(ACTUALLY I DON'T SEE HOW ANYONE COULDN'T RELATE TO THE "I WANT TO BE SEEN AS MATURE DESPITE JUST BEING A KID" THING, BUT IF YOU'RE OLDER I GUESS IT'S JUST IRRELEVANT NOW)
Growing up I never had an issue with wanting people to see me as mature. I saw myself as a kid and didn't expect people to think of me as otherwise.
BUT YOU HAVE TO ADMIT THAT NAOTA, AT LEAST, IS ONE OF THE MOST MULTIFACETED AND WELL WRITTEN CHARACTERS EVER, AND THAT ALL THE CHARACTERS HAVE A PURPOSE WHEN IT COMES TO THE OVERALL THEME. AND YOU ALSO HAVE TO ADMIT THAT THE THEME WAS COMMUNICATED PERFECTLY BY THE SHOW, IN THAT EVERY FACET OF THE SHOW WAS DEDICATED TO FLESHING IT OUT. BASICALLY, IT'S FINE IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, YOU JUST HAVE TO ADMIT IT'S GOOD DESPITE THAT.
He was a decent character, the least annoying of the main cast. Multifaceted and well written? Eh, sure, I don't think he was that spectacular but I've got nothing to argue against it. Having the characters set to the theme and fleshing it out doesn't mean much when you're unimpressed by the theme, so no I don't have to admit it's good. I found it highly over rated and the amount of praise given to its supposed depth is silly to me.
AND BASICALLY ANYONE WHO KNOWS ANYTHING WILL TELL YOU THAT THE ORIGINAL FMA TURNED TO **** ONCE IT DIVERGED FROM THE MANGA. ONLY PEOPLE WHO LIKE "OH SO DARK AND EDGY SUPER MATURE" AND PEOPLE WHO HAVEN'T SEEN ANY ANIME THINK THE ORIGINAL IS BETTER THAN BROTHERHOOD. UNFORTUNATELY, IT'S BEEN TOO LONG SINCE I'VE SEEN IT TO ACTUALLY DEFEND MY SCORE WITHOUT RESORTING TO INSULTS BECAUSE I DON'T ACTUALLY REMEMBER ANYTHING ABOUT IT.
FMA wasn't nearly as good near the end but it wasn't that bad. Who brought up Brotherhood? Brotherhood is better, yes, but that doesn't mean the original is terrible, some of the best parts of Brotherhood are in the original anyway, the only thing Brotherhood did far better than the original in my opinion was the ending and the homunculus.
