I want James Roday to play him cause he played Shawn Spencer in Psych, and in the pilot of Psych its stated Shawn has never been able to hold a job for more than a few days at the least
Michael's mistreatment of his brother likely comes from growing up with William as his father. His cruelty is because of how desensitized his dad made him to it even before the murders, not coming from malice just violence for the sake of humor because he doesn't understand how awful he's being.
He did a bad thing, and he regretted it immediately and forever more into the future for the rest of his life. He became a good man on a crusade to fight the wrongs of his father and hopefully put his siblings souls to rest.
He was neglected and raised without empathy, stuck with acting as the caregiver for his younger sibling at a very young age and most likely his friends kinda bullied him for having his baby brother tag along and having to act in a feminine role as a caregiver, no wonder he wanted to have as much distance between himself and his baby brother that in his eyes ruined his life simply by existing. He could not lash out on afton, so his brother became the convinient target. We sadly do not know how old he was when it happened, but kids do not quite understand consequences yet and he showed true remorse and regret, not making any excuses and did everything in his power to atone....
This is a great interpretation of Michael Afton. People need to accept that the hero of a story could have done something bad in their past and feel remorse. It usually makes for a much better character than someone who has never made any mistakes or bad choices.
Mike is quite possibly my favorite FNAF human character, he is always gonna be the most layered character and he deserved a final speech in FNAF 6 leagues more than Henry. It's really cool to see an in depth amylases on his character
I'm honestly fine with him not being the one saying the speech in FNAF 6. idk Henry saying it is iconic for me lol. BUT, I def think he could've got more clear lines from other character talking about him. Referring to him more, I guess is better to say. Could've gotten more in that game tbh with you. But yeah, Mike is really great. One of my favs 😎
Well the problem is that fnaf 6 was Henry's last game, Henry lost the most out of anyone and dies to make up for it, while Mike has an appearance in security breach and AR as an alive man plus mike didn't lose anything, I belive he's BV so maybe he lost his life a few times, but he constantly helps a child murderer what does he expect, I do want mike to have a final speech after ruin, in the next game, where he realises his wrong doing and sacrificed himself to kill William, it works becuase he knows that fire doenst destroy remannt (which got confirmed in novels, frights and games) and kills William which sets the mci and Charlotte free and gives a full new cast of characters, that what I hope would happen to his character in the future, but honestly I agree with the rest of this
@@tomkubus okay a few things, Michael he easily lost more than Henry, it’s fine if you believe MikeVictim but Michael has lot his entire family and gotten his body destroyed by Ennard, Mike also likely didn’t know William was a murderer and if he did he’s probably terrified so to act like Michael deserved having his life destroyed because of that is a very screwed up moral standard, also Mike rarely ever has helped William with anything, all Mike did was try to save his sister. Idk how anything you said was an issue with how I think Mike deserved a big dramatic speech way more than Henry.
"I couldn't save you then, so let me save you now. It's time to rest; for you, and for those you have carried into your arms. This ends for all of us; but not yet. Not before he, the one who laid these spirits to rest, says a few words of his own. It's, only fair, for the sacrifices he made along the way." And then Mike goes on to talk to Elizabeth and his baby brother, before finally resting himself. End communication
i honestly really like that michael is an antagonist in fnaf 4. him bullying and accidentally killing his brother is tragic, and lends towards a gentle redemption arc i really enjoy
I think the Sister Location monologue is my favourite piece of dialogue in this franchise. The voice acting truly kills it; selling this solemn, repent-full character on a quest to see things through, who still retains his original, ironic sense of humour. That humour has almost turned self-mocking in a way, with how he finds the comparison to his dad who he knows is a monster.
I would argue that there is a definitive character for William if you look close enough. If William's character can be summed up in one word, it would be "predatory." He always has struck me as a person who has the ability to be manipulative in an uncanny way. I think the best examples of this are how he acts in FNaF 4 when he talks to the crying child through the Fredbear plush, pretending to be his friend, yet being extremely controlling, messing with his head, and clearly not having the child's best interest at heart. The other example is in the fruity maze minigame of FNaF 6, how he manipulates Susie using her dead dog. It really highlights how predatory and underhanded he is, which I think are really the core traits of his character. These traits have been present in William since game one, and even as the series evolved, remain stable to this day.
I agree. But William is a character a certain amount of the fandom is VERY passionate about not being that character, as William is one of the big 3 faces of head cannon (Cassidy, Bite victim being the other 2). So that's why I refer to him as more divisive than I feel he actually is.
@@siresquawks I feel that there is something similar with a lot of characters that we think were only introduced later, but really had the seeds of their character planted early on and were just expanded upon. Henry was actually mentioned as far back as FNaF 2, not under his name of course, but referred to as "the owner of the old location" who couldn't be found. This already gives us the characterization of this man as the mysterious creator who unwittingly started everything that happened. It's just that it wasn't until later that this character would actually be given a name.
I got all of my Michael interpretation from one awesome fic who depicted him realistically, and it told exactly the same thing you did. It's the best way to interpret Michael as a character. Snarky and sarcastic but serious when needed, rebellious as a teen, and a self aware dude who tries to undo his biggest mistake as well as the evils of his father. Any person who seeks redemption like that, is admirable. And I think the crying child would see that, and would forgive him even if he held a grudge. It was always pointless to me to make them have a rivalry, cause like what's the point?? One of them's dead and possessing robots and the other one is dead possessing his own corpse. Like what rivalry is there to have lol
@@nidgithm it's on AO3 and basically retells his story, including the theory of glamrock freddy. But I won't say which one otherwise RU-vid edgelords will bully me lmao
I always had this idea in AUs/headcanons where Crying Child and Mike share the experience with the Nightmares somehow, but one gets it more extreme somehow or is still having them (not specifying which because it flip-flops as much as a fish out of water). On one hand, Crying Child is straight-up afraid of the animatronics, but on the other, Mike likely has PTSD from the Bite as the one who caused it, meaning he has just as equal of a reason to have really bad nightmares. I'm just not sure who gets it worse.
Well they both do as mike is the only Afton supposedly alive and getting scooped and having ennards parts inside him whereas Evan dies of brain trauma and is put inside an animatronic. But there is a mystery to it because after ps we get a video about freddy's no longer being a corporate company but how on earth do we the players get that video after Michael and Henry die with the animatronics?
One theory I've seen (mainly from MatPat) to explain Michael's involvment in FNAF2 is that Fritz is another of his aliases due to how you get fired for "Odor." which would make sense like someone who is basically a walking corpse.
I disagree with that though. And I disagree cause I don’t think Mike becomes a corpse until after FNAF 2 Seems like the Funtimes get pulled off the shelf anytime Freddy’s closes down, like after the first MCI, when Pizza World opens, and after FNAF 2, when entertainment and rentals opens, THEN they escape through Michael. And I think this makes sense since he had to have had or started to write in the logbook during his time as a guard in FNAF 1, which is also when the FNAF 4 gameplay nightmares begin to resurface in him. I think he went to the FNAF 1 location specifically to find William who disappeared after sending him into the murder bunker. Ironically he only came back to this location AFTER Michael and the rest of the staff were gone and the place was shut down. I SHOULDVE PREFACED THAT I DO in fact think Mike is Fritz Smith, as he could well possibly be 18 by 1987 and legally able to work overnight, I just don’t think he was a corpse at that point.
@@siresquawks I agree Plus, it would be a little bit complicated, mainly because of the phone guy in night 6 assuming you’re the same person which would make the player assume ur the same guy and in Night 7 there’s no phone call
The Nightmare animatronics in UCN might actually be CC and/or Cassidy adding things Michael went through into William’s hell because they understand that A) Michael was a tormented child as well, he suffered too and B) Michael did so much to try to save them
Also the Mike hell theory especially doesn't work due to the background noise in the old man consequences area is someone screaming "MIKE! HELP ME!" which would make no sense for Mike to be calling himself for help, it only makes sense to be William Afton calling for his son to come help him, save him. Even though he cant
Mike has aways been my favorite fnaf character (without counting the animatronics). His whole arc is so satisfying how he went from a bratty teenager to an absolute badass. For an empty skin shell, the man has guts. He went from pizzeria to pizzeria fending off haunted robots all so he can confront is father. Something that has always bugged me was why the night guards don't quit after the first night. If their life in danger couldn't they work at the fnaf equivalent to mcdonalds or something?? If we assume mike is the main character it makes so much sense. Of course he'd stick around at each place since he is searching for his father and cleaning up his mess. Since he most likely is the protagonist of fnaf 3 seeing hallucinations, that would imply that he had worked at both fnaf 1 and fnaf 2 since the animatronics he sees are from the first two games. Anyways, great video! It was well put together and very entertaining. Definitely worth the wait! :)
I thought it was odd that I hadn't heard about the grey person in MM being named "Man_Sitting" so I checked myself and indeed the object is unnamed. It is not named Man_Sitting.
13:30 technically this is an aspect in the games as well, at least with Micheal and CC, he’s constantly at work, and pretty much only speaks to his youngest son through the Fredbear plush and is aware of Micheals pranks to CC, hell CC is forced to have his birthday at Freddy’s even though he hates the restaurant, just so William can keep an eye on him.
Also I always see CC and Cassidy basically the same as the puppet and CC in the original fnaf VHS, CC believes in his brother and hopes that he can save people, while Cassidy is pessimistic and would jump at the opportunity to torture William, heck in FNAF 1 Golden Freddy is greeted with “its me” it’s Evan trying to get his brothers attention.
@@smashers6971 It would be pretty cool if it was CC's way of contacting Michael,but it's probably Cassidy,as she greets CC in the logbook the same way("It's me,Cassidy.) Would also make sense as of why the hallucinations also have it's me,as Cassidy trying to get William to feel guilt for what he's done and that is them following him,the person they should not have killed.
I believe that FNAF 4 is just all the guilt Mike feels over his brothers accident and death in the hospital, mixing with his experiences as the security guard = absolute nightmares. And 6 AM is what his alarm clock is set for. Or maybe he had those dreams before the set funeral date and they came back later, as the work of a security guard reawoken childhood trauma. . I also think that William putting Michael in a monitored room after the incident and him constantly running away makes ton of sense, even without Billy tornmenting Michael. Maybe he was just paranoid about not loosing any more kids... Dunno. But then again, I always like to see William as a monster but one that cares only about his kin. Everyone else can die, the world can burn but his children are off limits. I think that he gave Michael the instructions... because he went to jail. We can see in the first FNAF that the "suspect was convicted". And he didn't want to live Elizabeth alone there, or his work unfinished. OR he got springtraped and it was a message "in case I won't get back some day, here's what you need to do". Not a malicious plan of killing his only remaining kid.
That doesn't match up with William directly trying to kill Michael once he's Springtrap, be it in 3 or in 6. Or both. And it's not like he's being maneuvered around by the suit while his soul is trapped like Elizabeth and Baby (because fuck the idea that Elizabeth is a willing participant to William's shenanigans), because it's a broken down springlock suit that can't move without his say so. Not a super futuristic robot that was designed to kill. So he's doing everything of his own volition. He might have cared about CC and Elizabeth, to some extent. But if he ever did about Mike, that's long gone by the time he's springlocked.
@@damkylan3 Well since most likely Mike is already post-scooped and all rotten in the FNAF3 (probably wearing some kind of disguise to pass as a completly normal human to his employers), I don't think William had any way of knowing that it was his son. His jumpscares even look kinda like he's surprised looking at the player up close. And he still has the weird animatronic-like behaviours like going where the kids laughter is, even tho it's a dead of night in a closed up atraction etc. I don't think people in animatronics are "fully there" in a sanity sence. Since the kid souls in the animatronics just went after every adult they saw and trying to kill them (even the classic ones that only were programmed to sing and dance), William beeing an actuall, experienced murdered might've just be in the "kill everyone there is" state of mind. But perhaps once he died he lost all the care for everyone, since he's there out of agony and just kills everything, but I still like to think that when he was alive he cared for all his kids, even tho Mike made it extra difficult (perhaps even taking after him). I really hope that we'll see more of those topics and ideas explored in the upcoming movie, since the actor cast as him has an amazing acting range and I would love to see him both as a griefing father and a murderos mad scientist (perhaps dead set on resurecting his youngest kid, with THE BITE beeing what drives him mad? One bad day, as the joker said...) making us even symphatize with him in a weird way - was he always a monster or was it just that one accident? Do we all have that "evil" in us just waiting to be awaken? Maybe it's a bit deep but I can always dream and theorize haha.
@@PokemonkaDub becuase he doenst acquire remannt in the games, or atleast doenst inject himself with it, we see from his blueprints that Henry found that he doenst know Much about it until after the springlocke faliure, since we know as a fact that some of it (like the part where it says fire it bad for remannt) is flat out wrong, so he wanted to test it on mike first, and we know that the vengeful spirit aka toyshnk was keeping him alive and stopping him from dying
Is the skin color issue suppose to convey what time of year it is? Is Mike tanned in one scene because it's summertime and he is spending time outside, while the crying child is staying in the house? It would imply the cutscenes are showing a series of memories over a span of time; like over the course of a few weeks/months instead of within one week. It would also imply Mike as a child spends time outdoors with his friends and the crying child spends time alone, in the house, watching cartoons with his "friends" (toys).
@@CloudMouth27 Not really. Pete actually died from messing with the supernatural and William (who left the faded messages behind in the Survival Logs) seems to heavily embrace Michael as his son. A person he cannot move on from. To the point he turned Michael become an android, like William Afton himself, to also make him immortal. I think Pete is actually the stand in for the Phone Guy, since we all know that this foxy-loving guy was brutally murdered by the animatronics, including Foxy the Pirate, from the most unusual animatronic attack we've witnessed in the series. He also got Michael bitten 1987 at the fnaf2 location.
mmm pretty sure we all know that the FnaF 4's nighttime sections was a training montage ol Willy A. made for his son to get him ready for his job at Freddy's. Such a good dad.
IK I’ve already commented here, but there’s one more thing about FNAF 4 I want to say. One of the most important aspects of storytelling is the author. Their life, what they say about the story, etc. After FNAF 4 came out, Scott almost seemed… frustrated that no one got the story. He didn’t give us the box because of it. So I was thinking, why did no one get it? And I think it’s because, during the time, we didn’t know that Foxybro would matter at all, so we all dismissed him. But we didn’t dismiss CC, we talked about him constantly, trying to figure out to he is. But who is he? A tool. He’s not Golden Freddy, he’s Michael’s little brother. The game is about Michael, it’s his backstory, no one else’s. And that’s what people didn’t get, that FNAF 4 was the backstory of Foxybro, not CC. And honestly? Of course they didn’t realize. We didn’t even know Purple Guy’s name back then! They didn’t have the tools to figure it out, but Scott did, and he forgot to give them important puzzle pieces. That’s why in the books and SL, he focused on introducing William and Michael. That’s what SL is, putting a giant arrow to Michael and saying “PAY ATTENTION TO HIM!”. I’m almost certain that the first concept of the box was something about Michael, connecting Foxybro to the FNAF protags. But no one guessed so Scott decided not to give it to is
This is what I've been saying to the FNAF sub reddit! There's no way in hell that the dude slumped on the couch is Michael for the simple reason that he's defending his younger brother. Surely he wouldn't care if Billy here started antagonising him like he does. At least at this point of the timelime. My explanation for this minigame was the djion mustard man was William, dude slumped on couch was henry, the kid is Michael, the 2 bear footprints were golden freddy/Evan (he can teleport, has no endo skeleton and he's never physically moved ever in this franchise) that explains why there's only 2 footprints. The burial is Evan's burial. The reason William killed charlie is because he was both jealous of the happy life his partner got to live and angry, because Henry was the one that created the springlock fredbear in the first place. William even expresses bitterness when talking about the costumes in the books, like their creation was made to betray William. Throughout the series, William has been trying so hard to bring his dead son back to life, with using remnant, as evident by the repair dreadbear mini game and "I will put you back together". However he continually failed and (possibly) patient 46 might be the failed experiment cyborg of evan as that kid seemingly knows exactly what he's doing and it seems glitchtrap trusts him more than vanny. I think having evan die first serves as a reasonable explanation as to why William afton even became a serial killer in the first place. Him just craving immortality and wanting to rule the world comes off as boring, basic and bad writing for me. Steelwool seems to indicate in interviews that getting the motive behind the villain is key, so the general explanation from the fandom has is pretty lame tbh. We play as Michael in FNAF 4, getting tortured for our sins, killing our brother. This explains the weirdly placed icu bag, Surely if there's an icu bag, this place would be hospital, but no it's the sound illusion disc tormenting Michael, making him see what he dreads to see. Reminding him of his crimes. Sorry for the long comment, I just think some FNAFers out there aren't that bold with their theories as you, so I just wanted to share my thoughts.
I really like this theory and all except for the part where the sitting man is Henry. Why would they be living in the same house? It's kinda weird since they both have families of their own.
I hard agree with everything said here. The part about why William sent Michael down into Circus Baby's Rentals had me going 'yes! that's what i've been saying!'. I really like this interpretation of the story and of Mike as a character, it comes together really nicely :)
IN THE EYES!! IN THE EYES!! Michael is truly the best character. It's interesting that Mike and the spirits start to communicate at some point! Your FNAF timeline seems to make a lot of sense - if Crying Child died before Charlie, it would give William more motive to target his partner's daughter.
This is probably the best video for Michels character, I have been under this notion of Michel being the playable character in most of the games and this works. FYI I love the springtrap punching scene.
In the midnight motorist scene, I think the Crying Child which possessed the Fredbear animatronic was the one outside the window beckoning Michael to come outside. Michael out of guilt broke out of the window to follow his dead bro's ghostly robotic form.
Dear gosh, with all the time I've spent watching Fnaf theories without actually having experienced the games, I completely missed that Foxybro Michael actually apologizes to the Crying Child in the final Fnaf 4 cutscene. Heart-wrenching stuff.
Really good theory video! It’s a really intriguing theory that FNAF 4 is actually a nightmare or a sort of torture for Micheal based on his childhood memories and the experience in the five nights at Freddy’s pizzeria! It’s fascinating that Fnaf lore is being discussed and debated for so long!
Not to mention if you change the speed of the sound in old man consequence in ultimate custom night you can hear William call out for Henry and Michael
If Tape Man Henry never included that "I suspect you want to die in this fire too" bit, would anyone actually have made the conclusion that it was Michael who was the main character? Genuinely I don't remember if that was the theory before FNAF 6. I really adore the idea of Michael atoneing for his own sins and working to finally take down his father, but there is just so much that we have to assume and theorize, and not very much that is factually canon.
Probably, considering William also says "You may not recognize me, but it's still me". Since we're clearly not playing as Henry, it can only be Michael he's saying that to. Or like, his wife... but let's face it, Scott's never going to explain what happened to her. At this point, I won't be surprised if William created his children with Faz Goo. I have a little more reservation about Michael being the MC of 3. There's not much to suggest that, obviously because it was made before Scott even created Michael. It just meshes well with the rest of the story.
The only way I would ever accept the ‘Michael Hell’ theory was if he was Old Man Consequences. Like, he’s just chilling by the lake while William’s screaming bloody murder and he’s just going like; “Y’all hear somethin’?” That way, he is being punished in some way, but he’s not actually suffering because he has ‘repented for his sins’ already. Instead he’s there to watch and warn the Vengeful Spirit to let go. I mean, I know he’s not ‘old’, but depending on what age you think he was in 1983, by the time 2023+ rolls around, he would be over his 50s at least. Cool idea, but absolutely no evidence. (This may or may not have also been because I saw some wicked cool art of a younger Michael wearing the Foxy mask as Old Man Consequences.)
Great video! Lots of new observations about Michael being the one monitored I didn't notice before. Michael is definitely my favorite FNAF character, so it was interesting to see an in depth video about his personality and growth. I personally think that Michael worked in FNAF 2 as Fritz. Not just because of the odor on the pink slip, but, if I remember correctly, I think there was a goldfish in Sea Bonnies named Fritz that basically became the stinky rotting purple corpse. (*Please correct me if I'm wrong; I'm going off of memory.)
I’m genuinely so glad to see someone else who thinks Michael was the runaway kid. Like it makes so much more sense imo. Also I’ve never even considered the idea that the Fnaf 4 gameplay could’ve taken place after SL but the way u explained it makes so much sense and I totally believe it. Thanks for making this it made me really happy to watch all the way through :)
A little thing supporting Mike's involvement in FNaF 2 which sets up his hallucinations in FNaF 3 is that on night 6 we see a completely new guard join the establishment for literally one day before being fired for the same reasons as he is in fnaf 1. Whether this was because he was a rotting corpse or because they shut the whole pizzeria down the next day after the bite
hearing your rant about how stupid the idea of fnaf 4 being a hell for micheal constructed by a vengeful crying child was twice as funny to me because I used to have my own fnaf story with an evil vengeful crying child as the main premise
i love how you describe how micheal speaks being "roundabout" because whenever you say that, my mind goes to theatre kid, and after watching this video i can say with confidence that michael is 100% a theatre kid and extra as fuck
Really enjoyed your editing and artwork in this video. I laughed way too much at Mike just yeeting the CC around, and 'IN THE EYES'. Hopefully the movie doesn't ruin Michael's characterisation.
In my opinion out of all the fnaf theorists your like the most reliable You never really stretch it, and also look at the information in an objective and factual way
On the Michael's Hell theory; I think the only thing that makes it work is the line "the one you should not have killed." It gives more of a sense of a founding moment, a primary, inciting incident vibe, and you could argue the crying child's death lead to all this. I don't think this is what it meant, it's really for Cassidy, the one who turns around and fights back with every effort. And the morality of the eternal torment completely fricks Crying Child's character, as you said. If Cassidy is eternally tormenting Afton, that's ok, Cassidy doesn't have to be innocent or good. Cassidy is the outlet for our rage and hatred, watching Afton get his "deserved punishment forever and ever." Old man Consequences reminds us that endless revenge is bad, though. At some point there has to be forgiveness, at some point the anger has to be let go, at some point the crimes, no matter how heinous, have been balanced out. Finite killings does not equal infinite torture, though as humans we really enjoy watching the evil suffer like that. In short, if Crying Child is truly good and innocent, which I think FNaF repeats and reinforces any time they come up, them putting Michael through infinite hell makes no sense, especially if William exists. (Meaning if the entire franchise, except Michael putting Crying Child into Fredbeat and killing him, was all Michael's Hell and endless torture of him, ok yeah I could see that. But also then all the other lore in the game is meaningless because Crying Child made it up to torture Michael with it.) Cool video, enjoyed it, thanks bye~!
I agree with the whole “anger has to be let go” thing, but not “actions have to be forgiven”. At this point, saying William Afton’s actions should be forgiven is like saying Mike shouldn’t have burned him. William can not, and should not, be forgiven for his actions. Revenge is bad, sure, but forgiving someone like him is simply giving him what he wants. William is a narcissistic psychopath, he thinks and wants, above all, to be right. Forgiving him would only keep him on his path. But hey, what do I know, I’m just talking about a psychotic child killer who searches for immortality, and who would have kept doing it if he wasn’t stopped, I probably know just as much as Jon Snow.
You are one of my new favorite FNAF theorists. Mike being the kid from midnight motorist makes so much sense and it makes the timeline with out so much better!
One added thing to the "the fnaf 4 bedroom isn't an actual bedroom" is that no bedroom looks like that like that's bugged me since the game came out the design of that room makes no sense you've got a room at the end of two halls with no windows I have a terribly designed bedroom and even it's not that bad
my irl bedroom is set up the same way as the FNaF4 gameplay bedroom, I just have a worse- tinier- closet. It does exist, though I doubt scott knew that.. so it is a very strange design.
Goddamn... Before this I was convinced that BV was the FNAF 4 player and the runaway kid, with Mike only experiencing the memories of his nightmares, but this video completely flipped my perspective. Still have a few more minutes to go, but this video is really good. You seem like someone really cool to talk to the lore about
Huh. You know, I never considered that Lefty is dangerous to Michael because the robot itself is finicky. People sometimes say Henry is a dick for designing Lefty with the intent to administer shocks to Puppet/Charlie, but I always assumed that was because she had become dangerous over time and needed to be restricted, lest she attack someone, which I thought the potential attacks on Michael showed. I always thought she was maneuvering Lefty around, but I guess that really wouldn't make sense since he's meant to trap her and ferry her back to the pizzeria. I guess Henry was being extra super careful, or something? Because he seemed to understand what Charlie had done up until now and that it was "in her nature to protect the innocent". So why keep her imprisoned like that? Goddamn it, Scott, it can never be simple with you.
@@siresquawks yes, even in UCN she says is the one of the only souls really self conscious, she even describes the others souls as "Animals" following their instincts
@@siresquawks I have a theory and it actually comes from Ooftroop’s Undeniably Canon Fnaf Timeline series, specifically part 2. While most of the video(s) are played off as jokes and not meant to be taken seriously, he actually raises some valid points. Like how Henry didn’t know that the Puppet was his daughter until AFTER Lefty captured her. Think about it: Why would Henry trick Lefty out with all these torturous control shock mechanisms to capture his own daughter? Perhaps it’s because he thought he was sending it to capture another one of his rogue animatronics and hooked it up with all this tech to keep it at bay until it gets to the Pizzaria. He probably doesn’t realize that it’s Charlie in there until it was too late. I believe that one of his lines may even elude to this revelation: “I should have known that you wouldn’t be content to disappear, not my daughter.” This could imply that he now realizes what he has done and feels like a fool for not realizing it sooner. Idk that last part could be a bit of a stretch. This whole thing could have some issues (what Fnaf theory doesn’t 😒). But what do you think? I’d love to hear your thoughts on this.
I don't like the theory that William used illusion discs to torture Michael but does have some decent evidence behind it because in ultimate custom night the nightmares are in it which means that canonicly 2 people know of the nightmares existence
I always took it that the one you shouldn't have killed in UCN, was Michael. Every other person that William has directly or indirectly caused death to, has showed up. That list includes Baby ("I guess you forgot about me"), Ballora ("admit it - you wanted to let me in" and "these are strange circumstances that have brought us together") and all of his victims, except Michael. His death is undoubtedly the one death that caused William the most pain, considering he's the one that burned him to death no less than two times. Sure, Cassidy is the one that causes him the most torment, being called the vengeful spirit and all, but she's here, represented by the mediocres. Same as Charlie, who's represented by the puppet (and to a lesser extent, Nightmarionne). But Michael is nowhere to be seen. (Crying child isn't directly or indirectly William's fault, as William wasn't the one that programmed the springlocks and while you could argue gross negligence, in the end, William didn't exactly hand his son a gun and told him to "deal with it"; Michael was acting on his own here. Gross negligence doesn't necessarily always mean that the person is at fault). You might be like "what do you mean Elizabeth? How is that William's fault? And what was that about Ballora?" - Elizabeth dies to Baby, we know this. Baby was made to lure and capture/kill children and made by William. If you wanted to argue gross negligence, here it is. This is gross negligence. Like telling a kid they can't have candy but leaving it out on the table. - Ballora is heavily implied to be Ms. Afton, which we have suspicions of having committed suicide after William successfully took custody of the kids by having Elizabeth lie on the stands during the custody battle (which happens after the divorce, which then again explains why there's two houses). If she divorced him because he didn't want to be part of their (read also: *her*) family, but then took everything away that was part of their (read also: *her*) family, what was the point of continuing to live? She wanted to have a family together, and Afton didn't want that. So she wanted to have a family somewhere else, but Afton didn't want that either. So she killed herself (eventually, probably combination of depressive thoughts, grieving over her dead son and sadness over being excluded from the family she wanted). That screams causal connection to me, and if I were to point at the person responsible for this death I would say without a doubt that William is at fault. As you said in your video, it makes sense for Michael to resent his father, considering that he sent him on a suicide mission. It also makes sense that Michael would be here - perhaps as part of Ennard, considering that it was inside Michael for quite a while. This theory has holes, of course it does. but there's still something to be said that if anyone is supposed to be present, it should be Michael. And he's not for some reason.
Why would he be everyone hated Willam expect Michael Michael had no hatred in the end and let go of his grief and sorrow knowing or believing his brother forgave him and that he did everything he could in the least violent way possible to help or out right save the spirits Michael and Henry unlike everyone else let go of those feeling knowing they wouldn’t solve anything that everything that could have been done was done. Expect for Henry who might still be a bit angry and sad but clearly not enough to be sent down there with the rest. That’s what ties them to the crying child with their never ending hatred sorrow and grief at what has happened to them and all those around them they forever remain tied to the crying child because they share those same emotions only when he lets go or they all let go will they ever truly be free. I know it’s fucked up but they have to let Willam go and pass on never knowing if they got true Justice or not they have to show that’s not it’s about wraith and revenge anymore that they have faith and are truly ready to move on.
@DownTrodded henry was not a victim of William's crimes. Neither was phone guy. They aren't in UCN because William didn't directly target them. Ballora, not William's wife because I don't think she *is* his wife, just that she represents her, is there. Saying that everything is tied to Crying child does not make sense. He is also missing, but presumably he is tied to Golden Freddy (which is there) and his death wasn't William's fault. If anything it was Michael's. The spirits aren't lingering because CC is still around, I don't even think the spirits are around AT ALL. I think the spirits are gone. The only two that clearly DO remain in UCN are Charlie ("The others are like animals, but I'm very aware") and Cassidy/VS ("they tried to release us […] I will never let you rest"). As far as the others are concerned, I'm not convinced their spirits linger, but they are represented at least. Crying child is not, and the spirits around him are also not. Michael let go of his resentment? Where did you find this info? Michael very clearly stated that "there is only one thing left for me to do now... I'm going to come find you. *I'm going to come find you.*" which reminds me of the Taken movies ("I have a particular set of skills […] I will find you. And I will kill you"). Also please use more punctuation and make shorter sentences. It was incredibly difficult to read your sentences and trying to understand what you mean was very hard. It also doesn't help that you made several spelling and grammatical errors.
@@CaptainRickey I expect one line of explanation for why I was wrong and to keep a back and forth going for a while. It is quite impressive how fast you were in taking my points down with such clarity. Not a single slip up no anger or bitterness detected no insults to me or my character cool calm and collected only aiming to prove me wrong while also taking the time to even point out how my spelling was wrong and how I could improve my writing in the future. Again top notch thanks for the notes and have a nice life.
@@DownTrodded my comments used to be misinterpreted as snarky and miss-know-it-all in a mean-spirited way, so good to know that me working on that is actually bearing the fruits of past labour. Appreciate it. Same to you, have a good one.
@@CaptainRickey That’s why I’m here I lure people into have to disprove me or interact with me to test them. You got an A+ everyone else so far has gotten a C or F expect for that one guy who barely got a B. (The way I actually rank people is way more complicated and loose.) I usually go after people that think they are appear to be or are actually smart everyone else so far has failed to disprove my points or has been a jerk while doing it leading to these lower scores I also sometimes rank how they interact with other people as well and do multiple people at a time. I just hope that all this isn’t in vain and that my studies will lead to the good I think it will lead to. Your actually the first and only person that knows this because your the first to a good grade getting to know this after getting a good grade I think is a good reward let me know if you can think of a better one and feel free to ask any questions. Helping you will help me help others or wait maybe switch that up and swap it around?
You see even though Michael did a unforgivable thing he at least feels remorse about it. He didn't want to kill his brother. He basically does more than to f*** with him for a couple of minutes. Yes he was a horrible Big Brother but he at least tried to make amends for what he did he tried his best to help his brother and his. Sister he died trying to protect both of them. He still widens over them in some way trying to keep his sister from hurting anyone or herself. He at 110% is going to go after his dad. No matter what and he has sympathy because he actually has pain for what he did William on the other hand like I said before could have killed every single. Child in the pizza complex. Including their parents and then went off to ihop or Denny's I've been when shopping at Walmart afterwards IG there was no big f****** deal. This is a guy they killed it dozens of children Evan slept like a baby up until he was possessed so yeah I feel sad and kind of forgive. Michael because when he did what he did he has stupid idiotic teenager
I really love this video, It really explains some plot points and I totally agree with your thoughts on things like Mike being the runaway kid in the Midnight Motorist minigame, and...well, we really don't need to go into the whole "Mike Hell" theory again haha.
Stopping at 1:16 to say that he's in FNAF 2, as well. Now, the first 6 nights guy got bit, but the seventh night has a completely different person and It's heavily implied to be him.
Since it wasn't SUPER important to analyzing him, I didn't include as it's debated in the fandom. Since the withered animatronics canonically reek like hell, anyone would smell bad tampering with them, and Help Wanted confirms that the company is genuinely willing to fire people they don't like over odor.
I have a theory about this. Fnaf 1 guard is not him. Since Fnaf Sl also takes place at that time. İnfact him beign William theory is more strong. Since he tempered with the animatronics. Worked there a lot. This is also explains how he is knows the place so well. Fnaf 2,Jeremy and Fritz are deffinetly not him. Since Michael probaby at max 20 at the time. I beleive Fritz is the Phone dude from fnaf 3. He knows significant amount of Freedys and the place. He also tempered with the animatronics. And we know Fritz shoudnt be here at that point in fnaf 2. He is perfect fit. Fnaf 3-5-6 are deffinetly Michael.
The phone call easter egg in fnaf 4 is there as one of the many hints toward the forgotten plot of that game, a story that Scott had deemed better to "be best left forgotten for now." "The dream theory" who scott had comfirmed in a game theory livestream all the way back in 2015. The concept is as follows: the original trilogie wasn't an actual chain of events that happened in the fnaf universe, but are all actually the creation of a tortured soul, a story born out of the mind of the Crying Child. While the nights of fnaf 4 happened after the bite, when the child is in a coma at the hospital. And here's the proof: two of the clues gaven by Scott are :Why does the toy chica loses her beak?" And "What lurks in the shadows can be misinterpreted in the eyes of a child". Remember how the fnaf 4 minigames had all of theses neat little trowbacks to the earlier titles? You know, like a broken mangle mess, a purple car, ect.... theses aren't just easter eggs, theses are what was misinterpreted by the Crying Child to create the fnaf story of fnaf 1 to 3: the shadows? Just that, shadows of the springlock suits. The toy animatronics? Action figures of the fasbear gang owned by a little girl. The mangle? A broken toy in a girls room. Why is foxy broken in fnaf 1? It's the only plush of the Crying Child who's missing It's head. The purple guy? An employe helping a colleage putting on a suit. The animatronics walking during the night and hiding the bodiesbof theirs victims in a suit? Mear rummors shared by childrens to mock the Crying Child. The puppet and golden freddy? Mear reflections of himself. The list goes on.... If all of it is true, then, who are the nightmares? Who do they represents? They are the manifestations of the Crying Child's greatests fears, his trauma, the reason of his death who he needs to fight and conquer. Freddy, bonnie, chica and foxy are his brother and his friends who tortured him. Fredbear, is his biggest fear, the very machine that killed him. And ultimately, the nightmare, as death itself, who's comming for the child as transparent personification of Fredbear, all his greatest fears combined. Who needs to fight, in night 7, he fights against death itself in order to conquer it, and in a way, accept it. All of it was linking to one final event, the one and only mystery who hasn't been solved: the bite of 87, because it turns out that hidden numbers in the very first promotional images for the game shows the numbers 87, then 82, and finally 83. Meaning that Markplier's infamous "Was that the bite of 87?" Wasn't as farfech as it sounds. It's another redcon. Finally, the box. What was the box? And more importanty, what was inside. First, how to open it, Scott confirmed that he had planned for us to get on of two keys with the fun with plushtrap minigames. And the other? "Maybe"(this is speculation) that we would have gotten it with the fun with ballon guy variant considering as that minigame was originaly meant tp ship for release and was instead repurposed for the Halloween edition. Now for the content of the box: we don't know exactly what it was, but we do know it's use. What layed inside that box, was "all the pieces combined" as Scott said. The final clue to redirect us to the dream theory. That Theory, if you can still call it that, wasn't particulary liked by the community who saw it as a disgrace to the beautifully crafted storyline that came before, and Scott knew this, he said it himself,.so he changed his plans, either before release or after as he went along with popular theories of the time. He changed the game. And because of this nobody could found out the truth. This could also explain why sister location, who was orginaly promoted as a new begining. A new story set in the same universe as the other games, was instead a direct sequel. Scott had to make us forget fnaf 4. To rewright it.
It probably was, but I think it’s one of the many things now reworked for the plot. Honestly I plan on doing a dream theory revisited video at some point.
I have to say I disagree, I can't see a world where Dream Theory was ever true, or that the story changed that drastically *after* it released. Scott just uses red herrings in his teasers. FNAF2 wasn't a sequel, despite everything up to the game's release and even the game itself up until the "Climactic Reveal" on night 5 sets it up to be a sequel. He changed the 87s to 83s before the game came out, and the 1982 easter eggs were referring to when Fredbear's opened (given that this is the case in the novel that was being written at the same time) not when the game took place FNAF4 being in 1987 fundamentally breaks and ruins the story and established lore of FNAF2, and if you want to argue "yeah that's why Scott changed it" then none of this has any barring on what the story would have been when the game released anyways. By time he made those "hints to Dream Theory", the story would have already shifted away from it given he was making FNAF World and The Silver Eyes (both of which go against Dream Theory's narrative. Not to mention Scott was alluding to the plot of FNAF World in the post about the box, which is one of the evidence people use for Dream Theory) The reason FNAF4 seems unsolveable is because we have the solution, Squawks basically said it perfectly in this video. The game was Mike's backstory, the central protagonist of the series. Even under Dream Theory, which while I don't believe it, did hinge on Mike also being the fnaf4 player, because that was *always* meant to be the case. The fact it took until 2018 for Scott to spell it out for us in the logbook, and even 5 years after that we're still debating this, is evidence to Scott's statement that "the community won't accept it that way"
@@derekmartin5340 prehaps you are right, but there might be a slight issue. In fnaf 4, they aren't the aftons, yet. William Afton was introduced in the first book, while the rest was introduced with Sister location. Add the fact that fnaf 4 was gonna be the final chapter. Letme ask you this then, in fnaf 4 where are the aftons? Simple. They didn't existed yet, they got implemented into the continuity after Scott changed everything due to the inevitable backclash. If you take a look at everything that came before sister location, they aren't mentioned anywhere at all. They where a late addition. An a comfusing one at that, considering that it had lefr us wondering who out of Michael or William was actually in springtrap for a while. But hey, everyone can agree to disagree, and the aftons became so much of an iconic familly that it's difficult to see fnaf without them.
If Michael is really supposed to be a penitent character following accidentally killing his brother, then I *really cannot* see him being the person on the chair/couch and Crying Child is in the room. Under BVRunaway, Crying Child is already dealing with an abusive father (who seems to be physically violent if his banging on the door is any indication), so Michael decided to make his life even more of a living hell by bullying him???? Locking him in his room, jumpscaring him, and (it's implied) locking him in Parts and Services despite his overwhelming terror of the animatronics????? Not only is that just a messy character arc and timeline, that's just.....repulsive of Michael and makes it far more difficult to root for him even if he's sorry for the accident. Oh, and William went from abusive of his son to......not abusive(?) despite Michael causing trouble and barely saying anything about it but his sensitive son locking his door got him so riled up he was going to punish him? That sequence of events makes no sense.
Maybe Michael is the one having nightmares after doing that to his brother like a ptsd almost thing in fnaf 4? Cause he saw an iv drip, could have visited his dying brother, and the flowers might represent his sister? Where William is trying to now make him afraid of the pizzeria so that he’ll never go back there to stop him from being so fearless? Or not, it totally sounds like it’s Michael in fnaf 4
