Fullmetal Alchemist
| There a lot of misunderstandings and outright misinformation surrounding the 2003 anime and Brotherhood, so I thought I could clear up some of these myths that have perpetuated the fandom for eons with proof from interviews. Note: In this context, a " better adaptation " would be one that is more faithful to the manga. It does not mean it's a better anime or anything of the sort. ___________________________________________________________________ I'll start with the false information surrounding the 2003 anime first. The 2003 anime was adapting the manga well and was even a better adaptation of the manga in the beginning versus Brotherhood and it was forced to come up with an original plot at the halfway mark. These assertions are commonplace among the fandom. Not only are they untrue, but they're literally the opposite of what is actually the truth. Here are some comments from the director of 2003 regarding this specific topic: APA: The Full Metal Alchemist anime is pretty different from the original manga. Did you feel any pressure to be faithful to the original while you were working? Seiji Mizushima: When we started the Full Metal Alchemist anime adaptation, there were only one or two volumes out during that time. So when I started the project, there wasn't pressure to be faithful to the original story. It was more about creating an original story that would last a full season. Link to the interview: https://international.ucla.edu/institute/article/110467 This directly contradicts what people assume about the 2003 anime. the 2003 anime was never intended to be an adaptation of the manga the 2003 anime was intended to be an original story from the very beginning using the manga as a sort of framework. the 2003 anime was never forced to go original and they never had to come up with a plot on a whim since they knew the story they were going to create from the beginning The director continues on to say: APA: Usually, an anime is made from a manga that’s been out for a little while, but the FMA anime was made pretty soon after the manga was first released. Is it common to make animes from properties that have barely been in existence? Mizushima: When we want to make an anime from an existing source, we have to decide whether that anime is going to stick very closely to the story of the existing manga, or if we want to use the art style of the manga to create a wider audience through the anime. So our approach to the original manga is going to change a lot based on which direction we decide to go in. As a director, I have to ask what type of anime this is going to be – if we’re going to be doing a strict adaptation or an original story based loosely on the manga – so there isn’t any one way to adapt a manga into an anime. This further categorically disproves the myth surrounding the 2003 anime. The 2003 anime was planned to be a loose original interpretation of the manga from the beginning and was never a strict adaptation. Furthermore, you can can see the occurrence of this happening in the beginning of the 2003 show itself, it diverges from the manga in the very first episode! And episode 3 of 2003 was almost entirely anime original. That isn't even talking about the countless amounts of anime original content in the beginning of 2003. People have this idea 03 adapted the Nina arc better in 2003 versus Brotherhood despite the fact that the 2003 anime's Nina arc was chock full of anime original content. FMAB actually did a perfect adaption of the Nina episode in FMAB. Many think that Hughes was done a disservice in FMAB when in reality FMAB adapted Hughes very faithfully. There are countless examples from the Lab Arc in the 2003 anime which was a light and day differences versus the manga. Brotherhood adapted the lab arc from the manga extremely faithfully while the lab arc in the 2003 version is basically an entirely new thing. The beginning of 2003 anime was nowhere near a manga perfect adaptation. It was nowhere even near that. And this was done for a reason. Here's an interview from the CEO of Bones, the anime studio that animated and wrote the 2003 anime: The later episodes of the original FMA series had to tell a different story from the manga. Did Bones always hope that it could make a second version, closer to the FMA manga? When we started the first series, the manga was still the early stages and the pacing was not yet determined. So we made the animation with the premise that original elements would be included from the beginning. The reason why we threw in the original story in the first half was so we could depict the story in the latter half. Link to interview: http://www.mangauk.com/making-his-bones/ This reaffirms the director of 2003's points about the 2003 anime and gets to the heart of the matter regarding the anime original content in 2003. They made 2003 anime with the intention of going original from the start and made major changes in the beginning of the 2003 anime by adding tons of original content to make the drastically different plot in the latter half make more sense. As you can see, many myths surround the 2003 anime in the fandom that are just untrue. I don't know why people believe myths like the original was forced to go original at the halfway point and other similar beliefs like that. ___________________________________________________________________ Now regarding FMAB, which has even worse myths surrounding it that are the exact opposite of what actually happened in reality. The big one is the idea that: The director of FMAB assumed the audience had seen 03 prior to watching Brotherhood and therefore rushed the beginning of Brotherhood because the 2003 anime adapted those parts in the manga " better " than the 2003 anime to get to the manga original content faster that wasn't covered in 2003. This is downright untrue and the exact opposite of what actually happened. Here are interviews from the director of FMAB: How was it taking part in such a famous series like Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood as director? The first Fullmetal Alchemist anime came out in 2003 and became a huge hit. Then I got the offer to direct the next series that would coincide with the end of the manga series. At that point, I already knew how famous Fullmetal Alchemist was. However, that didn't influence or affect me in the way I was going to make the series, so it really didn't prompt me to do anything different from what I've always done. The 2003 anime had next to no influence on how the director approached FMAB as seen here How was the creative process for Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood? Do you feel a lack of creative freedom when it comes to adapt an existing manga? For the production of Brotherhood, the original author, Arakawa-sensei, did attend first meetings, and of course she also checked the storyboards and the scripts at that time, but she was too busy because of the magazine serialization schedule, so she and the editor just attended the meetings for the first episodes. They were there to sort of check and see what kind of direction the production was heading and what kind of approach we were taking. Instead of saying that there wasn't much creative freedom, I'd rather say the standard was basically just the manga. That was sort of like the Bible for the whole thing; all the meetings and the whole process was about figuring out how best to convert the manga into anime. Link to the interview: https://www.animenewsnetwork.com/feature/2017-11-30/interview-yasuhiro-irie/.124659 The director of FMAB says it in clear terms. The approach that FMAB took was one of viewing the manga as the Bible. It took zero influence from the 2003 anime and had ZERO intent in " assuming that people had seen the 2003 anime ". He says it even more strongly in another interview: What are the differences you felt for Fullmetal Alchemist, and Brotherhood? For the first season of Fullmetal Alchemist, I just worked on the first opening, and I participated in its realization. For Brotherhood for me, it was a new work. As for this second season, I really had a new approach: I approached Brotherhood as a work in its own right. There are no inspirations compared to the first season. We basically rely on the manga. If there are similarities with the first season, it's only because they were in the manga, and they were appreciated. Link to interview: https://www.manga-news.com/index.php/auteur/interview/IRIE-Yasuhiro The director directly denies these allegations that many in the FMA fandom believe to exist in clear terms. He approached FMAB as a new work in its own right. The only reason there are similarities in the beginning of FMAB and 03 is because FMAB is literally adapting the manga and is a much better adaptation of the manga from the BEGINNING versus 2003. You can see it in the beginning of FMAB as well. It adapts the Nina part in the manga better, the lab part, etc...The beginning of FMAB never assumed that people had watched the 2003 anime. ___________________________________________________________________ I don't want to say that all of FMAB was a perfect adaptation of the manga or didn't have original content because it did and it wasn't a perfect one to one adaptation of the manga all the time, but that was never because they rushed the story cause they assumed people had watched 03. I also don't want to say that the 2003 anime was all anime original content in the beginning because it did adapt the manga better in certain places in the beginning, but overall? It was pretty original. Adding on to this, I want to say that anime original content being good or bad is in the eye of the beholder. Anime original content can be great, it can terrible, it can be fine! I made this post to try and clear up misinterpretations, misunderstandings, and some false assertions that have continued to perpetuate for years on end. I want to make clear that this post was specifically meant to be objective and unbiased and based on facts from the word of people who helmed the different adaptations and not biased toward one or the other anime. Thanks for reading and hopefully I shed some new light on the Fullmetal Alchemist franchise. Original Post made by Reddit user Quiz0tix. |
 |
| That's a nice arguments you got there, but unfortunately for you, I'm forklift certified. But on a serious note, I've never seen anyone actually making those arguments. |
 |
Piromysl said: Yes, people do make such arguments. Just check out the comments of this recent threadThat's a nice arguments you got there, but unfortunately for you, I'm forklift certified. But on a serious note, I've never seen anyone actually making those arguments. https://myanimelist.net/forum/?topicid=2006756 |
|
| Finally someone who realises that both FMA03 and FMAB are DIFFERENT shows. Yeah sure they have same characters and certain plot points seem to be similar but they follow completely different stories right from the get-go. The pilots of both the shows are different in a million ways, setting separate tones and atmospheres. I don't get why people have the ideology that since FMAB is, for the most part, a one-to-one adaptation, it's the better/ideal show to watch. If one believes that FMA03 adapts the manga upto a certain point and then branches off into "anime original" stuff then they clearly didn't watch the show. Again, both FMA03 and FMAB are separate adaptations of the manga. It just happens to be that one comes up with an original (and better imo) story and takes certain good elements from the manga while the other show completely copies the source material. Rant over! Thank you for reading. |
| Pretty interesting read, thanks for posting this here. I've never really been interested in the '03 version, given I had such an amazing experience with Brotherhood. Regardless, the only good things I heard about the earlier adaptation was 'better pacing ' at the beginning. I on the other hand, never had any problems with Brotherhood's pacing at all. |
| Yh it never really made sense to me why they would rush the beginning of a series just because some people had seen it in a previous version. It wouldn't hold up on it's own very well then. I prefer the 2003 version tho |
| If the director went with that assumption why did he change the beginning so much? It was already perfect as it was in the manga, he just made it worse |
Crack said: My guess is they had a target number of episodes they wanted to hit for that season/series overall, and so they dropped the most non-essential chapters.If the director went with that assumption why did he change the beginning so much? It was already perfect as it was in the manga, he just made it worse Those chapters didnt really accent the overarching story, they kinda feel like the bonus chapters/OVAs in a way, but i do lament losing them. |
|
More topics from this board
Poll: » Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood Episode 64 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Ahenshihael - Jul 4, 2010 |
1051 |
by songohan3548
»»
Yesterday, 7:46 AM |
|
Poll: » Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood Episode 63 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Ahenshihael - Jun 27, 2010 |
385 |
by grimjaw1513
»»
Yesterday, 6:09 AM |
|
Poll: » Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood Episode 62 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )lafuria_sux - Jun 20, 2010 |
331 |
by grimjaw1513
»»
Yesterday, 5:38 AM |
|
Poll: » Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood Episode 61 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )lafuria_sux - Jun 13, 2010 |
259 |
by grimjaw1513
»»
Oct 10, 1:36 AM |
|
Poll: » Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood Episode 60 Discussion ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )lafuria_sux - Jun 5, 2010 |
357 |
by grimjaw1513
»»
Oct 10, 1:02 AM |