Видео

Back in the day I always liked the idea of the FNaF4 family being Henry's family. With the unoccupied Girl's Room belonging to Charlie, who was already dead, MaskBoy being Sammy, and Sadboy being just like, a random younger sibling idk. There's a lot that doesn't work about it but I wanted it to work so badly LOL.

Imo, I think the retcon was something simple like the FNaF 1 newspaper suggesting a killer was “caught”, which was retconned in FNaF 3 by having the killer actually get springlocked and hidden in the safe room. Nobody EVER brings up the old clipping that suggests somebody was caught, and the killer having BEEN caught simply doesn’t make sense with further facts that were introduced. Seamlessly implemented as nobody bothered to talk about it, entirely contained in the first 5 games, and it doesn’t cause any problematic contradictions other than that one clipping from the first game only.

Ive always thought this, because it didnt make sense to assume crying child and mike were williams kids. The plush bear in SL goes with the idea that that was the retcon since how could he be talking to crying child while also in the next room suiting up a performer?

This theory helps explain so much more for me. Since so much of the franchise/ fanbase has been excitedly looking into the series' origins, I have an additional theory to bounce off this one: - Assuming the crying child and Mike in FNAF 4 are both Schmidts instead of Aftons, this could help further explain Elizabeth. While I'm unsure when exactly in the timeline, William Afton kidnaps Elizabeth Schmidt (Or Charlie Schmidt) intending to either hurt Henry or drive him to madness. This kidnapping ruins Henry, making him try to do everything in his power to bring his little girl back, and in the process, his wife leaves him. During this period, he puts all his time into work/ research into animatronics, leaving the crying child and Mike alone all day. From either his obsession with reviving his daughter or revenge on the one who kidnapped her, Henry works with William to build the most lifelike animatronics they can. This leads to the creation of Charlie Emily, Emily being her middle name at the time of FNAF 4. A second tragedy occurs when William also chooses to murder the robot recreation of Henry's daughter, the one who went to possess the puppet. - This theory is likely some hefty fan cannon, but I do have some additional evidence I'd like to pitch: -The line delivered in 'The Immortal and the Restless' from the William stand-in of "The baby isn't mine" could be referring to how he once was raising a very young child that didn't belong to him, which was originally a kidnapped Elizabeth. This tangent could lead to William rebuilding his image of Elizabeth as Vanessa, but I'm getting ahead of myself. -The Fred Bear plush crying child considers his closest friend was originally Henry monitoring his youngest son and attempting to guide him while spending most of his time working nearby. -Henry only doubled down on recreating his family by saying "I will put you back together" to the crying child in his presumed coma. -The Five Nights at Freddy's Movie is showing us this original story, but the youngest son of Henry; Garret Schmidt is kidnapped instead of Abby. -Plus all of this theory could be considered incorrect in the modern timeline, due to how Sister Location may have course-corrected/ updated the narrative. -Lastly, Mike/ Michael never outright calls William his father, he says "Father it's me, Michael" which could also be referring to Henry. Henry may have learned that his original daughter ended up inside of the Baby animatronic and upon Michael's learning of this he went to the SL bunker to "put her back together" but the animatronics initially thought Mike was Henry. The miscalculation Mike made was that his original sister was manipulated/ changed by William, becoming a sinister puppet for his will *wink wink, hint*, who didn't care about Mike enough to not use him to escape the bunker to "Make Daddy Proud". Okay, that's all the Freddy Spaghetti I used to form most of this theory, but with new releases to the lore like 'The Week Before' I'm still processing new info, so feel free to ask questions/ poke holes. Thanks for reading ~

What’s the background music that plays at the beginning of the video? I’ve been looking everywhere for it

I actually had the theory that Mike, BV and Charlie were all Emilys (regarding this topic). I don't know. I think BV and the missing sister being twins made sense, and the SAVE HIM minigame could've been already retconned into being a girl. The flower connection between the Fredbear Plush and the sister's room was meaningful, and it would also be revealed in The Silver Eyes. A twin dies at Fredbear's and the other one has been already murdered by the evil purple guy. This would also mean that Charlie in this theory died in 1982 (I think it makes sense). This would make the Fredbear Plush more tightly connected to the Bite Victim, since it is his literal sister, protecting him and promising him to give him his Happiest Day. Alongside their brother, who, riddled with guilt, tries to redeem himself from killing his little brother. This would connect Mike and Afton again, since he killed Mike's sister. I mean, they still could be the Schmidts. I say Emilys more as that they play the role of the Emily family in the trilogy. But I agree that the Foxybully and BV were not meant to be Aftons.

I think that retcon was actually CC being The Puppet.

It makes more sense then mike putting a fake last name on a job application. I mean, fazebear need to background checks. That would have gotten mike cought immediately

Oh wow. I think you and @Stormister should collab ane put your heads together since both of you have really similar theories regarding the Aftons being the Schmidts. Hope this gets expanded upon because it's really interesting.

what’s the background music at like 5:55?

As an addition to your theory the missing sister from fnaf 4 could be one of the mci or garret's game counterpart she might be charlie who died outside & became the puppet

Ive always had a theory that Afton kidnapped all his suppsed children. Hence why there was no Mrs. Afton

I've said this on Freddit for years. It's nice to see someone who made the same observation finally do a breakdown video

I dont really agree with this, i think the broken mangle, the amount of freddy merch, fredbear plushue and how much time the kid spends at freddies during the days clearly points towards a connection to the family. Not to mention, if the retcon is that the entire story went from revolving around an unrelated family, to the main killers bloodline, is *not* a small, smooth change. That is a major rewrite of the entire series. In fact, im about 90% sure the retcon is something else. Something scott hinted towards, the entire community believed it, then the next game came out with something entirely different that was *literally* impossible to know from the hints in the game before. Remember back in fnaf2, i think it was night 6? Phone guy mentions how someone ”used” the yellow suit in the back, and now all the animatronics are acting strange. The same night, where golden freddy springs to life, and starts attacking the player. The implication is very clear, at this point in the story, golden freddy was the suit used by afton. This isnt even really up for debate, this is what he intended. There was no other solution. And dont even bother with ”scott had it planned out, it was a red herring but always spring bonnie”. No, no it wasnt, this was changed in the next game probably for story reasons. The entire community was on board with what scott was telling us in fnaf2, then after fnaf3 everyone was on board with it being spring bonnie. There was never any discourse around it changing, because there was no need. The original game was vague enough that scott could rewrite it later, though he 100% originally intended it to be GF that was used. This retcon builds off something scott very clearly implied and meant for, that later changed, with 0 problems rising up. But absolutely no doubt in my mind, that comment from phone guy, golden freddy springing to life, and him being the only one that existed at that point in the story, the original intention was clear as day.

This is an amazing video😂 absolutely brilliant, keep it up

yes! i absolutely agree with this being the retcon! i've always loved the idea of it because it feels very clean cut, as fnaf4 is mike and crying childs sibling relationship, with no real reference to parents. it's very kid focused, kinda like early fairly odd parents. so i think this makes a lot of sense

I've said this before but my thought back in the FNAF4 days was that: The "story" was about redemption. Four boys got a younger boy killed. FNAF1-3 have you play as four different security guards (remember in one game you play as someone else on nights 6 and 7). To me that suggested these boys wound up coming back to a place they had a terrible memory of, discovering the haunted animatronics, and maybe having a hand in helping the spirits find rest and in doing so, redeeming themselves/making peace with their past. To me it seemed so logical and obvious, but that's apparently not what Scott was planning, and everyone else assumed he was planning to canonize "Dream Theory" (the theory that the whole series had been a dream). After Sister Location I honestly stopped caring. Something about the later games just felt a little... "make it up as you go" to me, and the questions got less and less interesting. The most recent Game Theory video is about whether or not the Crying Child is named "Dave" and like... who cares what his name is? Why is this interesting?

Something one can have thought about for a bit. Even speculation that the Crying Child survived the bite and became the puppet and was placed into a puppet/dummy box. In addition Mike Schmidt could possibly not even be Michael now given how one would have to figure out the timing of events. Something noteworthy is Puppet was a he until it was retconned to be well Charlie. Interesting detail is the books had it be Charlie's brother who got taken by Afton but later surprise twist it was her all along a and she is a robot. I wonder if it was supposed to be her brother in save him?

I could be wrong but I heard that in an interview with dawko Scott admitted Mike was not originally supposed to be an Afton.

I always wondered why so many fnaf theorists never used the movie as evidence for the Schmidt/Afton debate. Scott was a massive part of making this film. Hell, he spent years changing and refining it, im sure that there are more connections to be made. That no one has even considered yet.

This really makes a lot of sense. I hope this could blow up like the Dual Process theory people need to know about this!

I haven't played the games yet, but isn't the unnoticed retcon Golden Freddy, more specifically who possesses Golden Freddy? If that's the case then the retcon would have originated from the bad ending of FNAF 3 ala Mandela Effect.

Interesting theory, tho don't agreed since it is implied that their parents owned the place in 4. Along with purple guy eaeter egg

Honestly, you're probably right... But I wish the box actually had an answer.

the only retcon was never caught so it didn't change anything

Another thing I think adds to the whole “they weren’t Afton’s kids originally” is the fact Scott always seems to give William 1 kid in the Non Cannon continuities In the movie: Vanessa In the novels: Elizabeth It seems like when changing the story he always wants William to have 1 kid while in the game has 3

I absolutely agree with this theory. Hell, the fact that SL is all up in your face about how the FNAF 4 house is connected to Afton is probably because that wasn't the original intention.

I personally see MCI happening after Elizabeths death. So basically, William builds these high tech robots for killing, it backfires by killing Elizabeth which frustrates him. He shuts down CBPW and choses a more hands-on approach with trying out robot remnant possession by killing the 5 MCI victims, which works. Before all of this, William stuffed Daves corpse inside golden freddy, few hours later he found out that Dave now possessed Golden Freddy/Fredbear. His logic: Corpse + Robot = Corpses spirit possessed the robot

I disagree on the nightmare fredbear points.

On Night 3, you can find Freddy acting weird if you hide under the table. He'll crash into the tables and limp. I think that is Bronwin

Sambar, what do you think about what year this story takes place after fnaf 6

9:52 Ah yes Fredrick Faz Bearington

Thank you 🙏! I love your type of book readings .

i love this model, although the endo is too smol for it to look like a real springlock suit.

Truly a Masterpiece I was lucky to find

Neat video😙

The week before confirming 2 theorys and proving that one is a lie it's fire(3 theorys actually)

So at 26:50 what you’re getting at is (these aren’t really numbers but) that Golden Freddy has like 40% of CC in him while the other 4 split the remaining 60% between them kinda

Please do count the ways

16:53 cupcake dog might be true ngl

In summary: the location opens in the early 1980s, kids died, and it closed.

Balloon boy. JJ. And others might have been In the attraction as well

The one thing I don't understand is if the withereds have the victims stuffed in them. Because if they were before the 1993 animatronics of FNAF 1 then why are there missing children posters in the FNAF 1 restaurant? I also just want to believe that the 93 animatronics have the MCU stuffed in them but can't find a reasonable explanation outside that William just killed another set of random 5 kids

I thought it was opened in 1993

what indicates that someone other than c.c is in golden freddy?

9:17 In the call he asks if the next night guard could check the back inside the suits. Because he was always curious which may have saved his life.

It's important to keep in mind that Ralph's memory is unreliable, as he claims that he never took Coppelia to Freddy's at one point, then at another point in the novel reminisces on how he took her once when she was seven, causing her nightmares. I'm unsure if his claims about his daughter "just being born" is enough to warrant adjusting the timeline.

i think the "it's me" phrase is what connects all the animatronics with the crying child