Just because the original doesn’t follow the manga to a T doesn't mean it's bad.
The 2009 anime Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood is one of the few shonen series that most anime fans would agree deserves its legendary status. With its broad appeal, ambitious but well-executed story, and distinct cast of complex characters, the show has few detractors. Thus, the original anime version from 2003 is often left in the shadow of its younger brother. But does it deserve more spotlight?
First, let’s clear up a common misunderstanding: the first anime series is not a prequel. The two adaptations start off following the same plot until the 2003 anime branches off from the manga events and begins to spin its own yarn. The creators simply ran out of the source material as the anime had caught up with the manga.
Despite that, the original series managed to gain a significant following as the show continued telling a compelling story on its own. But, armed with the power of hindsight, we now have the ability to compare the two versions.
The overall premise is the same: two brothers searching for a way to get their bodies back to normal after a failed alchemical experiment. This is where the similarities end: the first Fullmetal Alchemist anime comes up with a different basis for the alchemical energy, writes a new villain into the series, and puts the Homunculi characters at the center of the story.
But the difference that sticks out the most is the dark, mature tone the series takes on halfway through. It essentially applies “real life” logic to the brothers' circumstances. Ed and Al have to make sacrifices, choose what’s important to them, and every decision they make carries real weight. The 2003 adaptation also takes its time to reveal our characters’ backstory, whereas the second series assumes that the audience is already familiar with the world of Fullmetal Alchemist.
Where Brotherhood builds up to the stereotypical shonen evil antagonist, FMA 2003 ends up being more realistic and cynical. Without giving away too much, we’ll just say that the moral of the story is that anyone with greed and access to special knowledge can turn into a villain.
The only undeniable weakness of the first series is the lack of good visuals, which makes the backgrounds boring and the action scenes less exciting. If you’re already familiar with the early 2000s anime aesthetic, this shouldn’t be a problem.
That being said, it’s the grim atmosphere of the original version that most likely makes it less popular: it makes for a challenging watch. It is a tragic but thematically more complex watch that doesn’t get the same happy ending as the 2009 version.
So, to answer our first question: yes, the original adaptation deserves more attention. There’s a reason why both versions enjoy high ratings on practically every anime and movie-watching platform. Both are works created by talented storytellers, just with different visions.
Just because the original doesn’t follow the manga to a T doesn't mean it's bad.
The 2009 anime Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood is one of the few shonen series that most anime fans would agree deserves its legendary status. With its broad appeal, ambitious but well-executed story, and distinct cast of complex characters, the show has few detractors. Thus, the original anime version from 2003 is often left in the shadow of its younger brother. But does it deserve more spotlight?
First, let’s clear up a common misunderstanding: the first anime series is not a prequel. The two adaptations start off following the same plot until the 2003 anime branches off from the manga events and begins to spin its own yarn. The creators simply ran out of the source material as the anime had caught up with the manga.
Despite that, the original series managed to gain a significant following as the show continued telling a compelling story on its own. But, armed with the power of hindsight, we now have the ability to compare the two versions.
The overall premise is the same: two brothers searching for a way to get their bodies back to normal after a failed alchemical experiment. This is where the similarities end: the first Fullmetal Alchemist anime comes up with a different basis for the alchemical energy, writes a new villain into the series, and puts the Homunculi characters at the center of the story.
But the difference that sticks out the most is the dark, mature tone the series takes on halfway through. It essentially applies “real life” logic to the brothers' circumstances. Ed and Al have to make sacrifices, choose what’s important to them, and every decision they make carries real weight. The 2003 adaptation also takes its time to reveal our characters’ backstory, whereas the second series assumes that the audience is already familiar with the world of Fullmetal Alchemist.
Where Brotherhood builds up to the stereotypical shonen evil antagonist, FMA 2003 ends up being more realistic and cynical. Without giving away too much, we’ll just say that the moral of the story is that anyone with greed and access to special knowledge can turn into a villain.
The only undeniable weakness of the first series is the lack of good visuals, which makes the backgrounds boring and the action scenes less exciting. If you’re already familiar with the early 2000s anime aesthetic, this shouldn’t be a problem.
That being said, it’s the grim atmosphere of the original version that most likely makes it less popular: it makes for a challenging watch. It is a tragic but thematically more complex watch that doesn’t get the same happy ending as the 2009 version.
So, to answer our first question: yes, the original adaptation deserves more attention. There’s a reason why both versions enjoy high ratings on practically every anime and movie-watching platform. Both are works created by talented storytellers, just with different visions.
