarily a bad thing. The first series had a different tone and focus, and was telling a different sort of story. The first series was darker, slower paced, more character driven, and with a greater emphasis on tragedy and moral ambiguity. Brotherhood was bigger and more epic in scope. It was more plot driven and action oriented. It had a broader focus and a larger cast. This meant that the world and cast felt more expansive, but it also meant that many of the individual characters weren't explored as much. A great example is Lust, who in Brotherhood is just pure evil, but in 2003 becomes a surprisingly nuanced and human character.

Whereas the first series was more about moral ambiguity, Brotherhood often had more straight forward good vs evil scenarios. Even the Ishval war was more straightforward in Brotherhood, with the Ishvalans (with the possible exception of Scar) just being victims fighting back against their oppressors. In 2003 it wasn't as straightforward as that.

FMA 2003 is a story focused on a relatively small group of characters, and their lives, and struggles, and tragedies. Brotherhood is an epic about a grand conspiracy, a war for the fate of a country, and the heroes having to band together to defeat a satanic figure at the top of it all. Like I said, different sorts of stories, different scopes, and probably different target audiences as well.

As for the Star Wars comparison, let me make my own comparison to illustrate my point. I would compare FMA 2003 to the 1979 movie Alien: a small story with a small scope, focused on a small group of characters. Alien is a character study, and a horror story, and a tragedy. Then you have Aliens (compared to Brotherhood), which is larger in scope, with a bigger cast of characters. It is not a character study or horror story like the first movie. Instead, it is an action movie, and a story of heroism and sacrifice against a great enemy/alien force. Both movies are set in the same "world", and even feature the same protagonist, but their tone, scope, and focus are very different.

And as far as the first series story "not making sense", If anyone has any specific examples to point out then feel free, because I thought it made sense for the most part. Sorry for the long post, wasn't intending it to be this long. I just notice that people say FMA 2003 isn't good on the grounds that it didn't do the same things that Brotherhood did.

[Wargriffin]

I believe what Dae tone is getting at but is poorly conveying is the lack of Universal Stakes in FMA while in FMAB ALOT of the way the world is outright connected to the overall conspiracy

Which actually isn't true...
Both Conspiracies outright affect the setting, the only difference is the Scale of the Villain's overall goal

which I can sum up as Ridiculously petty vs Final Fantasy Grandiose

You know... I did get around to watching Brotherhood not that long ago and I have to say.... I don't like it... especially the ENDING it just... felt awful. like I don't wanna spoil anything for those who havn't seen it but those that have... am I out of my mind or was the ending as bad for you was it was for me?

Generally Speaking, I find that the divide is squared heavily on what people feel the Price of the journey should have been

and its ridiculous that we have youtube button but no spoiler button... cause Then I'd probably get more into detail

[Mecha82]

As a long time fan of the first FMA series, I feel kind of feel like I should stand up for it. I don't expect to change anyone's mind, but maybe this can at least help illustrate why some people prefer the first series over Brotherhood. First of all, I feel that comparing FMA 2003 to Brotherhood (or the manga for that matter) is the wrong way of looking at it. I feel its best to look at it as its own thing, an alternate take on the story and characters.

As far as the story feeling smaller... Yeah, it was. But that isn't necessarily a bad thing. The first series had a different tone and focus, and was telling a different sort of story. The first series more darker, slower paced, more character driven, and with a greater emphasis on tragedy and moral ambiguity. Brotherhood was bigger and more epic in scope. It was more plot driven and action oriented. It had a broader focus and a larger cast. This meant that the world and cast felt more expansive, but it also meant that many of the individual characters weren't explored as much. A great example is Lust, who in Brotherhood is just pure evil, but in 2003 becomes a surprisingly nuanced and human character.

Whereas the first series was more about moral ambiguity, Brotherhood often had more straight forward good vs evil scenarios. Even the Ishval war was more straightforward in Brotherhood, with the Ishvalans (with the possible exception of Scar) just being victims fighting back against their oppressors. In 2003 it wasn't as straightforward as that.

FMA 2003 is a story focused on a relatively small group of characters, and their lives, and struggles, and tragedies. Brotherhood is an epic about a grand conspiracy, a war for the fate of a country, and the heroes having to band together to defeat a satanic figure at the top of it all. Like I said, different sorts of stories, different scopes, and probably different target audiences as well.

AS far as the Star Wars comparison, let me make my own comparison to illustrate my point. I would compare FMA 2003 to the 1979 movie Alien: a small story with a small scope, focused on a small group of characters. Alien is a character study, and a horror story, and a tragedy. Then you have Aliens (compared to Brotherhood), which is larger in scope, with a bigger cast of characters. It is not a character study or horror story like the first movie. Instead, it is an action movie, and a story of heroism and sacrifice against a great enemy/alien force. Both movies are set in the same "world", and even feature the same protagonist, but their tone, scope, and focus are very different.

And as far as the first series story "not making sense", If anyone has any specific examples to point out then feel free, because I thought it made sense for the most part. Sorry for the long post, wasn't intending it to be this long. I just notice that people say FMA 2003 isn't good on the grounds that it didn't do the same things that Brotherhood did.

I do think that its not about which one is better anime but which each person prefers because both are good series. Like you said FMA03 feels smaller while FMA:B is larger in scale. Personally I prefer FMA:B over FMA03 because of it and for having ending that is more to my liking. After all like Glass Reflection tends to say ending is paramount and it can make or brake series. Of course does ending feel satisfying also depends from preferences of each person having seen that ending. Ending that might feel satisfying to one person might not be that for another and vice versa. So really I understand were those that like FMA03 over FMA:B are coming from and I am not going to fight them over that.

[AuRon]

I believe what Dae tone is getting at but is poorly conveying is the lack of Universal Stakes in FMA while in FMAB ALOT of the way the world is outright connected to the overall conspiracy

Which actually isn't true...
Both Conspiracies outright affect the setting, the only difference is the Scale of the Villain's overall goal

which I can sum up as Ridiculously petty vs Final Fantasy Grandiose

I guess I get that. Mild spoilers: In Brotherhood the villain's ambition is "I want to be a god", whereas in 2003 its "I want to live forever". Achieving immortality is a fairly common goal in fiction, particularity among villains. But I guess it could be considered underwhelming compared to the bad guy's ambition in the other show. On the other hand, you could also make the argument that wanting to become a god is more... cartoonish. Its the sort of thing a comic book villain would aspire to, while wanting to live forever seems more... relatable? Something many people would actually want, but can't achieve.

But yeah, I guess it would still be disappointing if you want a big boss fight at the end.

[MithrandirOlorin]

I hate GR's "Ending is Paramount" video, so many of my favorite shows period had endings I was then less enthusiastic about. Like the quest for the Holy Grail the journey is more important then the destination.