Why We Need to Stop Fighting Over FMA's Incarnations

(Author’s note: I had originally intended to do a full-on review/analysis of Brotherhood after concluding my blogging experience, but then I read a fabulous article defending the 2003 series and it kind of inspired me to return to this idea. I figured this would suffice as a "review" for both series, since I never even touched the 2003 version in terms of blogging and my Brotherhood review was turning into a freaking term paper in its length.)

Three points before I say anything:

• These words are said without malice, but I’m going to be honest. My thoughts here are coming from an examination of what I’ve seen across the Internet, not from a position of preference or bias. 
• There's still a lot of material in here that is my opinion, and you're welcome to disagree with me as long as you are mature and reasonable about it.
• I’m not telling you which one I prefer because it doesn’t matter. To do so would defeat the entire point of this article. So don’t ask me.

The Internet continues to baffle me in its level of hypocrisy and contradiction. We live in a world where people can have fifty-different OTP’s despite the fact that the acronym means “ONE True Pairing,” everyone has their own headcannon for everything under the sun, I’ve seen more gender-bending in fandom than I ever cared to encounter, and any character can be interpreted as twenty different sexualities while people scream at each other that all “ships” are legitimate and we shouldn’t condemn others for what they like.

And yet, despite all this versatility, God-forbid Fullmetal Alchemist and Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood exist together in the same space, or universe, or dimension.

I don’t really get it. Nowadays there are so many different creative possibilities for entertainment and one would think that the formal existence of two interpretations of the same material would be welcomed with open arms. People should be dancing on the rooftops, singing songs of rejoice, soaking in the discussion that could be spawned from looking at differences and similarities between the shows…but instead, it’s practically turned into a bloodbath, one strong enough to scare away formal reviewers from even grazing the topic. Even the English voice actors subvert the question every single time it’s asked at a convention by saying something to the effect of: “Well, I see them as two different entities, so it’s impossible to really compare them.” No one can have an opinion without getting hate for it.

I’m going to call out everyone on this. I have spent enough time Googling articles, scanning YouTube comments, and browsing Tumblr to see that the bitterness and spite is launched from both sides of the debate, though I think the reasons for it are different.

For those who prefer the 2003 series, their anger comes from a couple of places. Many of these people fell in love with anime through this series (back when it was airing on Cartoon Network) and so they hold a high regard for it emotionally. It has historical significance in terms of its effect on the anime community in large part because of that secular exposure. It was loved and respected by a great deal of fans and critics. Once Brotherhood appeared and proceeded to swipe the spotlight, fans of the 2003 series I think became resentful. In the wake of its flashier, more expensive, and more manga-faithful counterpart, Fullmetal Alchemist started to drift into the shadows and was demoted to “second best.” Cartoon Network aired Brotherhood as it came out and stopped showing reruns of the original. People quit recommending it in favor of Brotherhood, and many of the original’s faults were highlighted as a way to support the legitimacy of the remake.

As a result, those who like the original better developed this weird sense of superiority out of that resentment. Somehow preferring the 2003 series seems to make people think they they’re better, since it’s the original incarnation of the show and somehow “more hardcore.” There’s a passive-aggressive way that they talk about their preference, almost as if they’re daring someone to argue with them so they can launch into an epic diatribe about how Fullmetal Alchemist is better, both critically and historically, and you’re not a “serious anime fan” if you prefer Brotherhood.

This guy, though. He's for real.

So the people on the Brotherhood side bit back as a way to defend themselves. They kept pointing out the faults of the original, lamenting the ending of that series and how it didn’t make any sense, and in some cases out-right mocking people who liked the “old series.” Others pointed out that Brotherhood follows the manga, which is often seen as the true cannon above any animated adaptation, and therefore should be considered superior by default. I have seen Brotherhood supporters egg people on in a much more directly aggressive way and intentionally spark arguments because they know that they have a better shot at winning since more people like Brotherhood. Which, you know, isn’t even true if you take a moment to browse a chat board or any of the ten different Tumblr tags for these series.

What you have left is a bunch of spiteful, bitter people who all feel personally attacked and wounded for their preference and the whole thing runs on a never-ending cycle.

We all need to take a minute to breathe and chill the hell out. In light of this, here are a couple of points I’d like to make in regards to this endless debate:

The existence of Brotherhood does not invalidate the original 2003 series.

I’m going to repeat this: The existence of Brotherhood does not invalidate the 2003 series. As I mentioned above, I think a lot of the anger comes from a feeling of being ignored or forgotten. Tumblr has an entire freaking week dedicated to the original series alone, complete with its own tag. It’s true that more people suggest Brotherhood to those who have no exposure to the series as a whole, but what isn’t true is this idea that the original series is somehow dissolving into the abyss of obscurity. It’s 2015. The Internet is a thing. It’s a powerful force with virtually unlimited resources and I am telling you right now that is it impossible for someone to look up and watch Brotherhood without running into its predecessor in some form or fashion. Even if the person who recommended Brotherhood said the original sucked, it wouldn’t take much digging for someone to find out that such an opinion is a little on the extreme side. You don't have to feel like it's being ignored. It isn't.

Japan certainly isn't ignoring it, either.

In fact, most articles and forums I’ve browsed will tell you to watch both, and those that don’t are typically speaking to people who have little to no experience with anime. For someone who is new to this type of animation, Brotherhood is going to be an easier adjustment than the original because of its type of narrative, character archetypes, and animation, all of which tend to lean towards the familiar side to an American viewer.

Which brings me to my next point:

Fans of the original series have to accept that Brotherhood, from a technical standpoint, looks better than the 2003 series.

Brotherhood had more money thrown at it, they don’t waste any of it, and by that point technology had improved enough that there is a visible difference between the quality of Brotherhood’s artwork and the original’s. That’s just reality. The animation and character designs themselves are fine (some people prefer the original's since they're a little more faithful to Arakawa's style) and for its time the art and designs still hold up pretty well. For a seasoned anime fan, there shouldn’t be any real issue switching to and from both shows. The limited budget and dated animation does not hurt the show’s overall value. However, for someone who has next to no experience with this type of animation, Brotherhood is visually more appealing and easier to watch because people are shallow and don’t like watching something that looks dated. And Fullmetal Alchemist does look a bit dated.

Top: FMA; Bottom: Brotherhood

And I'm not going to sit here and compare every element, but the difference is apparent even in the openings. Fullmetal Alchemist's openings feature a lot of Ed and Al sitting/standing still, frames where nothing but one or two objects (or even just the camera) move, and people staring off in the distance with pensive expressions on their faces. The action is limited to small snippets and is more involved with the last two openings than the first. In retrospect it fits the series, since it's much less action-oriented than the remake, but that kind of opening is about as interesting to watch as a photograph slideshow: You only care when you know who's in the pictures, and if you haven't gotten a chance to see the show, some of these openings can be straight-up boring. The limited budget restricted what they could do. When you compare that to Brotherhood, whose openings are fast-paced, action-centric, and feature crisper and smoother animation, it isn't much of a contest for the general public as to which one will grab their attention.

It's the same reason why it's easier to get people to watch something like The Princess and the Frog over Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. There's nothing wrong with Snow White's animation, per se (especially for its time and the fact that it was the first full-length animated feature), but it looks dated, even when it's in HD. Technology can only fix so much. Therefore the film is more off-putting than Princess and the Frog, which is so damn beautiful it will make your eyes sing. By that point technology had improved, people knew what they were doing, and the budget for the film was higher because Disney had become a monstrous corporate beast and had the money to spend. Of course it's going to look better. Standards of quality have changed and the environment that these products are released in is different. John Lasseter was also pushing really hard to bring back 2D animation which is probably why there was so much put into that film.

Should that make you consider watching Snow White any less? No, but chances are you're going to pick up the more modern film long before you do the old one. How much you like recent material often determines whether or not you explore older things. Hell, this applies to any medium when you think about it: books, movies, television shows, even some artwork. For whatever reason, it's just human nature.

Both shows have their strengths and weaknesses.

So many people have such a nostalgic and personal connection to Fullmetal Alchemist, and that’s great. But the issue is that those attachments end up making criticism feel like a personal attack, and the fact that its faults are often juxtaposed with the strengths of Brotherhood makes it all ten times worse. It’s kind of like an older sibling having terrible hair and everyone points out how much that hair sucks in light of their younger sibling’s flowing, glorious locks. People shouldn’t be comparing you in the first place, since you’re both separate beings and independent of one another, but you’re also both related and can’t escape the fact that you’re always going to have that connection.

Then you’ve got the people on the Brotherhood side, who get cocky and any time criticism is thrown in that show’s direction they turn it back around on Fullmetal Alchemist. “Oh, the way they handled Hughes’ relationship to Ed and Al in Brotherhood was sloppy and unconvincing? Well HOW ABOUT THAT HORRIBLE ENDING IN THE ORIGINAL? What about that, huh??? Your show doesn’t even follow the manga!” Their need to defend the legitimacy of the remake morphs into this refusal to accept that certain elements of it were, in fact, not perfect. As if, somehow, saying that the first twelve or so episodes were rushed negates your ability to prefer it.

Both shows have two totally different approaches to the narrative. They’re two different ways of telling a story: The 2003 series is slower, more character-driven, and heavier on theme. Brotherhood is a fast-paced adventure with more emphasis on plot and action than anything else. Great characters and themes are present, they’re just not the focus. Neither of these approaches is wrong. They both lend themselves to different strengths and weaknesses, all of which are legitimate for critics and reviewers to point out and discuss. Preference is going to come down to a matter of taste in most cases, and there are a handful of people who will give a recommendation for which to watch based on that. Again, it depends on the situation and context.

Watching both gives you an appreciation for both.

Fun fact: When I first watched the original series, my mind wasn’t blown. I liked it a lot—it was definitely great and I would have suggested it to anyone who asked. But I wasn’t hanging on the edge of my seat, anticipating the next episode, until the last ten or so. The ending annoyed me more because of the sheer amount of plot holes than the fact that it was bittersweet.

But oh boy was I glad I’d watched it when I started Brotherhood.

The emotional impact that certain events in Brotherhood had often came from my attachment to characters in the original. The first episode had a “roll call” sensibility to it that felt fun and familiar, even though I had finished the 2003 series literally less than 48 hours prior. Certain elements of the show had the impact they did because I had already been entrenched in the universe for two months and fifty-one episodes. At the same time, Brotherhood felt more complete and whole, was overall much more fun, and the ending made more sense than the original’s did.

But those bonuses complimented Fullmetal Alchemist, they didn’t detract from it. My enjoyment of the remake created a new appreciation for the original because it had things that Brotherhood lacked. Brotherhood has the more appealing ending, while Fullmetal Alchemist has the better beginning. Brotherhood has better animation, Fullmetal Alchemist a better score. Brotherhood’s Winry is given something to do and Fullmetal Alchemist’s Winry is a tertiary character at best. They balance each other out in an almost creepily perfect way. They can exist together; they’re not mutually exclusive. I think it’s detrimental to your enjoyment of the series as a whole if you opt for one over the other.

You are not better for liking one more than the other.

This petty competition amongst fandom in general has got to be one of the most aggravating things on the planet and really just needs to stop. Your experience with a show is your experience. No one can take that away from you, even if they spend 5,000 words on Tumblr ripping apart what you love. Having a preference for something—regardless of what it is or how many people agree with you—doesn’t make you superior to someone else who doesn’t share that same preference. By the same token, liking something that less people do doesn’t give you some kind of Super Cred, and claiming it does makes you look like a douchey hipster. Don't be a douchey hipster.

Don't be this guy.

It's okay to feel sad if someone doesn't care for something that you have a passion for. It's not okay to think that their opinion somehow wounds your pride and makes you less of a person. Own your preferences, but accept those that differ from you with grace. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter which one is "better." They're both great shows that have struck a chord in thousands of people, plot holes and pacing problems and animation included. If one matters more to you than the other, then that's all that should matter. Stop trying to justify your preference and just put yourself at peace.

Now, everyone go buy Fullmetal Alchemist because it's coming out on Blu-Ray in September.