Skip to main content

A Valiant Effort, But in Vain


This review is late. I meant to see this movie two months ago when it first premièred on Netflix, but didn’t get to it before bad word-of-mouth got out. And I had other stuff to do. But I was still curious, and with limited options before Deadpool 2, I figured I should give it the benefit of the doubt.
I’m a relatively recent but nonetheless enthusiastic fan of Fullmetal Alchemist, the animes based on the manga by Hiromu Arakawa. Both series are smart, imaginative, intriguing, and really gripping; and whatever shortcomings there are in one are rectified in the other. I’d recommend them to anyone who’s interested in unique fantasy storytelling or just as a gateway to anime as a whole.
And Japan, as it happens, is just as prone to making live-action movie versions of popular TV shows as we are in the west. Fullmetal Alchemist, directed by Fumihiko Sori, is following in the footsteps of the likes of Attack on Titan, Black Butler, and Death Note. So this was really inevitable. Of course it’s impossible to condense fifty-one to sixty-four episodes faithfully into a two hour movie, so I don’t expect it to be incredibly loyal to plot. But does it adapt enough of the source material well and more importantly, does it stand alone?
In an industrial world governed by loosely medieval notions of alchemy, two prodigy brothers, Edward (Ryosuke Yamada) and Alphonse Elric (Atomo Mizuishi) were seriously scarred in an attempt to use alchemy to bring their mother back to life as children. Now Edward, with a prosthetic arm and leg, and Al, his soul bound to an empty suit of armour, are on a quest to find a philosopher’s stone, the one substance that can restore what was lost of their bodies. In the process they’ve become military State Alchemists, and while searching and researching they come into conflict with indestructible beings called homunculi.
The plot of this movie makes little sense if you’re not familiar with the material. It adapts a handful of plot lines, most from the first third of the story, but doesn’t know how to do so in a coherent way. Because of that there are certain major story flaws. The homunculi still serve a role as main antagonists but they have no motivation for their actions whatsoever. Ultimately they just wind up being obstacles in Edward and Al’s quest. There’s another plot point where a character comes to a conclusion that’s included purely for a famous scene and is never extrapolated on afterwards, making the subsequent development entirely pointless. The same goes for the death of Edward and Al’s mother and their absent father, crucial though it may be, it has no bearing on the direction of this film. Those of us who know Fullmetal Alchemist understand the significance of moments like these, but a newcomer has no chance -they don’t even explain what a chimera is. And much like A Wrinkle in Time those who do love the material aren’t going to be satisfied either. The film has to condense a lot which results in a movie with incredibly rushed pacing. The filmmakers were clearly more concerned with hitting a number of important beats, one after another, than sensibly constructing the narrative.
That being said, the scenes that are loyal are very loyal -to the point where there are a few instances they’re directly imitating the manga. One key scene for example involving an alchemist called Shou Tucker (Yo Oizumi) is depicted with the right level of weight. However, loyalty to the source can be a crutch as well. Sometimes something that works in an anime just doesn’t translate to live-action. This includes some over-the-top gestures, reaction shots, and exaggerated bickering out of nowhere that’s awkward to watch. There’s also a subplot included, a personal crisis for Al, that should have been left out, given how there just isn’t runtime available to give it the drama it deserves.
Because of the elements in focus, the cast is much reduced. Significant characters like Scar, Armstrong, Izumi, half the homuncli, and all of Mustang’s squadron are nowhere to be seen. And as disappointing as that may be for fans it does keep the movie from feeling crowded. In terms of the cast, Yamada’s actually pretty good as Edward. The character’s portrayed with excessive angst (he’s constantly breaking down over his brother), but he also has moments of maturity; and however poorly the character may be written, Yamada’s putting in effort, and especially early on is genuinely having fun. Dean Fujioka is also pretty good as Roy Mustang, Edward’s superior and fan favourite. Ryuta Sato is decent, though sometimes awkward, as Mustang’s friend Hughes. Tsubasa Honda though is too over-the-top as Winry, the Elrics’ friend and mechanic, whose role is significantly larger. In contrast, Hawkeye, one of the best characters from the anime, is so sidelined she’s never even mentioned by name in the movie.
Probably the most obvious weakness is the effects, which range from mildly unconvincing, such as Al and the chimeras, to distractingly bad in the later acts. The alchemy itself is severely underwhelming, lacking any energy or power, and the philosophers stone looks a little too plastic. The film also feels fairly small scale for a story as epic as Fullmetal Alchemist. There are barely any extras, giving the impression that urban centres like Liore and Central are sparsely populated. And the production design in the former was nice, but the action sequence that accompanied its introduction had a bad taste of Dead Men Tell No Tales. The costuming is good though -except for Edward’s hair which I’m not convinced isn’t a wig.
So yeah, Fullmetal Alchemist isn’t good, but to its credit, it’s not as bad as I thought it would be. Where similar adaptations like The Last Airbender and Netflix’s Death Note have been insults to their original shows, this movie’s just lame. It feels like a bunch of fans wanted to re-enact their favourite scenes, and did so semi-competently, then tried to tie them together in two hours in an attempt to make sense. But this film won’t appeal to fans, and as a standalone narrative for newcomers, it’s flimsy at best, completely alienating at worst. Conqueror of Shamballa is still the best Fullmetal Alchemist movie.
Fans of Bleach, you’re next.
Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/Jordan_D_Bosch 
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Strange History of the American Spoof Movie

Parody movies have been around for a lot longer than we tend to think of them. Even from the earliest days of Hollywood there were movies meant to satirize a particular subject or genre. In the silent era, Buster Keaton was responsible for a few. And in the early sound era, almost as soon as the monster pictures took off did you see comic versions of them -Abbott and Costello hosting a few. But parody movies tended to be subtle for most of cinema history, or parody came in conjunction with another goal of the comedy. It really wasn’t until the 1980s and 90s that it took off and became popularly understood. And there is perhaps a line to be drawn to the counterculture comedy explosion that began in the 1970s through avenues like  Saturday Night Live , which frequently parodied from even its earliest years popular movies and cultural properties of the time. But that is still a way’s back. To my generation though, ‘parody movie’ is perhaps a less known term than the more blunt ‘s...
Post a Comment
Read more

A Stylish and Charmingly Reinvented David Copperfield

The Personal History, Adventures, Experience and Observation of David Copperfield the Younger of Blunderstone Rookery (Which He Never Meant to Publish on Any Account)  is the most important book Charles Dickens ever wrote. It is not the most famous or influential by any means (that would of course be A Christmas Carol ), but it is the book that is the purest expression of the authors’ style, identity, and worldview. It is his most personal work, semi-autobiographical in its story of the chronology from infancy to adulthood of a character who overcomes great loss and hardships to find a fulfilling life as a writer. To read David Copperfield  is to understand Dickens himself. Armando Iannucci knew this when he decided to make a new adaptation of the novel for a twenty-first century audience. He also knew that Dickens adaptations are ubiquitous at this point. Films are a bit rarer, but every few years a new television adaptation rears its head to keep the authors’ unique world an...
Post a Comment
Read more

Notes on the Title Cards of The Lord of the Rings

It might be sacrilege for one who both considers The Lord of the Rings  trilogy to be one of the greatest triumphs of cinema and has been an avid lover of the films since adolescence, to declare that the original theatrical cuts of the films are better than the much beloved extended editions. Easily it’s my most controversial opinion regarding these movies. Don’t get me wrong, I do like the extended editions quite a lot, especially as someone who just enjoys spending time in that universe. They flesh it out more, add extra flavour, and in increasing the length by about an hour really emphasize the epic quality of these films. But I find that the original cuts are generally more cleanly paced, more seamlessly edited, and much more accessible to audiences. All the stuff there is to love about The Lord of the Rings  is there in the original versions, the plethora of new and extended scenes merely add to that for fans. And of those, they fall into three camps for me: 1....
8 comments
Read more