Forum - View topicKey differences in FMA Original and Brotherhood.
|
Goto page 1, 2 Next |
| Author | Message | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ethanftw
 Posts: 107 |
|
|||||
|
WARNING: MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS
This is probably a topic that has been beat to death but I am very curious on the subject. I tried looking if there was already a thread about this and I couldn't find one, though I am sure the question has been answered. From what I gathered in other places around the internet, the only differences I can see are that Brotherhood follows the manga exact, and that the original only is "loosely based" on the manga. However, what specific key differences are there in the manga? I've yet to see any of Brotherhood, but I have watched the entire original series which I must say was very good. The only part I particularly wasn't thrilled about was the very end, but I'm one of those people that likes "a happy ending". Nonetheless, I'm wondering what you guys think is better. I'm also wondering what the more minor differences are between the series. For example, are there are characters that are added or skipped? Are there any events from the original that are skipped or not talked about or described as much? Or are there any added in Brotherhood? I got the vibe online that the original has a much "darker" tone to it, which is actually what I really liked about the anime. So based on that , I would say that I would like the original better. Is the ending any different in Brotherhood? Thanks for all the answers! |
||||||
|
||||||
naninanino
 Posts: 680 |
|
|||||
|
It is overall a happier, more straightforward and bare bones story. More cool factor, but less uniqueness.
|
||||||
|
||||||
ArsenicSteel
 Posts: 2370 |
|
|||||
|
Well the ending of Brotherhood didn't require a separate movie for closure.
The original anime being "loosely" based on the manga is the one that did skipping and leaving out of characters. There are a couple of more characters introduced in Brotherhood, some of the homunculus are different, several side-characters get more backstory, and there's no Dante. |
||||||
|
||||||
Unicorn_Blade
 Posts: 1155 Location: UK |
|
|||||
|
As for the darker- I actually think the first FMA was darker in many respects. Brotherhood has got this strange humour all over the place that for a lot of people ruined the series, as you see instances of it in some really serious moments. I did not mind that, but I do think there is a lot more of humour in Brotherhood than there was in FMA1.
Aside from characters that were in either series, and the different plot, FMA1 was a lot more sentimental and there is a lot more talk about the past, memories, etc, while in Brotherhood most characters concentrate a lot more on future. It is a lot more hopeful, all in all, out of the two, despite some really sad moments. Oh, and Brotherhood has a lot more cool fighting in it. I loved both for different reasons, Brotherhood probably a bit better since my favourite character got such a better treatment in it... But you have to see for yourself what works better for you 
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
ethanftw
Posts: 107 |
|
|||||
|
Yeah, there seems to be quite a clash between the two series. There really isn't one that more people seem to like than the other, it's about 50/50.
I guess the best way would be for me to just watch it for myself and see what happens. However, based on what I am hearing, I think that I am going to like the first FMA the best. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
ArsenicSteel
Posts: 2370 |
|
|||||
|
All I can get from this is that FMAB has the more conclusive ending, offers more introspect on more characters, and has a more consistent use of SD(super-deformed) comedy. SD comedy isn't a problem since it was used through out the first series. I would say the comedy in FMAB isn't out of character, at least not to the point of wanting all female military personnel in mini-skirts.
BUT if that's the conclusion you've drawn from these posts then that's how it will turn out for you. |
||||||
|
||||||
Dorcas_Aurelia
 Posts: 5344 Location: Philly |
|
|||||
I'd have called the use of SD more persistent than consistent. It's not that the comedy is out of character, it's that it's used at the wrong time. Also, I found that the more in-depth character development in Brotherhood only starts showing up after the point at which it diverges from the first anime. Which is partly a result of Arakawa realizing from the first anime that the characters should be more fleshed out rather than simply agents of the plot. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
ArsenicSteel
Posts: 2370 |
|
|||||
Then I would call it's comedy moments signature Arakawa. FMA is a story that uses action, adventure, drama, and comedy as tools that permeate through the story. There's no wrong time for a joke. There is however knowing your audience and also knowing who is the person telling the story. |
||||||
|
||||||
Gon*Gon
 Posts: 679 |
|
|||||
Actually Hellsing uses this kind of comedy very often too. It's not present in the horrible Gonzo Hellsing, but if you watched Hellsing Ultimate, almost every episode, regardless of how gory and dark it is, will very suddenly have atleast one incredibly goofy moments. ...and I love them solely because of that. The ovely emo, dark, and gory moments of FMA and Hellsing...suddenly whiplashes you with incredibly bright and lighthearted japanese humor. 
1st Anime: Great first half. Shit second half. Bleh to okay fight choreography. Far better Lust and Gluttony. 2nd Anime: Rushed first half. Great second half. Good to Amazing fight choreography. Far better every single homunculus that isn't Lust or Gluttony. My reccomendation? Watch 1st half of 1st anime. Then start with 2nd anime. |
||||||
|
||||||
Charred Knight
 Posts: 3085 |
|
|||||
|
The first anime's problem is that the last few episodes are more interested in setting up the movie (which has different villains) than they are with actually giving the tv series closure.
As for tone, Shou Aikawa and Hiromu Arakawa are two completely different people, so their view of the world is radically different. |
||||||
|
||||||
Ggultra2764
 Posts: 4056 Location: New York state. |
|
|||||
|
The first series goes for a mature style of storytelling in that it explores the moral and tragic shortcomings of the characters caught up in the Philosopher's Stone fiasco. This results in allowing one in making a better emotional connection with the series as certain events (spoiler[the Nina situation and Hughes' funeral]) and characters (spoiler[the Homunculi]) are better fleshed out in the series where you can actually care for what happens. Essentially, it took scenes from the earlier parts of the manga and made them better because the anime allowed more time for viewers to connect with the characters whereas the manga (have yet to see Brotherhood) just breezes through its earlier chapters just to advance the plot. The only issues I could find with the first series were the lack of focus on some key characters and the shoddy ending, but the mature storytelling is great stuff for me.
The manga appears to go for a more conventional story considering that the Homunculi are portrayed as shallow villains, the series is more focused on depicting its plot than balancing focus between plot and characters and the frequent appearance of comedy that appears at inopportune moments during serious scenes. While I've heard enough people praising the daylights out of Brotherhood for being a more closer depiction of events in the manga, I wasn't digging the manga's more conventional storytelling methods with its plot as in a rare instance, I found myself preferring the first anime's original storyline over the manga. While I do plan on seeing Brotherhood at some point to see how it is animated, my expectations aren't too high for it compared to how enough people have praised it. |
||||||
|
||||||
zawa113
 Posts: 7394 |
|
|||||
|
@Ggultra
While few would deny that Brotherhood is a better adaptation of the manga, I've actually been finding preferences split more 50-50 (maybe more 60-40) then you might think between series 1 and B. Still, I don't think it's quite as unanimous as a lot of people make it out to be. Anyway, I definitely get what you mean by making the Homunculi more shallow as villains. Sure, they're more powerful, but they seem more like thorns then actually uber important to the plot if you ask me. The only exception might be Greed. First Greed is pretty similar, though I think we get more time with his crew in 1, but spoiler[since Greed gets revived in B, he gets more development as a result] But personally, I felt like the first anime tried something new, something darker and more mature whereas the manga played it far safer (even considering that almost every volume had a little shout out to whoever died that volume like almost every volume). But for me, compared to other shonen, FMA played it a bit safer, though it certainly had a far more vast and interesting world then many shonen. For example, a shonen that I don't think played it as safe was Kekkaishi where spoiler[after building up Gen's character a lot, they kill him when he finally knows what it means to be happy! He was in it for about 5 volumes and was awesome, but he's totally offed, though he does appear in a few flash backs. But man, by the time they offed him, he was my favorite character! And he dies in vol 10 out of 35 btw] but that, to me, is an example of taking a pretty big risk. Hughes was similar spoiler[gotta have a big emotional investment before the kill], the 1st anime did that for me while the manga just made him seem like another random soldier. Bokurano and the Battle Royale manga do a similar thing but far far more often, lol. Ok, so death isn't the only way to not play it safe, I'm just using an example that was in FMA but played far more adventurously in other series, at least by my viewpoint. One thing that played it safe was B's ending (or at least the manga, I'll admit, never seen B, but I've read the manga) while 1's was definitely less of a happy ending. I don't like endings that are totally happy, I just feel like so few series actually earn it or warrant it and I think a sad ending fits better for FMA if you ask me personally. I feel like Ed and Al threw away their happy ending as soon as they attempted human transmutation, but B more or less gave it back to them. In 1, I felt like they weren't ever expecting a happy ending while the manga made it all too clear to me that that was how it was gonna end, happy. I am, frankly, unaccustomed to getting endings that happy, it seems foreign to me. Like even the more comparative happy ones have some sad part about them, ok so spoiler[Hohenheim dies] but it's not like Ed and Al cared about him much anyway. It's probably got the happiest ending of any shonen I've read in a while, and while it's easy to go "but it's been 27 volumes, they earned it!", it just doesn't seem true to life to me to ever have a happy ending. Thus, I really did prefer 1's ending more. Some happy parts, but an equal amount of sad parts too. This probably seems especially odd coming from me, one of the people who seems to read the most manga around here who still posts on the anime boards regularly, to not pick the original when I've only done that twice before (Mushi-shi and Planetes, though Planetes is more of a tie), but this is a rare case where I think the anime (1)>manga. I don't think something needs to be true to the manga to be good, Planetes really wasn't (well the characters were much the same), but it needs to be good in its own right for sure. But I guess this makes number 3 for me on that short list! It all depends on if I think something in the manga needs to be improved in the first place. Most of the time, I don't think a manga needs to be improved, thus I usually won't like the anime as much, I find a lot of "improvements" to be useless or something. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
ArsenicSteel
Posts: 2370 |
|
|||||
There was also Wrath, Pride, Envy, and Gluttony that had a decent amount time to display more emotion than a villain of the week. Of course their pasts were not all tear jerking, melodramatic fluff and they weren't the masterminds pulling strings like in Bones' version. They were effective villains that were more than shallow mid-bosses for the Elrics to defeat.
And I think FMA was one of those series where the characters each and every happy ending. "True to life fiction" Oy vey it's going to be one of those days.
/shrug You're are really downplaying their feelings. |
||||||
|
||||||
amarielah
 Posts: 178 |
|
|||||
|
The biggest differences between the two are, IMO, often the more subtle ones. There's a certain atmosphere present in the first anime that's not at all there in Brotherhood, and vice-versa. Personally, though it was developed more thoroughly in terms of its fantasy elements, I found the world of Brotherhood to be incredibly...stark. This is, I think, a combination of the art style and the method of storytelling. Characters in the Brotherhood always had that feeling to me of being actors on a stage, with very well-defined roles that were to be played out just so; heroes are heroes, villains are villains, and the morally-ambiguous will end up being one or the other. Brotherhood!Edward, for example, never really has to face his moral convictions in any significant way; his character development in focused solely on overcoming the tragedy of his past. There's never a question of whether or not his "no-kill" policy is actually the correct one.
Contrast FMA!Edward, where the bulk of his character development stems from the moral implications of his actions. Is it alright for him to be selfish, and hurt strangers in the process of helping Al? Is it alright for him to kill people, if it means saving thousands? Just how has his self-righteousness affected those around him? spoiler[(I use Lior as the example for this one - B!Edward was never confronted with the possibility that he was a prime cause of Lior's suffering, while a huge chunk of FMA!Edward's development had to do with that confrontation.)] In the first anime, Edward is important to the plot because he was being spoiler[manipulated by a human villain with an emotional investment in his family], and half the things that go wrong are either directly or indirectly his fault. He has a personal reason for wishing to correct things. Meanwhile, B!Ed is not really manipulated at all; it's by chance that he finds out what's happening beneath the surface of Amestrian politics. spoiler[His importance to Father's plot begins and ends with him being a potential sacrifice], and so his decision to intervene in the events that follow are ultimately more impersonal. FMA1 was smaller in scale, far less epic, and far more dependent on character development. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that the plot was a vehicle for character development. BHood was larger in scale, for more epic, and far more dependent on events and world building. There was character development, but it was a vehicle for the plot. Many characters in BHood got developed in a good amount of depth, but none so deeply as Edward was in FMA1. I can say with absolute certainty that FMA1 was the story of Edward and Alphonse. They were the viewpoint characters from start to finish, and the story began and ended with them. BHood, on the other hand, had them as the "Ishmaels" at the start of the story, but they were not really who the story was about. And I have to agree with classicalzawa: I believe that, between the two, FMA1 took far more risks in its storytelling. Arakawa is a very talented woman, but she tends to play on the safe side. I knew how the manga was going to end by the time that I was halfway through the narrative. Not the exact minute details, mind you, but the general gist of how things were going to play out. spoiler[I knew that the main characters were going to survive; I knew that Ed and Al would get their bodies back. I also knew that there were going to be babies ever after.] But during FMA1, I had no earthly clue whether or not the main characters would survive, let alone if they would get some semblance of a happy ending. The plot was less coherent as a result, but it was also far more engaging to me. And that's my two cents. 
Last edited by amarielah on Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:52 pm; edited 1 time in total |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Gon*Gon
Posts: 679 |
|
|||||
I had some problems when I watched the 1st anime and seeing this theme played out.... The majority of the people Edward fight are criminals and monsters that's taken a ridiculous amount of lives. For example, in the lab, he had his own brother taken hostage and asked to use a bunch of prisoners to create the Philosopher's Stone, which was their goal to begin with. It always felt stupid how Ed could hesitate at that moment. They're prisoners. His brother is taken hostage. And the homunculus wanted him to do what they set out to do from the very start. Asides from that, I do agree the 1st anime did Lior better...then again, that's mostly because Lior and Rose wasn't that big a deal in the manga which the Brotherhood was trying to be faithful to. The reason it didn't focus on that one town was because there were far bigger and more important things to focus on. |
||||||
|
||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group