It says that a man was trapped alone in a sealed room for 30 years. Have you ever looked up what total isolation in a blank room does to a person? Genuine warning, don't do so if you're faint of heart. It is scarring. After 30 years of that situation, he would have absolutely no sanity left.
@@cameronhodgetts920 It's not a quote from the games, Novel Afton was only springlocked a year beforehand and I think he got out of Freddy's even sooner
May i mind you these people don't know Afton commited those crimes and such, he's just so evil and in agony that people can literally sense it, similar to an aura.
I much prefer this interpretation. The more I dig into fanaf lore the more I feel William didn’t really care all that much about his family. I think it was necessary to seem like the picture perfect father to the outside world and that’s all.
I understand the desire to give Afton more sympathetic motivations as a storytelling tool, but its always bothered me because its always seems contrary to any and all evidence. Micheal's backstory is sympathetic, he was a stupid teenager bullying his little brother and went too far and feels immense grief about that, before finding out about his father's actions and wanting to put a stop to them. Even if you assume that William is Psychic Friend Fredbear and says he'll "put you back together" and Orange Guy isnt William, giving Afton the maximum amount of leeway, he doesnt care about CC being bullied, SL actually made that worse for him by retconning the plushie as William with a Walkie Talkie, and somehow Mike(or Willaim himself) gets access to the Parts and Service Room to lock CC in. The books even go further out of their way to say "hes always been a monster" In "What We Found" our protagonist Hudson works in the FNaF3 location, taking Micheal's assumed position as security guard and when Hudson looks at Springtrap he specifically sees his own abusive father. In "The Man In Room 1280" the story where Afton is being tortured and quite literally being kept alive by Andrew, the book version of Cassidy, the story goes out of its way to make sure you arent sympathetic to him, calling him evil incarnate, similar to how in UCN the only time our PoV isnt William being tortured, OMC refers to Afton as "the demon" while Afton is cursing Mikes name in the background. The only two thibgs i can think of that makes William show any level of care for his kids is one of his death quotes as Scraptrap where he describes killing Micheal as "bittersweet" and "The Real Jake" where Jake describes his brother as being kind of robotic and caring about money, an allusion to Mike, while the voice over the Jake doll's Walkie Talkie is his father's. Compared to how Mike's character growth has been very clear and slow based on what little information we get about him, Afton hasn't had any sign of his "good guy" phase. Comparing back to Wandavision for instance, which i think does this kind of sympathetic story well, we see Wanda before Wandavision and understand exactly why shes doing her actions. Shes in denial and desperately wants her family back, her husband, fake kids, and brother. We get to see her at her lowest moment, when she attacks Thanos in Endgame. The MCU does with Wanda what people try to connect with Afton pretty well. Also the timeline for Wandavision + MoM is much smaller and tighter than the what 50 years inbetween 1983 and SB? If were saying Gregory and Vanessa are the two robotic versions of the two kids who didnt set William on fire.
Oh yes, I agree with all this, but i don't think the line "bittersweet" when he kills michael is a show of care because he has other line where he says "That what EASIER than I thought it would be", so I think that he says that it's bittersweet because, yes, it's sweet because he killed him and that was his goal but it's bitter because it was so fucking easy that he doesn't feel it so sadisfactory and, btw, he has really said "skill issue" to his son. that's so funny to me
@@Blueberrypie62 oh yes I agree that the bittersweet line is reaching I was just thinking of that line and figured I'd mention it as something that could POSSIBLY be read into as him caring
Interesting, I'd always just accepted the grieving father "put you back together" theory. However, when you last out things this way it's fairly obvious - he's a sociopath.
@@ShesNervous looking at it now I wonder if them emphasis there is on the "I" and not on fixing the loss of his son. All that matters is this is something else William can control. Not even death is beyond his control.
I was gonna say, I always liked the idea more of him being a serial killer who stumbled into mad scientist; anything else felt like people were trying to justify (obviously only the breaking point and not the actions; but the waters were muddied in some areas) his murder spree. I’m a teacher, one who fell in love with the franchise cuz the teacher in me wanted to gather the hurting souls and help them, provide them safety from he horror. Goofy, probably. But i firmly believe only monsters attack and harm children on purpose (accidental collateral is different, like mike and cc). It’s why I loved movie Afton so much. He was really JUST a serial killer. Well and the glorious Matthew Lillard Edit: I am still less than 4 minutes in, so… I wanna clarify I do not hate anyone who wants to make an interesting villain. Or hate on anyone in the fandom at all. This is just the version of the story I like more
When the abuser pits two or more victims against each other, he feels that he is in control, after all, the main problem is left aside. William ''cared'' about his children in his sick way, but it doesn't mean he was a good person, he obviously felt the loss of C.C and probably went crazy because of it, he lost the control he had, selfish as he was, he couldn't admitting that the mistake was his, he let the blame bleed to others and that was his ruin.
!!! I did have a line in an early version of this script about how Afton saw the CC dead as Henry's fault for creating the animatronics and Mike's fault for doing the deed, rather than HIS fault for being an absent father.
Well said. C.C. can be a significant catalyst for William’s actions without making him sympathetic or framing him as a good person and father. C.C.’s death just gave William an excuse and a twisted justification to kill Charlie to get back at Henry.
I feel like Afton cared in his own twisted way, but it wasn't okay and by no means was it enough. He never gave his children the attention they needed, he always prioritized literally everything else. They were all neglected and died because of said negligence.
Ive always seen Afton like an actor, a desire for immortality simply being the cherry on top He adopts the fantastical sadism of a slasher while Springtrap and exaggerates his cool cunning persona while Scraptrap, sure some emotions MAY be there like when he's audibly disappointed at how easy it was to murder Michael, but other than that he only truly cares about being immortalized; whether literally via possession and successors, or metaphorically via his influence being everywhere. Just the idea of a man, a monster, whatever Afton is always coming back simply because it's what any good villain does is actually a little creepy as it's no longer "pee paw Afton got his foot stuck on some cables again, another fire in his history I suppose" but now it's "how the actual hell does this guy keep surviving fires". It adds an idea that William could potentially be FAR worse, but his audience enjoys (or well, is terrified of) his current persona, thus he keeps it.
I believe he was a "Sociopath in Remission". He masked well enough to function in society, get a wife and raise a few children, maybe even tricked himself into believing that bringing joy to kids through Fredbear and Friends was his life mission, but he never really felt love for anyone, and he was always truly motivated by his agony. He lost the mask from the grief, simply uncovering what was always underneath, a deeply disturbed and immoral man obsessed with undeath at the cost of as many lives as it takes.
Anyone would defend him if they understood his pain. The children that were killed aren't innocent either, they are just as bad because they also killed innocent people (the guards) I think that the children should find peace when they finally forgive Afton. No one can really find true peace until they let all of their grudges go. Its in the nature of many people to try to find the good in everyone, a reason to not hate someone and to forgive. I myself try to find the good in all people.
@@jesshowler9904 DID YOU WATCH THE VIDEO WHAT PAIN HE WAS A NEGLECTFUL ABUSER WHO MURDERED KIDS THEY ARE NOT NEARLY AS BAD AS HIM THEY BARELY REMEMBER ANYTHING AND HAVE UNDERDEVELOPED BRAINS😭 NIGGA YOU TRIPPING 💀💀 You just wanna defend a child killer
The only time i ever see afton thinking a kid of his is good is when ggy was the wizard's favorite apprentice.. So yeah, that says a lot about him when it took him to die and be scanned into a literal AI to appreciate someone even if in a possessive manner.. Cause it feels more like a "im proud of my puppet" kinda relationship Its not like gregory was his normal self at that point
William is one of those villains that does make you question, why? For me, I never thought William was pure evil, he was just so consumed with his grief and work. William had everything, yet he lost it all, becuase he wasn’t a better dad. Obviously running a business can take a mental toll on someone, and make it where he spends less time with his family. While I do feel bad for William for losing his kids, at the same time, he got what he wanted and deserved at the end. He knows it’s his own fault, he just doesn’t want to admit it. He says, “I always come back”, and in UCN, that’s literally the case. He dies and keeps coming back, while he screams in the void for Michael to help him. I am glad Fnaf’s newer timeline is focusing on the whole rogue AI thing, because UCN is a fitting end for William. Not only does he face all the monsters he created, he also got his immortality by dying over and over again forever. Granted it’s because of Cassidy, but she ends up being The Princess, no longer connected with William, but he’s probably still suffering. Do I think it’s sad William lost his kids? Yes Do I think William deserved to suffer the loss of his kids? No Does William deserve to suffer for everything he’s done? Absolutely Edit: Regardless to what Williams motive is, he got what he deserved in the end with UCN. Steel Wool even said that they want to make a game about the origins of Fazbear Entertainment, and go j to how William isn’t just some mindless heartless monster. I would love to see an origin story to how William became bitter to the world.
William didn’t “have it all”. Sure, on the outside he looks like he had a great life and a big family and thriving business but he didn’t love any of it. He hates everyone around him and harms his own family. In his mind, he didn’t lose anything when his kids died, only gained
Pretty much how I view William Villains who snap after a tragedy and become obsessed with rectifying it, losing themselves in the process, have always fascinated me, because you can sympathise with what they've lost whilst condemning who they've become I truly believe William *did* care about his kids at one point in his life. After the bite, I can buy that he became abusive towards Michael. I don't think William *is* a good father, I think he *was* a decent father whose prioritisation over his business and less-than-stellar comforting of his youngest son (Fredbear plush) served as contributing factors for his own family's downfall I can sympathise with what William has lost and that he cares, but I can also see that he became an irredeemable, child-murdering, sociopathic monster who *did* end up becoming abusive towards Michael (and possibly Elizabeth but I don't see that as likely) deserves punishment because he's become completely lost in his spiteful, grief-fuelled "the ends justify the means" obsession I think Afton is the player in Midnight Motorist. I think Afton, after the Crying Child's death, became a violent drunk towards Michael and emotionally/physically abused him. I don't think Afton was always an abusive father, but that's who he ended up becoming down the line. It was tragic what happened, but his actions towards Michael and his victims were entirely of his own volition
A few years ago I shied away from an argument with a comment section under a community post asking “what Afton you think deserves a hug most.” I thought it would be Michael or CC but William was the first pick by a large margin. So I went to the comment section and wrote “The number of people who chose William is concerning.” And 3-4 people actually responded all telling me I just didn’t understand, but one person elaborated. Apparently even though William has done some terrible things he “doesn’t deserve to be tortured” and has “suffered enough. :(“ Sure. Tell that to the extended families of the kids he’s murdered. Or his 3 kids he neglected, emotionally manipulated, and abused. Or Henry. The list goes on. William was never charged for his crimes nor took any form of accountability as far as we know. He most certainly deserves everything that was coming to him. I was 13 when I first saw that community post. Now I’m 17 and I honestly should’ve held my ground back then.
Exactlyyyyy. HE doesn't feel bad about what he did. imo I bet he thinks he did those kids a favor letting them live forever as beloved characters and getting to "play" all day. It's like feeling bad for John Wayne Gacy because he was bisexual. I am not going to feel bad for someone who turned their insecurities and fears into the reason someone had to die.
I think this is a fair assessment. The only case to be made against it really is that he's "lost in the sauce", that if he's operating on the assumption that he can, eventually, resurrect people if his "research" goes well, and that the end justifies the means. Sort of a sunk cost fallacy thing. Like, I murdered one kid, the only way I can square that is to murder enough kids to figure out how to un-murder kids. Not that I would call that sympathetic necessarily, but at least comprehensible. Good theory
Honestly it really bothers me how often people see these vile characters and immediately try to make them sympathetic to justify liking the character. For whatever reason we just can’t enjoy villains because they’re good villains.
@@Ultra_JTB yes, but because of the lack of evidence in the games, we can't infer an alternative motive. There are very few things we know about game William, and one of the most important ones is that he is a dad whose kids die
@@cameronhodgetts920 except for the fact that the books tell us he had an intense jealousy of Henry, as well as a fascination with the properties of remnant. So we can infer that his motive was a combination of wanting to ruin Henry and advance in the science of remnant.
@@Ultra_JTB no we can't. Scott Cawthon described the books as "a reimagining of the FNAF story". To use an analogy, it would be like saying "we know MCU Spider-Man will marry MJ because Sam Raimi Spider-Man married MJ". They may be the same characters, but they're in different stories.
I think there's this idea popping up in media recently that villains need this emotional backstory to be a good/interesting villain. Amd thats not really true. Sympathic villains are fun(if done right) but sometimes people are just bad. They can have the whole world handed to them on a silver platter and still want more from life,and take everyone down with them for it. Same with redeemed villains. There some people in this world that you dont owe forgiveness. You can forgive for yourself,but you dont have to let them back in your life,or clear them of all they done. Afton can be a fun villain with being sympathetic. Sometimes,villains being unsympathetic can be even more fun. We see no clear evidence he ever loved his children in the way Henry did. But we see all the evidence of him being very in his own head. I always saw him as seeing a chance to live forever,and do so much more. And in a way he achieved that,even if living forever meant being without a full free life.
The only problem with this is that Help Wanted 2 basically confirmed that Charlie died LAST, after all the other missing children. So him killing the others wasn't a result of him wanting to understand what happened to Charlie. I do agree that Charlie's death was most likely to get back at Henry. But now he needs a whole new motivation for every other kid before Charlie. Which is why I believe we still don't have enough pieces of the puzzle to figure out William's motivations. I still heavily doubt they're sympathetic in any way, but there's definitely more than meets the eye in my opinion.
It’s my belief that William DID begin the killings because he was upset at Crying Child’s death, however I believe he was upset in the same way you might be if someone wrecked your car or broke your phone. The way William treats his kids when they’re alive makes me think he views them more as property than people, a common trait among parents as horrible as him. I imagine he was furious when Crying Child died he was furious that such a valuable item had been rendered unusable by one of his other creations (Micheal), and in his incoherent and unjustified rage, he decided to steal one of Henry’s most valuable possession from him and kill Charlie. After that he just kept going. Make no mistake, I don’t think Crying Child or any of the Aftons are robots, I mean that’s just the way William views them. Probably lends come credence to, “I will put you back together”. They’re like broken toys to him, or robots, more accurately.
Adore this video and fully agree. One key detail I'd like to add is that the funtimes seem to be the "better" more superior versions of his own family. We know Baby was inspired by Elizabeth, and in TFC Elizabeth's goal is to live up to what circus baby truly is, an obedient killer for her dad. But its not just Elizabeth. Many people have pointed out the ballora comparison. Ballora being blind because perhaps william wishes his own wife in real life was blind to the monster he truly is. We see ballora as a motherly figure to the minirenas, and in UCN she talks to william almost as a representation of a lover at one point. "Ballora never learns" baby says, because ballora was made to be left in the dark, blind to the horrors of whats going on, just like william wishes his wife was. Then we have funtime freddy. A bear whos obsessed with birthdays, and has a plush friend to calm him down. The fnaf 4 bite victim died on his birthday, and also had a plush friend to calm him down. His personality is the total opposite of the BV (bite victim) loud and outspoken, bloodthirsty. William's "better version" of his own son. "One big happy family" could actually just refer to molten freddy himself, representations of the aftons merged together. Molten freddy being the first antagonist for michael in ffps is fitting too, a representation of the brother he killed. And then lastly we have funtime foxy. A silent fox animatronic who hides in the shadows. The only canonical jumpscare. Michael was a silent protagonist up until sister location custom night, and he speaks of "living in shadows" very similar to funtime foxy. Its in these shadows that mike experiences the only canonical jumpscare, at the hands of the animatronic that represents him. Perhaps william wishes he was silent and obedient, instead of rash and eventually disloyal like we see in the bite of 83 and eventually in fnaf 6/fnaf 3 when mike turns against william. Funtime foxy follows baby's orders to kidnap mike, showing his obedience. In UCN, aftons personal torment, this is broken free and funtime foxy is completely independent and loud and outspoken, diverting from William's wishes for michael. We see in the logbook michael has a creative artist side that is probably supressed due to being under William's thumb. Or none of this was intended and im delusional but who knows. Again, great video. I love your presentation.
I appreciate this video, people really get caught up in headcannons and let it cloud their vision of the story. AUs and headcannons are fine, but there's already a story to enjoy and theorize about!
I saw the idea of Fredbear's "let me put you back together, and take you apart all over again" as a way he views his kids for experimenting, and the rush he'd get out of it. One particular factor for Matpat making William sympathetic in his timeline was a Steel Wool 2022 interview saying 'try not make a scary monster without reason'. Though recently, I think this may've been intended for Roxy given how she got built out last year. The interview also was pre Ruin... And many book stories look to have their antagonists just flat out evil, like Eleanor.
Afton was a cruel man killing kids as well as the employees at or near the restaurant. Can anyone really believe that this man had any sort of decency within him after turning on Henery his business partner? No? his brother or should I say Ex brother.
I was always so deeply bothered by people using the theory that he talks through the walkie talkie to CC as "evidence" that he cares about his kids. If he does, why is he making his son have a birthday party at a place that scares him so badly he collapses to the floor in tears? Why isn't he actually doing anything to stop the abuse Michael puts him through? Why does he just let this son he supposedly cares so much about suffer? Not to mention Midnight Motorist, not letting your children have their own privacy i.e locking their bedroom door is just...textbook abuse.
Yes, someone else pointed out something similar that I agree with and have thought as well. If he IS able to see everything Michael is doing to CC it is WORSE because he refuses to intervene despite being the parent.
Actually, there one line represent the way william afton was thinking the whole time William Afton-"i am one of them" william afton see the ghost kids as his family, that why he always bring them back this look sympathetic, but isn't, his ego has no limits william afton doesn't care world domination, but being the main attraction of this show of horror forever He don't feel any empaty, not because he has none, its has because he see no value what happened to them isn't not enough for him to feel any, because he is beyond death he can revived his child, so why he should care if his child died again because of research do you think, he just forget the crying child after the bite? the same dude was breaking circus baby and rebuilding her up, again and again for decades? i never said once that william afton is sympathetic villain, but a egocentric villain, has no limits for his actions but he isn't a simple character, that killed for the sake of it do you think he is angry for the vengeful spirit maintaing him alive forever? actually i am absolute sure, that he is very thankful for it in the books after charlie springlock him William Afton Thanks her, now he beyond what is before he mess up his children with the thing about immortality Mikes just want everything in fnaf to end, this tragedy burn to ground Elizabeth only want to play it, she is really bored, she is torturing william afton forever together Cassidy(her best childhood friend), and just for the sake of william to suffer, a twisted charlie Cassidy(Gregory/Crying Child) he see life as just pain, life and death was not difference for him anymore,he can just be revived as robot kid, and in security breach proof robots can flesh regenerate above the metal endo even the bite 1983 was accident,even the crying child isn't anger at all against mike Elizabeth pretends not being angry, but she is very angry at him Mikes deserves to be scooper by circus baby, after he caused bite 1983 now in security breach, steel wool is trying to put gregory as mastermind and vannesa as his assistant there confirmation show gregory was possessed during the therapy when therapist said, someone get mangle by robots, gregory just laughs of it because gregory is a mess up kid, its likely he doesn't any value to life, or he see not difference of being dead in trilogy i mean if william have killed john, Circus Baby was likely she will kill william after that she takes her relationship with john far more serious than her relationship william afton
it always bother me when people use elizabeth (in games) to make a point of why they think william cared for his kids. like, yeah, he told elizabeth to not get close to baby, but just that, he just do "mmhg" to her, you can't tell me that he was trying. and why did he bring her in first place???? he has an older son to take care of her. no, "let's bring my daugther to the place with child-killer robots that, btw, I told her that one of them was for her". But that is not the worst part, the worst part is WHAT he did when elizabeth was killed. He just left her. He abandon her as baby, a funtime, the funtimes were eletrocuted on a daily basis and we know that they can feel PAIN. So he basically left his daughter totally separated from her family meters underground where she was tortured for years. I no longer believe that Elizabeth has become a sociopath because of Baby's code... (good video btw ^^)
Exactly! I genuinely wouldn't be surprised at all if what he means by he built baby for elizabeth WAS for her to become Baby once she was ready, but he never got to that point and he abandoned her because she ruined his experiment
Or maybe “make her just for me” was how Elizabeth interpreted it. What if William, when he was designing a robot to lure and capture kids, he based one of them off of his own daughter as a twisted sign of love for her. Who wouldn’t want to have a robot (that kills kids) modeled after them? That would make Elizabeth being the first and only kid taken by Baby completely unintended and poetically ironic.
If you think about it all the aftons kids fit the narcassitic family unit elizabeth being the golden child crying child being the forgotten child and Micheal being the scapegoat this could explain why Micheal picks on his brother so much i know older siblings do tease their younger siblings but what if Micheal bullys cc because william doesn't gave a crap about him or cc so Micheal like he literally makes Micheal fix the funtime animatronics but he let elizabeth get a look at circus baby because william sees that elizabeth is constantly trying to make him proud so he uses her as a servant a tool if you will because william doesn't care about anyone
There was a point or 2 where I took him snapping after CCs death, but more for motive-reasons. The true crime and horror fan that I am wants to know what makes him tick, to poke at his brain, to see what makes this monster. He is irredeemable and was a horrible manipulative father, but I have to say I love all the interpretations and and aus that try and give him a motive.
I agree that William doesn't need sympathy or a reason to be a killer. But my headcannon theory is that Henry designed the animatronics, for example thats how it shows him in the character encyclopedia. I think that perhaps Elizabeth got scooped by baby, and William killed Charolette because he deemed it Williams fault.
*Long comment incoming* I must admit that there are some people I have lost I desperately wish I could bring back in a positive manner, but also state I haven't truly felt like I would do **anything** to bring them back. But (x2) I don't have the power to do **anything**, and maybe I'm glad I don't; watching X-Men Apocalypse made me jealous of Magneto for having the ability to destroy something that had hurt him. THAT BEING SAID, Afton never struck me as a grieving father. I could understand hurting because you lost your child and then choosing a very dark path, but to me I always felt like Afton was jealous. He seemed like he just strangely **hated** children. I don't think he had any real reason to kill beyond hate and jealousy, right up until he did. After that it was probably even easier.
Thank you!!!!! It never sat right that people would try to give a serial child murder sympathetic traits. I’m a teacher at heart (currently not working bc of health problems) and all I ever wanted from this franchise was to hug the souls of the kids who were killed. To try to give them some semblance of a normal childhood in spite of the trauma. And I’m so grateful to see my gut feeling about this asshole is supported by evidence and that you agree with me
I hate the "immortality bs" it's convoluted & didn't help either, sometimes less is more & I'd rather have an ambiguous motive rather than a terrible one. Don't try to explain possession & grieving souls with science because with each attempt at trying to solve it, slowly the magic is fading away & the thematic metaphors of the series became literal. The original story is no where perfect but it wasn't impossible to keep track of, the story focused on the aftermath of the tragedies, how it happened don't matter because it's in the past what matters is the fate of these doomed souls in the present
I think I wish the series leaned more into Afton being obsessed with becoming an animatronic because humanity is full of death and emotion which he sees as weak. So he thinks being entirely machine is the solution to the weaknesses of humans - emotions and mortality. I like your last sentence a lot. I miss the focus on the children's souls in the present and helping them find peace.
I am personally am a believer of the “put together theory” for William. But I’d always viewed and thought William as a complex and intriguing but ultimately vile man. I always viewed William as a man who at least at some DOES or DID at one point genuinely care about his family but in a completely twisted and warped sense. I do believe that William is a sociopath with clear mental instability and narcissistic tendencies. But even narcissistic and abusive parents can ‘love’ their children. I personally think that he does care for his children and family but in an extremely overbearing, controlling and possessive manner. It’s possible he views his children as extensions of him and useful tool/trophies to be kept but also genuine but disillusioned and twisted love and affection. I think both interpretations of William could be true. But this is just a few of my personal opinion Ms and views on him and I’m just incoherently rambling in 12:54 AM rn. I could just be spouting random BS into the void as I fail to convey my mangled and racing thoughts with a barely half functioning brain.
Something that I feel is worth noting is all of Sister Location and the fact William communicated with Garret/CC with the Fredbear Plush. If you look at the wall of the SL Lobby, there are three robot heads (fitting since Afton had three kids). Two have open eyes, one has its eyes closed. The two with open eyes have blue eyes and yellow/green eyes respectively. Garret most likely had blue eyes, since we see Mike having blue eyes, and Elizabeth clearly had green ones. It's highly likely the entire point of the SL location was to research remnant to a point where William could fully understand its secrets, then implant the remnants of his dead kids into robotic bodies. Or in other words, "put them back together." It's also a bit suspicious how the Bidybabs have high-pitched, kiddy british accents, almost like Elizabeth. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that Garret's death is what drove William to commit the atrocities he did, and that his motivation to research remnant was because he wanted to save Garret and later Elizabeth. And, in a way, Michael, considering the fact there was a third robot head with its eyes closed and how he sent Mike to SL knowing that it would likely kill him. And there's of course the fact that it's suggested during Midnight Motorist that Mike was the one who ran away, likely out of guilt for what he had done, which drove William to devise a way to try and keep him inside the house so that he wouldn't lose him too (likely when he created the Illusion Discs). I could go on and on, but yeah. People love the idea of William Afton just hating everyone and everything, being every bad thing in the book from the getgo, and just killing people cause he feels like it. Which requires so much mental gymnastics and the ignoring of many plot points (like how Garret died first and not Charlie). I guess because it's impossible for someone who owned a pizzeria marketed towards kids who had a wife and kids of his own to have one point been a decent person.
@@AmirPrinceling I personally believe that William does in some extremely twisted and warped way DOES care and even genuinely Love his family but in the most messed up and overly controlling way. He made an animatronic (mostly likely) based off his ex-Wife with Ballora and even went through the effort of adding more security and a mic on C.C’s plush bear. Which I felt like William WOULDN’T have went through the EFFORT to set the extra security footage and methods up if he DIDN’T at least care even a tiny bit about his son. I really like the idea of William genuinely loving his family but only in the missed f*cked up and possessive and unhinged ways. William is an absolutely vile and unhinged individual but even the most evil of people have at least some kind of emotion, empathy, or even kindness or care. I don’t think that if William was completely evil incarnate he would have even bothered or put any effort into keeping memorabilia or even dedicated animatronics based off the people that were in his life. Why would he build Ballora if he didn’t love his wife at some point or missed her? Why would he make Circus Baby for Elizabeth? Why put the mic and camera into C.C’s beloved plush toy? In my mind if he truly didn’t care about his family in any way and only viewed them as tools or pawns then why would he bother doing all this?
@@jasminguiza6227 Pretty much, yeah. FNAF as a whole is meant to serve as a story, with its characters moving it along. Each character has their share of depth, even William. If he was totally heartless, he wouldn't have installed cameras around the neighborhood just to keep an eye on his sons while he was working, he wouldn't make a whole walkie talkie to comfort his son with, he wouldn't have made Ballora a tribute to his wife, he wouldn't have cared if Michael ran away during Midnight Motorist (or even go to the trouble of putting an animatronic outside just to keep him inside), etc.
@@AmirPrinceling It’s pretty clear that even before the murders William was *far* the best Dad. He’s clearly very neglectful and absent, too busy with his business and animatronics to properly look after his kids. But I don’t believe he started off as the abusive dead beat, not until later on. He could have possibly started out as trying to be a *decent* father until his grief, envy, anger, paranoia, bruised pride, resentment and need for control boiled over and made his finally snap. He’s still a sh*t dad no doubt about but William isn’t heartless as heartless and he personally-*WANTS* to believe he is. But at the end of the day his abuse, his neglect, his abandonment, his rage, his murders are all of William’s own free will and actions and his alone. He is the one whom decided to kidnap, kill, and hurt sooo many people (indirectly or directly) and he only has himself to blame for his behavior. William ultimately and rightfully *DESERVES* all of his punishment.
Hey, wonderful video! I fully agree. William was never depicted as a sympathetic or tragic character in any of the canon works. If Scott really was trying to push the idea of WillGrief or WillCare he would have made him that way in the books or movie just to show fanbase what kind of character William is. But instead he gave us irredeemable heartless monster. Both in the books and the movie. William simply js a psychopath who never had the capacity of feeling empathy or love. It made him bitter because he felt as though the whole world wronged him. He tries to create his perfect family several times: his human family and his animatronic family. He wanted to love. But his understanding of love and family is twisted and cruel. He wants control over everything. His children, his creations. Because this makes him feel "complete". That is my understanding of his motives which is based on canon information from the novels. Anyway, thank you for this video and have a great day!
Pretty sure c.c died first which caused William to snap and kill Henry's daughter Charlie because he partially blamed Henry sense fredbear was his creation.
I wanna say, while I really do love this video and how it finally captures how William’s character actually works There is an issue with it in the form of saying William may have build human robots in the games. We’re told how a human robot like Charlie was made and it has a supernatural element that requires love and grief, both of which you rightly say in this video that William lacks. Thats why he was so obsessed with Charlie in the novels, she was something beyond his understanding and ability to create.
Such an amazing video. You just proved what I feel others see as dificult, and therefore want William to be simpathetic, you kept him a monster AND compelling.
I take issue with your characterisation of Wandavision. The show makes it clear multiple times that, while she can control things inside the Hex, she didn't consciously create it. The magic literally explodes out of her in a moment of grief. And I don't think you can say "whether it's the games, books or movie", because they're three completely different characters with completely different stories. Movie Afton is nothing like book Afton
I don't believe I characterized her as having consciously created it, but just that she won't stop it and when she's confronted about doing so it still takes a fight. I would go deeper into the moments in the show that made me feel the way I feel, but this comment would be ridiculously long as I struggle with brevity. And I don't really mind if people disagree with how I reacted to the show. Anyway, I say "whether it's the books movies or games" because Scott is responsible for all of those portrayals of William. You can say nothing about the books has ever shown up in the games and only the names are the same, but the point is that Scott has never ever given William a sympathetic moment in the franchise. Not that the actions movie William takes parallel the games. Just that Scott has never given us a reason to see him as sympathetic. A creator's intentions matter and how Scott allows Afton to be depicted across portrayals is important. Like, we know Spider-man has infinite versions, but there are certain parts of who is a Spider-man that remain so we can still analyze that character using the comic books and movies and his games. not because they are the "same" peter parker running through those exact beats, but because the heart of who is Spider-man. Even when he's Miles Morales and is an anomaly he still embodies what we understand about Spider-man.
@@ShesNervous so you're saying that seeing a character lose both his son and his daughter isn't sympathetic? I would say that it is. I believe there is quite a lot of in-game evidence that William cares about his children, most notably the line "I will put you back together".
@@ShesNervous another point, if I may (but I don't want you to feel like I'm attacking you). Proponents of this theory are judging William based on 21st century standards. And yes, by our standards, he would be a bad father. But we only ever see William in a 1980s setting. In the 1980s, they literally used to air adverts saying "It's 10pm, do you know where your children are?" It was commonplace for parents to be hands-off with their children, or to let them deal with bullying in order to toughen them up. 80s sitcoms give us this romanticised view of parenting at the time, but Danny Tanner and Mike Brady were the exception, not the norm. My uncles used to taunt my mother in much the same way Mike does to CC (jumping out and scaring them), and my grandparents let them get away with it. But my mom wouldn't say she had bad parents. I'm not trying to argue that William is father of the year. To me, he's just a workaholic single father (Mrs A doesn't seem to be in the picture) who is a product of his time. He's not the best judging by 21st century standards, but I don't see any reason to doubt that he loves his kids, as any normal parent would. Couple with that the fact that he's a provider, he gives CC all the plushies he wants, he puts on a party for CC's birthday, he lets Mike stay up late watching TV, and Elizabeth genuinely seems to believe that he built Baby for her, I think there's a case to be made that he indulges his kid. Maybe not good parenting, but an act of love.
@cameronhodgetts920 I don't think I lack sympathy for someone losing a child, no. I am saying he isn't a villain because something bad happened to him. He's a villain because he has always been an egotistical and jealous human which effectively inhibits his ability to be a caring father. I don't care particularly if people think William loved his kids, but there is objectively no evidence that he valued them as more than his property. My proposition is he was hurt about losing them the way you'd be mad if someone totalled your car. We disagree and that's okay.
@@ShesNervous you're right, we do disagree, and that's fine. Although quite ironically, my position is exactly the opposite. I think there is plenty of in-game evidence that he loved his children, and no in-game evidence that he was egotistical or jealous. I hesitate to use the books in this way because Scott has always been clear that they are "a reimagining of the Freddy's story", so I don't think we should infer motivations onto Afton 1 based on events that happened to Afton 2, which may not have happened to Afton 1. Particularly when it comes to jealousy of Henry.
THIS. This exactly what i mean when we say that Afton is just evil. Because that's what he's been always portrayed like. Because it has a narrative weight to it. Because it allows us to think of him in much more interesting ways, motivations and interpretations. And i would say that, while most people say that making him sympathetic doesn't mean that they justify his actions... they sometimes do, even unwittingly. They do not say "Afton because a serial killer because of the loss of his son", they say "Afton became a villain after the tragic and painful loss of his beloved son..". It's not the same! And make him sympathetic inherently and unconsciously makes us rationalize his actions. I've seen it much more in non-theorist portions of the fandom, where William's actions are depicted not as a man killing children, but as "a poor man that lost everything he had, whose only wish is to bring his beloved son back!". His actions are not explained, they are justified. And that's, i think, my biggest issue with this sympathetic interpretations of the character: the line separating explaination from justification is VERY fuzzy. It's like, why are you trying to justify and humanize a man that literally killed like 11 kids, and his own family!? And while i understand that making Afton just evil because yes might sound depthless, i would say it's more a way of not justifying the villain's actions, and giving him a much more deep and even religious arc as a monster, disguised as a man, doing all he can in order to reject his humanity and mortality. I think it has a lot of narrative weight! This video is a really good dive on Afton's character, and why he probably isn't, and shouldn't be seen as, a sympathetic villain. I love the editing, the pacing, and the writting. Amazing!
I'm sure someone else has said it somewhere already, but I've always seen William Afton's motivation of "fixing" his dead children to be more about control and possession than grief. In his mind he owned his children, and it's his job to put the crying child back together like you might glue together a broken vase. A popular fanfiction by pearlandpine on ao3 exemplifies the type of characterization I've always read from William.
YES? THIS! I posted a video joking and implying they fact he DID NOT care about his kids like so many others believe and I got so many replies about how I’m wrong and “actually he only hates Mike” and it blows my mind.😭
Please tell me that I wasn’t the only one who thought of the opening quote of avenged sevenfold’s bat country when she said the last line of the closing statement. “HE WHO MAKES A BEAST OUT OF HIMSELF GETS RID OF THE PAIN OF BEING A MAN.”
I’ve been watching your videos and I totally agree 100 percent. *Despite* the many strange lore points pointing toward Afton in some way grieving the loss of his children, (for example the SL passcode 1983, telling Mike to free Elizabeth, Steelwool mentioning they want a villain to have buildup by being at first somewhat normal) we should NOT feel sympathetic for him whatsoever, as the series goes on, he becomes more deranged and demented, notably Scraptrap, in fnaf 6 he’s seen in my eyes even more egotistical, insane, and lacking any and I mean ANY empathy even for his children that are in the same building. Glitchtrap for example is an extremely violent and dangerous version of him that clearly points he only wants what he wants. Even if it’s cannon that he did grieve for a little, no sympathy for him should be what we’re doing.
Afton did this when his son died and killed Charlotte to get even with Henry which was pretty unfair. Afton soon found out Charlotte and BV possessed Puppet and Golden Freddy. Afton needed to understand the concept. This leads to Remmnant(link of a soul to whatever the remmnant is attached to) and dark remmnant(bad emotions like hatred, sadness, wickedness and of course agony). Afton is quite evil and wickedness to a point so deep where all his humanity is gone and Afton is pure evil to the creation of Shadow Freddy and RWQFSFASXC. Afton is someone who becomes pure evil. This was stated many times in the books of Fazbear Frights in The man in room 1280.
This is why people justifying him or Whatever pisses me off so Much The evidence is EVERYWHERE like open your eyes! They always say "oh no the books Aren't canon to the games" or "the movie Aren't canon to the games and that was Vanessa not Elizabeth" like yeah it's not Canon TO THE GAMES but! They ARE still canon UNIVERSES like the book universe, movie universe and game universe are all canon the games are just the MAIN universe we follow
@@Void-r3b no he dosen't He manipulates her, blames her for he's mess, and he literally stabs her and chokes her Not to mention the scene Where Mike Asks her to come with him to save Abby and She says "i won't be any use to you BELIEVE me" and mike says "wow he Really messed you up didn't he?" Implying her obvious trauma of it All and is terrified to face her own Dad He only cares About her in the way that She can be useful to him Think About it She's a cop It's Perfect for William She can Help and has helped him Get away with he's crimes by leading the police to a dead end He's Manipulative and Abusive towards her and it's wild Some of ya'll can't See that
Bruh, purple dude in the games did not pay attention to his son's bullying, then tried to kill his eldest son, if we take the theory that he is an orange guy, then it gets even worse because he insulted his child. In the trilogy, he beat his daughter and did not feel grief when she died, then told her In front of her that she was not enough and used her as an ordinary minion to achieve his vicious goals. In Fazbear Frights, he is described as an evil who wants to cause pain. In the movie, he fucking stabbed his daughter with a knife. And people keep saying that he loved his children in his own way? He has self-awareness and he doesn't give a shit about his children and the people around him. He doesn't love anyone, he can't even love in his own way. He is a psychopathic narcissist and pure evil.
Interesting I personally think that william afton is supposed to have a reason to become the villian we have since steelwoll talked about how they wanted him to be a more sympathetic villian since they found that more interesting. I do believe william cared for his children, just not in a way normal parents do. There might be a bit of love in there but i think he mostly cared about them because they were his and he had controll over them and they made others think more highly of him.
Yeah, I put the line "if he has a reason it's before the events of FNAF as we know them" because it DOES feel like Steel Wool is setting something up to explain his origins. I just don't think the reason is being gried stricken over the loss of his kids. If they try to make it that, they'll be retconning so much of what we know about Afton and that will infuriate me 😂
I think your thinking is far too narrow and lacking in nuance. William can absolutely be a bad father, a horrible person, a control freak, and deeply envious of Henry, while ALSO being a grieving father who (believes he) loves his children and has actual reasons for the horrible things he does. He can simultaneously be a complex villain that doesn't just do things for the heck of it without being a sympathetic character.
The WandaVision comparison is so interesting. I agree Wanda was absolutely the villain of her story. She wasn't intentionally or knowingly trying to hurt anyone but that doesn't make the events any less harmful. Afton as he has almost always been portrayed is much more sinister. Maybe less enjoyable of a villain for some, but absolutely realistic. Many of us wouldn't like to admit it but some people see their children as tools and not much else. So both are similar with different intentions. But at the end of the day both are acting the role of villain. Abusers can come in all shades, learned behavior, manipulative liars, absentee parents... these can all lead to abuse. Thank you for discussing this topic and putting words to things I had been sensing from some places in the fanbase but couldn't fully put words too.
FNAF has enough sympathetic villains, William is one of only 2 pure evil ones in this entire franchise (the other being Elenor) and I wish more people would see it that way
You are correct. Henry, in the books, ignores his living child (Sammy) and "similarly to Henry, William's grief causes him to ignore his only living child - Michael." They both (in different continuities) end up neglecting a living son. Though to further clarify- I don't actually believe William ignored Michael out of grief. That's just me explaining what others have stated. I think he ignored Michael because he blamed him for CC death and overall thought he was useless and thus not worthy of his attention. He only reached out to Michael when he thought his son could be of use to him.
@@ShesNervous honestly I see your point in the whole video. I don't know a part of me just wants William to have at least some shred of humanity and I'm not sure why, I'm not exactly one to look for the good in people if I don't see it
@@daviddimitrov3696I completely understand and I don't think you are alone! Steel Wool (seemingly) wants to reach that human part of Afton we've yet to have explicitly shown to us in the franchise. I'm excited to see how they potentially tackle it with Fall Fest. I'm not against him getting that back story, I'm just against the idea that he was a loving father. 😂
The books are a separate continuity. It’s really simple to understand. Just like the Marvel comics are not happening in the MCU ,the books are not happening in the games or the movie please stop acting like it’s all the same story 🫡
Themes/patterns and literal crossover are not the same thing. At absolutely no point did I make the assertion otherwise. I am saying Scott Cawthon has never, in any iteration of William, made him a sympathetic character. It's important to point to Scott's intention with the character. It would be so silly to act like the books and movies are some complete departure from how Scott FEELS about Afton and who he wants that character to be. The Marvel comics are not literally happening in the MCU, but Wanda Maximoff in the comics is /also/ a sympathetic villain whose motivation is finding a universe where she can be with her twin boys. Her journey to that moment is objectively different, but the core of her character is still the same/very similar. There are character traits that crossover. I don't think Charlie-bot is a part of the games. I don't think Afton only has one child. I don't think Golden Freddy is a kid named Michael. I could go on and on. I DO think Afton, across all of his different iterations, is ALWAYS a bad father who has a jealous heart and unsympathetic motivations.
@@ShesNervous My comment was more a bulletin for the comments section, rather than trying to imply that different continuities contradicted your argument. I’m sorry if it came off this way. I agree that we are not meant to sympathize with Afton at all. The way I have interpreted the game (I’ve only read the Silver Eyes and gotten a synopsis of the other books and the movie isn’t enough to bite into yet) has made me sympathetic towards him as losing your wife(whether she’s dead or just left him) and two of your children, one at the hands of your own son would make anyone snap. I think that’s the REASON he kills children I think things can be reasonable and still unacceptable and he is not to be redeemed nor should he be imprisoned for all eternity “leave the Demon to his Demons”. What’s done is done and now all that have suffered deserve to rest.
There is also this wonderful quote in The Silver Eyes about William: "Before him stood someone who had spent so much of his life fighting like a cornered rat that he had taken on the mantle of bitter sadism as an integral part of himself. He would strike out against others and revel in their pain, feeling rightously that the world owed him his cruel pleasures." To me he seems to genuinely revel in causing harm to others. It seems like exerting control and killing is one of his main motivators. I even believe he likes the idea of being viewed like the boogyman and a monster. His voice lines do reflect that in the AR game.
I was thinking the same thing that C.C's death lead to the man's madness it kind of reminds me of Miraculous as where Gabriel lost his wife and went mad to harm people to resurrect his wife. But Afton's madness went to extreme that he cared for his own life over his son and daughter as he didn't wanted to die and killed kids to become immortal. Similar to Gabriel he could have saved his wife in the episode Evolution where he travelled back in time and could have left the recipe of to fix a damaged jewel that caused his wife's death. But he feared for his opponent taking his miraculous and cared for his miraculous over his wife.
Actually, it has been confirmed by the lorekeeper that he did snap due to his kids deaths, but you should not sympathize with him, because he still did an evil act, and the fact he snapped was because he did have dark thoughts, and was not truly a mentally stable man. His heart was filled with greed and jealousy.
Yee in canon William is pure evil but how most of the fandom try depict him as a monster who cares about his family making him more three-dimensional and make him more interesting.
I am so glad im not the only one who thinks that.the only time i can recall gaining sympathy towards william was when i was a newbie to the lore and worked my way in with the help of popular headcannons.and ever since that,it just makes me rage whenever i see a theory that portrays william as poor sad dad killer .if you think about it,the only reaspn why i wouldnt mind killing for my child is if someone directly intented to hurt them .but in williams case,no one harmed him except his narcissistic beliefs and ego.henry never created fredbear with the intention of murdering cc and even if he did charlie didnt help him .also,i hate it when people use "ill put you back together"or him warning Elizabeth not to go near baby as proof that he cared about them. I've interpreted "ill put you back together"as william just doing it to satisfy his curiosity as what will happen.if he really cared he would just let cc rest in peace,also it doesn't make sense that after he neglected him and did nothing to stop micheal from bullying him and setting his birthday at the place of his worst nightmares that he'd be willing to get his son back .and him warning Elizabeth, 99.99999% of parents know that words do absolutely nothing to convince children to be obedient,and not just that.i especially hate it when people make it seem like Elizabeth was his favourite so he didnt hurt her,he just was too broken.NO HE WASNT.literally there is millions of proof that he abused her,manipulated her and neglected her in the books.i've always viewed william as a heartless father who only used his children as trophies,and when he found that neither micheal nor cc could represent him as the perfect business man,Elizabeth was just the perfect tool for him,but after circus baby killed her ,william,seeing that not only did she fall short of his expectation, but also ruined his experiment ,he decided to let her suffer knowing he has the knowlege necessary to save her.also a head cannon i have is that he saw micheal as a substitute or replacement for Elizabeth in case something happened to her which ofcourse,she dies and now there's only the other child left he can manipulate for the sake of his curiosities.i just feel like everypne is so focused on theorising to the point where the story is just irrelevant and everyone is trying to find the occams razor for those "unnecessary"bits to continue theorising.it makes me sad because what got me into fnaf was the story and i see very little people on youtube atleast do character analysis and stuff that expands on the story.im glad i found this video ,keep going!
Just a suggestion you might want to split and space your stuff into paragraphs. As your wall of text is kind of hard to read. This would be much appreciated thank you.
I recently had a small thought, but I'm not sure if it's relevant... What if William was a single father? It would make more "sence" to be neglectful of him for that, since he'd have to try to balance work and his family (And since he's a narcissist, and prefers his craft, he'd obviusly priorotize work.), plus we never see Mrs. Afton anywhere in the games! Unless you think the person on the couch in the "Later that night" is her (And in that scene, she's just also being neglectful), or the wierd Angel-like being(?) from Fnaf World is her, then we've never seen her!
im 99% afton is just a killer with no filler. in the reasonable 1% chance otherwise, cc dies first, then 4 kids, then charlie but that kinda only works if the 4 kids he killed were related to cc death so imma shut up now
"My name is Springtrap. I'm more than Afton ever was and far more then Henry" says a lot with so little.
AGREED 👏👏👏 I cannot believe people don't point to it more.
It says that a man was trapped alone in a sealed room for 30 years. Have you ever looked up what total isolation in a blank room does to a person? Genuine warning, don't do so if you're faint of heart. It is scarring. After 30 years of that situation, he would have absolutely no sanity left.
@cameronhodgetts920 He never went through that in the books, though, which is where this quote is coming from.
@@cameronhodgetts920 It's not a quote from the games, Novel Afton was only springlocked a year beforehand and I think he got out of Freddy's even sooner
@@thetuned6972 well that's more proof that book Afton and game Afton are completely different
“And what is it … h-he?” Arthur stammered.
“Evil, Father Blythe. Evil pure and simple.”
-The Man In Room 1280
May i mind you these people don't know Afton commited those crimes and such, he's just so evil and in agony that people can literally sense it, similar to an aura.
I much prefer this interpretation. The more I dig into fanaf lore the more I feel William didn’t really care all that much about his family. I think it was necessary to seem like the picture perfect father to the outside world and that’s all.
yesssss
I understand the desire to give Afton more sympathetic motivations as a storytelling tool, but its always bothered me because its always seems contrary to any and all evidence. Micheal's backstory is sympathetic, he was a stupid teenager bullying his little brother and went too far and feels immense grief about that, before finding out about his father's actions and wanting to put a stop to them.
Even if you assume that William is Psychic Friend Fredbear and says he'll "put you back together" and Orange Guy isnt William, giving Afton the maximum amount of leeway, he doesnt care about CC being bullied, SL actually made that worse for him by retconning the plushie as William with a Walkie Talkie, and somehow Mike(or Willaim himself) gets access to the Parts and Service Room to lock CC in.
The books even go further out of their way to say "hes always been a monster"
In "What We Found" our protagonist Hudson works in the FNaF3 location, taking Micheal's assumed position as security guard and when Hudson looks at Springtrap he specifically sees his own abusive father.
In "The Man In Room 1280" the story where Afton is being tortured and quite literally being kept alive by Andrew, the book version of Cassidy, the story goes out of its way to make sure you arent sympathetic to him, calling him evil incarnate, similar to how in UCN the only time our PoV isnt William being tortured, OMC refers to Afton as "the demon" while Afton is cursing Mikes name in the background.
The only two thibgs i can think of that makes William show any level of care for his kids is one of his death quotes as Scraptrap where he describes killing Micheal as "bittersweet" and "The Real Jake" where Jake describes his brother as being kind of robotic and caring about money, an allusion to Mike, while the voice over the Jake doll's Walkie Talkie is his father's.
Compared to how Mike's character growth has been very clear and slow based on what little information we get about him, Afton hasn't had any sign of his "good guy" phase. Comparing back to Wandavision for instance, which i think does this kind of sympathetic story well, we see Wanda before Wandavision and understand exactly why shes doing her actions. Shes in denial and desperately wants her family back, her husband, fake kids, and brother. We get to see her at her lowest moment, when she attacks Thanos in Endgame. The MCU does with Wanda what people try to connect with Afton pretty well. Also the timeline for Wandavision + MoM is much smaller and tighter than the what 50 years inbetween 1983 and SB? If were saying Gregory and Vanessa are the two robotic versions of the two kids who didnt set William on fire.
Oh yes, I agree with all this, but i don't think the line "bittersweet" when he kills michael is a show of care because he has other line where he says "That what EASIER than I thought it would be", so I think that he says that it's bittersweet because, yes, it's sweet because he killed him and that was his goal but it's bitter because it was so fucking easy that he doesn't feel it so sadisfactory
and, btw, he has really said "skill issue" to his son. that's so funny to me
@@Blueberrypie62 oh yes I agree that the bittersweet line is reaching I was just thinking of that line and figured I'd mention it as something that could POSSIBLY be read into as him caring
Interesting, I'd always just accepted the grieving father "put you back together" theory. However, when you last out things this way it's fairly obvious - he's a sociopath.
Yeah, I personally read that line as very flippant. Not upset just, he'll put him back together as something better so it's okay he died
@@ShesNervous looking at it now I wonder if them emphasis there is on the "I" and not on fixing the loss of his son. All that matters is this is something else William can control. Not even death is beyond his control.
I will put you back together is referring to molten Freddy
I was gonna say, I always liked the idea more of him being a serial killer who stumbled into mad scientist; anything else felt like people were trying to justify (obviously only the breaking point and not the actions; but the waters were muddied in some areas) his murder spree. I’m a teacher, one who fell in love with the franchise cuz the teacher in me wanted to gather the hurting souls and help them, provide them safety from he horror. Goofy, probably. But i firmly believe only monsters attack and harm children on purpose (accidental collateral is different, like mike and cc). It’s why I loved movie Afton so much. He was really JUST a serial killer. Well and the glorious Matthew Lillard
Edit: I am still less than 4 minutes in, so… I wanna clarify I do not hate anyone who wants to make an interesting villain. Or hate on anyone in the fandom at all. This is just the version of the story I like more
When the abuser pits two or more victims against each other, he feels that he is in control, after all, the main problem is left aside. William ''cared'' about his children in his sick way, but it doesn't mean he was a good person, he obviously felt the loss of C.C and probably went crazy because of it, he lost the control he had, selfish as he was, he couldn't admitting that the mistake was his, he let the blame bleed to others and that was his ruin.
!!!
I did have a line in an early version of this script about how Afton saw the CC dead as Henry's fault for creating the animatronics and Mike's fault for doing the deed, rather than HIS fault for being an absent father.
Well said. C.C. can be a significant catalyst for William’s actions without making him sympathetic or framing him as a good person and father. C.C.’s death just gave William an excuse and a twisted justification to kill Charlie to get back at Henry.
I thought Circus Baby was narrating this video until i looked at my screen.
Omg this is the 2nd comment I've seen saying that. If anyone needs a Circus Baby voice actor I'm available 🙋🏻♀️
I feel like Afton cared in his own twisted way, but it wasn't okay and by no means was it enough. He never gave his children the attention they needed, he always prioritized literally everything else. They were all neglected and died because of said negligence.
Ive always seen Afton like an actor, a desire for immortality simply being the cherry on top
He adopts the fantastical sadism of a slasher while Springtrap and exaggerates his cool cunning persona while Scraptrap, sure some emotions MAY be there like when he's audibly disappointed at how easy it was to murder Michael, but other than that he only truly cares about being immortalized; whether literally via possession and successors, or metaphorically via his influence being everywhere.
Just the idea of a man, a monster, whatever Afton is always coming back simply because it's what any good villain does is actually a little creepy as it's no longer "pee paw Afton got his foot stuck on some cables again, another fire in his history I suppose" but now it's "how the actual hell does this guy keep surviving fires". It adds an idea that William could potentially be FAR worse, but his audience enjoys (or well, is terrified of) his current persona, thus he keeps it.
I believe he was a "Sociopath in Remission". He masked well enough to function in society, get a wife and raise a few children, maybe even tricked himself into believing that bringing joy to kids through Fredbear and Friends was his life mission, but he never really felt love for anyone, and he was always truly motivated by his agony. He lost the mask from the grief, simply uncovering what was always underneath, a deeply disturbed and immoral man obsessed with undeath at the cost of as many lives as it takes.
Some people GENUINELY do try and defend this man and vilify his victims
Like an amount you wouldn’t BELIEVE
Anyone would defend him if they understood his pain. The children that were killed aren't innocent either, they are just as bad because they also killed innocent people (the guards) I think that the children should find peace when they finally forgive Afton. No one can really find true peace until they let all of their grudges go.
Its in the nature of many people to try to find the good in everyone, a reason to not hate someone and to forgive. I myself try to find the good in all people.
@@jesshowler9904 DID YOU WATCH THE VIDEO
WHAT PAIN
HE WAS A NEGLECTFUL ABUSER WHO MURDERED KIDS
THEY ARE NOT NEARLY AS BAD AS HIM
THEY BARELY REMEMBER ANYTHING AND HAVE UNDERDEVELOPED BRAINS😭
NIGGA YOU TRIPPING 💀💀
You just wanna defend a child killer
@@jesshowler9904 what the hell 😭 "the children he killed weren't innocent" is CRAZY. this has gotta be some weird ass bait.
@@Blue-ux4skWHO LET BRO COOK
@@jesshowler9904 "the kids aren't innocent because they killed the guards too"
What interesting way your mind works.
The only time i ever see afton thinking a kid of his is good is when ggy was the wizard's favorite apprentice..
So yeah, that says a lot about him when it took him to die and be scanned into a literal AI to appreciate someone even if in a possessive manner..
Cause it feels more like a "im proud of my puppet" kinda relationship
Its not like gregory was his normal self at that point
William is one of those villains that does make you question, why?
For me, I never thought William was pure evil, he was just so consumed with his grief and work.
William had everything, yet he lost it all, becuase he wasn’t a better dad. Obviously running a business can take a mental toll on someone, and make it where he spends less time with his family.
While I do feel bad for William for losing his kids, at the same time, he got what he wanted and deserved at the end. He knows it’s his own fault, he just doesn’t want to admit it.
He says, “I always come back”, and in UCN, that’s literally the case. He dies and keeps coming back, while he screams in the void for Michael to help him. I am glad Fnaf’s newer timeline is focusing on the whole rogue AI thing, because UCN is a fitting end for William. Not only does he face all the monsters he created, he also got his immortality by dying over and over again forever.
Granted it’s because of Cassidy, but she ends up being The Princess, no longer connected with William, but he’s probably still suffering.
Do I think it’s sad William lost his kids? Yes
Do I think William deserved to suffer the loss of his kids? No
Does William deserve to suffer for everything he’s done? Absolutely
Edit: Regardless to what Williams motive is, he got what he deserved in the end with UCN. Steel Wool even said that they want to make a game about the origins of Fazbear Entertainment, and go j to how William isn’t just some mindless heartless monster.
I would love to see an origin story to how William became bitter to the world.
William didn’t “have it all”. Sure, on the outside he looks like he had a great life and a big family and thriving business but he didn’t love any of it. He hates everyone around him and harms his own family. In his mind, he didn’t lose anything when his kids died, only gained
Pretty much how I view William
Villains who snap after a tragedy and become obsessed with rectifying it, losing themselves in the process, have always fascinated me, because you can sympathise with what they've lost whilst condemning who they've become
I truly believe William *did* care about his kids at one point in his life. After the bite, I can buy that he became abusive towards Michael. I don't think William *is* a good father, I think he *was* a decent father whose prioritisation over his business and less-than-stellar comforting of his youngest son (Fredbear plush) served as contributing factors for his own family's downfall
I can sympathise with what William has lost and that he cares, but I can also see that he became an irredeemable, child-murdering, sociopathic monster who *did* end up becoming abusive towards Michael (and possibly Elizabeth but I don't see that as likely) deserves punishment because he's become completely lost in his spiteful, grief-fuelled "the ends justify the means" obsession
I think Afton is the player in Midnight Motorist. I think Afton, after the Crying Child's death, became a violent drunk towards Michael and emotionally/physically abused him. I don't think Afton was always an abusive father, but that's who he ended up becoming down the line. It was tragic what happened, but his actions towards Michael and his victims were entirely of his own volition
@@mrsurge4789 William is incapable of caring for others
@@mrsurge4789 yeah
William in The Man In Room 1280 clearly states he is pure and evil
A few years ago I shied away from an argument with a comment section under a community post asking “what Afton you think deserves a hug most.” I thought it would be Michael or CC but William was the first pick by a large margin.
So I went to the comment section and wrote “The number of people who chose William is concerning.” And 3-4 people actually responded all telling me I just didn’t understand, but one person elaborated. Apparently even though William has done some terrible things he “doesn’t deserve to be tortured” and has “suffered enough. :(“
Sure. Tell that to the extended families of the kids he’s murdered. Or his 3 kids he neglected, emotionally manipulated, and abused. Or Henry. The list goes on. William was never charged for his crimes nor took any form of accountability as far as we know. He most certainly deserves everything that was coming to him.
I was 13 when I first saw that community post. Now I’m 17 and I honestly should’ve held my ground back then.
Exactlyyyyy. HE doesn't feel bad about what he did.
imo I bet he thinks he did those kids a favor letting them live forever as beloved characters and getting to "play" all day.
It's like feeling bad for John Wayne Gacy because he was bisexual. I am not going to feel bad for someone who turned their insecurities and fears into the reason someone had to die.
Finally someone realising that he's a horrible father
I think this is a fair assessment. The only case to be made against it really is that he's "lost in the sauce", that if he's operating on the assumption that he can, eventually, resurrect people if his "research" goes well, and that the end justifies the means. Sort of a sunk cost fallacy thing. Like, I murdered one kid, the only way I can square that is to murder enough kids to figure out how to un-murder kids. Not that I would call that sympathetic necessarily, but at least comprehensible. Good theory
Honestly it really bothers me how often people see these vile characters and immediately try to make them sympathetic to justify liking the character.
For whatever reason we just can’t enjoy villains because they’re good villains.
But a villain without motivation is not a good villain. If Afton is just going around killing kids for the hell of it, he's not a good villain.
@@cameronhodgetts920 villains can have motives without said motives being sympathetic
@@Ultra_JTB yes, but because of the lack of evidence in the games, we can't infer an alternative motive. There are very few things we know about game William, and one of the most important ones is that he is a dad whose kids die
@@cameronhodgetts920 except for the fact that the books tell us he had an intense jealousy of Henry, as well as a fascination with the properties of remnant.
So we can infer that his motive was a combination of wanting to ruin Henry and advance in the science of remnant.
@@Ultra_JTB no we can't. Scott Cawthon described the books as "a reimagining of the FNAF story". To use an analogy, it would be like saying "we know MCU Spider-Man will marry MJ because Sam Raimi Spider-Man married MJ". They may be the same characters, but they're in different stories.
the sympathetic afton idea seems to be one of the things matpat has infected the fnaf theorising spaces and now we can’t get rid of it lol
I think there's this idea popping up in media recently that villains need this emotional backstory to be a good/interesting villain. Amd thats not really true.
Sympathic villains are fun(if done right) but sometimes people are just bad. They can have the whole world handed to them on a silver platter and still want more from life,and take everyone down with them for it.
Same with redeemed villains. There some people in this world that you dont owe forgiveness. You can forgive for yourself,but you dont have to let them back in your life,or clear them of all they done.
Afton can be a fun villain with being sympathetic. Sometimes,villains being unsympathetic can be even more fun.
We see no clear evidence he ever loved his children in the way Henry did. But we see all the evidence of him being very in his own head.
I always saw him as seeing a chance to live forever,and do so much more. And in a way he achieved that,even if living forever meant being without a full free life.
The only problem with this is that Help Wanted 2 basically confirmed that Charlie died LAST, after all the other missing children. So him killing the others wasn't a result of him wanting to understand what happened to Charlie. I do agree that Charlie's death was most likely to get back at Henry. But now he needs a whole new motivation for every other kid before Charlie. Which is why I believe we still don't have enough pieces of the puzzle to figure out William's motivations. I still heavily doubt they're sympathetic in any way, but there's definitely more than meets the eye in my opinion.
It’s my belief that William DID begin the killings because he was upset at Crying Child’s death, however I believe he was upset in the same way you might be if someone wrecked your car or broke your phone. The way William treats his kids when they’re alive makes me think he views them more as property than people, a common trait among parents as horrible as him. I imagine he was furious when Crying Child died he was furious that such a valuable item had been rendered unusable by one of his other creations (Micheal), and in his incoherent and unjustified rage, he decided to steal one of Henry’s most valuable possession from him and kill Charlie. After that he just kept going.
Make no mistake, I don’t think Crying Child or any of the Aftons are robots, I mean that’s just the way William views them. Probably lends come credence to, “I will put you back together”. They’re like broken toys to him, or robots, more accurately.
EXACTLY THIS
Adore this video and fully agree. One key detail I'd like to add is that the funtimes seem to be the "better" more superior versions of his own family. We know Baby was inspired by Elizabeth, and in TFC Elizabeth's goal is to live up to what circus baby truly is, an obedient killer for her dad.
But its not just Elizabeth. Many people have pointed out the ballora comparison. Ballora being blind because perhaps william wishes his own wife in real life was blind to the monster he truly is. We see ballora as a motherly figure to the minirenas, and in UCN she talks to william almost as a representation of a lover at one point. "Ballora never learns" baby says, because ballora was made to be left in the dark, blind to the horrors of whats going on, just like william wishes his wife was.
Then we have funtime freddy. A bear whos obsessed with birthdays, and has a plush friend to calm him down. The fnaf 4 bite victim died on his birthday, and also had a plush friend to calm him down. His personality is the total opposite of the BV (bite victim) loud and outspoken, bloodthirsty. William's "better version" of his own son. "One big happy family" could actually just refer to molten freddy himself, representations of the aftons merged together. Molten freddy being the first antagonist for michael in ffps is fitting too, a representation of the brother he killed.
And then lastly we have funtime foxy. A silent fox animatronic who hides in the shadows. The only canonical jumpscare. Michael was a silent protagonist up until sister location custom night, and he speaks of "living in shadows" very similar to funtime foxy. Its in these shadows that mike experiences the only canonical jumpscare, at the hands of the animatronic that represents him. Perhaps william wishes he was silent and obedient, instead of rash and eventually disloyal like we see in the bite of 83 and eventually in fnaf 6/fnaf 3 when mike turns against william. Funtime foxy follows baby's orders to kidnap mike, showing his obedience. In UCN, aftons personal torment, this is broken free and funtime foxy is completely independent and loud and outspoken, diverting from William's wishes for michael. We see in the logbook michael has a creative artist side that is probably supressed due to being under William's thumb.
Or none of this was intended and im delusional but who knows. Again, great video. I love your presentation.
Even if not intended, I love this connection/interpretation of the fun times
Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts!
I love this connection too. I never thought of this
I appreciate this video, people really get caught up in headcannons and let it cloud their vision of the story. AUs and headcannons are fine, but there's already a story to enjoy and theorize about!
I saw the idea of Fredbear's "let me put you back together, and take you apart all over again" as a way he views his kids for experimenting, and the rush he'd get out of it.
One particular factor for Matpat making William sympathetic in his timeline was a Steel Wool 2022 interview saying 'try not make a scary monster without reason'. Though recently, I think this may've been intended for Roxy given how she got built out last year. The interview also was pre Ruin...
And many book stories look to have their antagonists just flat out evil, like Eleanor.
Afton was a cruel man killing kids as well as the employees at or near the restaurant. Can anyone really believe that this man had any sort of decency within him after turning on Henery his business partner? No? his brother or should I say Ex brother.
I was always so deeply bothered by people using the theory that he talks through the walkie talkie to CC as "evidence" that he cares about his kids. If he does, why is he making his son have a birthday party at a place that scares him so badly he collapses to the floor in tears? Why isn't he actually doing anything to stop the abuse Michael puts him through? Why does he just let this son he supposedly cares so much about suffer?
Not to mention Midnight Motorist, not letting your children have their own privacy i.e locking their bedroom door is just...textbook abuse.
Yes, someone else pointed out something similar that I agree with and have thought as well.
If he IS able to see everything Michael is doing to CC it is WORSE because he refuses to intervene despite being the parent.
Actually, there one line represent the way william afton was thinking the whole time
William Afton-"i am one of them"
william afton see the ghost kids as his family, that why he always bring them back
this look sympathetic, but isn't, his ego has no limits
william afton doesn't care world domination, but being the main attraction of this show of horror forever
He don't feel any empaty, not because he has none, its has because he see no value what happened to them
isn't not enough for him to feel any, because he is beyond death
he can revived his child, so why he should care if his child died again because of research
do you think, he just forget the crying child after the bite?
the same dude was breaking circus baby and rebuilding her up, again and again for decades?
i never said once that william afton is sympathetic villain, but a egocentric villain, has no limits for his actions
but he isn't a simple character, that killed for the sake of it
do you think he is angry for the vengeful spirit maintaing him alive forever?
actually i am absolute sure, that he is very thankful for it
in the books after charlie springlock him
William Afton Thanks her, now he beyond what is before
he mess up his children with the thing about immortality
Mikes just want everything in fnaf to end, this tragedy burn to ground
Elizabeth only want to play it, she is really bored, she is torturing william afton forever together Cassidy(her best childhood friend), and just for the sake of william to suffer, a twisted charlie
Cassidy(Gregory/Crying Child) he see life as just pain, life and death was not difference for him anymore,he can just be revived as robot kid, and in security breach proof robots can flesh regenerate above the metal endo
even the bite 1983 was accident,even the crying child isn't anger at all against mike
Elizabeth pretends not being angry, but she is very angry at him
Mikes deserves to be scooper by circus baby, after he caused bite 1983
now in security breach, steel wool is trying to put gregory as mastermind and vannesa as his assistant
there confirmation show gregory was possessed during the therapy
when therapist said, someone get mangle by robots, gregory just laughs of it
because gregory is a mess up kid, its likely he doesn't any value to life, or he see not difference of being dead
in trilogy
i mean if william have killed john, Circus Baby was likely she will kill william after that
she takes her relationship with john far more serious than her relationship william afton
it always bother me when people use elizabeth (in games) to make a point of why they think william cared for his kids.
like, yeah, he told elizabeth to not get close to baby, but just that, he just do "mmhg" to her, you can't tell me that he was trying. and why did he bring her in first place???? he has an older son to take care of her. no, "let's bring my daugther to the place with child-killer robots that, btw, I told her that one of them was for her". But that is not the worst part, the worst part is WHAT he did when elizabeth was killed. He just left her. He abandon her as baby, a funtime, the funtimes were eletrocuted on a daily basis and we know that they can feel PAIN.
So he basically left his daughter totally separated from her family meters underground where she was tortured for years. I no longer believe that Elizabeth has become a sociopath because of Baby's code...
(good video btw ^^)
Exactly! I genuinely wouldn't be surprised at all if what he means by he built baby for elizabeth WAS for her to become Baby once she was ready, but he never got to that point and he abandoned her because she ruined his experiment
Really good point I didn't even think about that. Video Game timeline Afton was probably going to put his kid in the Baby animatronic anyway.
Or maybe “make her just for me” was how Elizabeth interpreted it. What if William, when he was designing a robot to lure and capture kids, he based one of them off of his own daughter as a twisted sign of love for her. Who wouldn’t want to have a robot (that kills kids) modeled after them? That would make Elizabeth being the first and only kid taken by Baby completely unintended and poetically ironic.
If you think about it all the aftons kids fit the narcassitic family unit elizabeth being the golden child crying child being the forgotten child and Micheal being the scapegoat this could explain why Micheal picks on his brother so much i know older siblings do tease their younger siblings but what if Micheal bullys cc because william doesn't gave a crap about him or cc so Micheal like he literally makes Micheal fix the funtime animatronics but he let elizabeth get a look at circus baby because william sees that elizabeth is constantly trying to make him proud so he uses her as a servant a tool if you will because william doesn't care about anyone
this is too real 🥲
Who feels sympathy for a Purple Guy whose sprite literally SMILED during every cruel thing he did? lmao wat
There was a point or 2 where I took him snapping after CCs death, but more for motive-reasons. The true crime and horror fan that I am wants to know what makes him tick, to poke at his brain, to see what makes this monster. He is irredeemable and was a horrible manipulative father, but I have to say I love all the interpretations and and aus that try and give him a motive.
This video is great and all but I could think about was how you sound exactly like Circus Baby. Guess it is fitting though.
hahaha, this is the first I've gotten that but now I'm gonna hear nothing else while editing 😂
@@ShesNervous hey why not lean into. Be the FNAF theorist who sounds like a FNAF character.
Is it just me or does her voice sound a lot like the Psycho2Go narrator?
I agree that William doesn't need sympathy or a reason to be a killer. But my headcannon theory is that Henry designed the animatronics, for example thats how it shows him in the character encyclopedia. I think that perhaps Elizabeth got scooped by baby, and William killed Charolette because he deemed it Williams fault.
*Long comment incoming*
I must admit that there are some people I have lost I desperately wish I could bring back in a positive manner, but also state I haven't truly felt like I would do **anything** to bring them back. But (x2) I don't have the power to do **anything**, and maybe I'm glad I don't; watching X-Men Apocalypse made me jealous of Magneto for having the ability to destroy something that had hurt him.
THAT BEING SAID, Afton never struck me as a grieving father. I could understand hurting because you lost your child and then choosing a very dark path, but to me I always felt like Afton was jealous. He seemed like he just strangely **hated** children. I don't think he had any real reason to kill beyond hate and jealousy, right up until he did. After that it was probably even easier.
Thank you!!!!! It never sat right that people would try to give a serial child murder sympathetic traits. I’m a teacher at heart (currently not working bc of health problems) and all I ever wanted from this franchise was to hug the souls of the kids who were killed. To try to give them some semblance of a normal childhood in spite of the trauma. And I’m so grateful to see my gut feeling about this asshole is supported by evidence and that you agree with me
finally some good food
I hate the "immortality bs" it's convoluted & didn't help either, sometimes less is more & I'd rather have an ambiguous motive rather than a terrible one. Don't try to explain possession & grieving souls with science because with each attempt at trying to solve it, slowly the magic is fading away & the thematic metaphors of the series became literal. The original story is no where perfect but it wasn't impossible to keep track of, the story focused on the aftermath of the tragedies, how it happened don't matter because it's in the past what matters is the fate of these doomed souls in the present
I think I wish the series leaned more into Afton being obsessed with becoming an animatronic because humanity is full of death and emotion which he sees as weak.
So he thinks being entirely machine is the solution to the weaknesses of humans - emotions and mortality.
I like your last sentence a lot. I miss the focus on the children's souls in the present and helping them find peace.
@@ShesNervous your video is well thought out, and your conclusion in this reply is the answer that I was looking for all along, well done
I am personally am a believer of the “put together theory” for William. But I’d always viewed and thought William as a complex and intriguing but ultimately vile man. I always viewed William as a man who at least at some DOES or DID at one point genuinely care about his family but in a completely twisted and warped sense. I do believe that William is a sociopath with clear mental instability and narcissistic tendencies. But even narcissistic and abusive parents can ‘love’ their children. I personally think that he does care for his children and family but in an extremely overbearing, controlling and possessive manner. It’s possible he views his children as extensions of him and useful tool/trophies to be kept but also genuine but disillusioned and twisted love and affection. I think both interpretations of William could be true. But this is just a few of my personal opinion Ms and views on him and I’m just incoherently rambling in 12:54 AM rn. I could just be spouting random BS into the void as I fail to convey my mangled and racing thoughts with a barely half functioning brain.
Something that I feel is worth noting is all of Sister Location and the fact William communicated with Garret/CC with the Fredbear Plush.
If you look at the wall of the SL Lobby, there are three robot heads (fitting since Afton had three kids). Two have open eyes, one has its eyes closed. The two with open eyes have blue eyes and yellow/green eyes respectively. Garret most likely had blue eyes, since we see Mike having blue eyes, and Elizabeth clearly had green ones. It's highly likely the entire point of the SL location was to research remnant to a point where William could fully understand its secrets, then implant the remnants of his dead kids into robotic bodies. Or in other words, "put them back together." It's also a bit suspicious how the Bidybabs have high-pitched, kiddy british accents, almost like Elizabeth.
There is plenty of evidence to suggest that Garret's death is what drove William to commit the atrocities he did, and that his motivation to research remnant was because he wanted to save Garret and later Elizabeth. And, in a way, Michael, considering the fact there was a third robot head with its eyes closed and how he sent Mike to SL knowing that it would likely kill him. And there's of course the fact that it's suggested during Midnight Motorist that Mike was the one who ran away, likely out of guilt for what he had done, which drove William to devise a way to try and keep him inside the house so that he wouldn't lose him too (likely when he created the Illusion Discs).
I could go on and on, but yeah. People love the idea of William Afton just hating everyone and everything, being every bad thing in the book from the getgo, and just killing people cause he feels like it. Which requires so much mental gymnastics and the ignoring of many plot points (like how Garret died first and not Charlie). I guess because it's impossible for someone who owned a pizzeria marketed towards kids who had a wife and kids of his own to have one point been a decent person.
@@AmirPrinceling I personally believe that William does in some extremely twisted and warped way DOES care and even genuinely Love his family but in the most messed up and overly controlling way. He made an animatronic (mostly likely) based off his ex-Wife with Ballora and even went through the effort of adding more security and a mic on C.C’s plush bear. Which I felt like William WOULDN’T have went through the EFFORT to set the extra security footage and methods up if he DIDN’T at least care even a tiny bit about his son. I really like the idea of William genuinely loving his family but only in the missed f*cked up and possessive and unhinged ways. William is an absolutely vile and unhinged individual but even the most evil of people have at least some kind of emotion, empathy, or even kindness or care. I don’t think that if William was completely evil incarnate he would have even bothered or put any effort into keeping memorabilia or even dedicated animatronics based off the people that were in his life. Why would he build Ballora if he didn’t love his wife at some point or missed her? Why would he make Circus Baby for Elizabeth? Why put the mic and camera into C.C’s beloved plush toy? In my mind if he truly didn’t care about his family in any way and only viewed them as tools or pawns then why would he bother doing all this?
@@jasminguiza6227 Pretty much, yeah. FNAF as a whole is meant to serve as a story, with its characters moving it along. Each character has their share of depth, even William. If he was totally heartless, he wouldn't have installed cameras around the neighborhood just to keep an eye on his sons while he was working, he wouldn't make a whole walkie talkie to comfort his son with, he wouldn't have made Ballora a tribute to his wife, he wouldn't have cared if Michael ran away during Midnight Motorist (or even go to the trouble of putting an animatronic outside just to keep him inside), etc.
@@AmirPrinceling It’s pretty clear that even before the murders William was *far* the best Dad. He’s clearly very neglectful and absent, too busy with his business and animatronics to properly look after his kids. But I don’t believe he started off as the abusive dead beat, not until later on. He could have possibly started out as trying to be a *decent* father until his grief, envy, anger, paranoia, bruised pride, resentment and need for control boiled over and made his finally snap. He’s still a sh*t dad no doubt about but William isn’t heartless as heartless and he personally-*WANTS* to believe he is. But at the end of the day his abuse, his neglect, his abandonment, his rage, his murders are all of William’s own free will and actions and his alone. He is the one whom decided to kidnap, kill, and hurt sooo many people (indirectly or directly) and he only has himself to blame for his behavior. William ultimately and rightfully *DESERVES* all of his punishment.
I always was went with Afton was always that way but it was after his sons death that he started acting on it.
Hey, wonderful video! I fully agree. William was never depicted as a sympathetic or tragic character in any of the canon works. If Scott really was trying to push the idea of WillGrief or WillCare he would have made him that way in the books or movie just to show fanbase what kind of character William is. But instead he gave us irredeemable heartless monster. Both in the books and the movie. William simply js a psychopath who never had the capacity of feeling empathy or love. It made him bitter because he felt as though the whole world wronged him. He tries to create his perfect family several times: his human family and his animatronic family. He wanted to love. But his understanding of love and family is twisted and cruel. He wants control over everything. His children, his creations. Because this makes him feel "complete". That is my understanding of his motives which is based on canon information from the novels. Anyway, thank you for this video and have a great day!
Pretty sure c.c died first which caused William to snap and kill Henry's daughter Charlie because he partially blamed Henry sense fredbear was his creation.
I wanna say, while I really do love this video and how it finally captures how William’s character actually works
There is an issue with it in the form of saying William may have build human robots in the games. We’re told how a human robot like Charlie was made and it has a supernatural element that requires love and grief, both of which you rightly say in this video that William lacks. Thats why he was so obsessed with Charlie in the novels, she was something beyond his understanding and ability to create.
Such an amazing video. You just proved what I feel others see as dificult, and therefore want William to be simpathetic, you kept him a monster AND compelling.
I take issue with your characterisation of Wandavision. The show makes it clear multiple times that, while she can control things inside the Hex, she didn't consciously create it. The magic literally explodes out of her in a moment of grief.
And I don't think you can say "whether it's the games, books or movie", because they're three completely different characters with completely different stories. Movie Afton is nothing like book Afton
I don't believe I characterized her as having consciously created it, but just that she won't stop it and when she's confronted about doing so it still takes a fight.
I would go deeper into the moments in the show that made me feel the way I feel, but this comment would be ridiculously long as I struggle with brevity. And I don't really mind if people disagree with how I reacted to the show.
Anyway, I say "whether it's the books movies or games" because Scott is responsible for all of those portrayals of William. You can say nothing about the books has ever shown up in the games and only the names are the same, but the point is that Scott has never ever given William a sympathetic moment in the franchise. Not that the actions movie William takes parallel the games. Just that Scott has never given us a reason to see him as sympathetic. A creator's intentions matter and how Scott allows Afton to be depicted across portrayals is important.
Like, we know Spider-man has infinite versions, but there are certain parts of who is a Spider-man that remain so we can still analyze that character using the comic books and movies and his games. not because they are the "same" peter parker running through those exact beats, but because the heart of who is Spider-man. Even when he's Miles Morales and is an anomaly he still embodies what we understand about Spider-man.
@@ShesNervous so you're saying that seeing a character lose both his son and his daughter isn't sympathetic? I would say that it is. I believe there is quite a lot of in-game evidence that William cares about his children, most notably the line "I will put you back together".
@@ShesNervous another point, if I may (but I don't want you to feel like I'm attacking you). Proponents of this theory are judging William based on 21st century standards. And yes, by our standards, he would be a bad father. But we only ever see William in a 1980s setting. In the 1980s, they literally used to air adverts saying "It's 10pm, do you know where your children are?" It was commonplace for parents to be hands-off with their children, or to let them deal with bullying in order to toughen them up. 80s sitcoms give us this romanticised view of parenting at the time, but Danny Tanner and Mike Brady were the exception, not the norm. My uncles used to taunt my mother in much the same way Mike does to CC (jumping out and scaring them), and my grandparents let them get away with it. But my mom wouldn't say she had bad parents. I'm not trying to argue that William is father of the year. To me, he's just a workaholic single father (Mrs A doesn't seem to be in the picture) who is a product of his time. He's not the best judging by 21st century standards, but I don't see any reason to doubt that he loves his kids, as any normal parent would.
Couple with that the fact that he's a provider, he gives CC all the plushies he wants, he puts on a party for CC's birthday, he lets Mike stay up late watching TV, and Elizabeth genuinely seems to believe that he built Baby for her, I think there's a case to be made that he indulges his kid. Maybe not good parenting, but an act of love.
@cameronhodgetts920 I don't think I lack sympathy for someone losing a child, no. I am saying he isn't a villain because something bad happened to him. He's a villain because he has always been an egotistical and jealous human which effectively inhibits his ability to be a caring father.
I don't care particularly if people think William loved his kids, but there is objectively no evidence that he valued them as more than his property. My proposition is he was hurt about losing them the way you'd be mad if someone totalled your car.
We disagree and that's okay.
@@ShesNervous you're right, we do disagree, and that's fine. Although quite ironically, my position is exactly the opposite. I think there is plenty of in-game evidence that he loved his children, and no in-game evidence that he was egotistical or jealous. I hesitate to use the books in this way because Scott has always been clear that they are "a reimagining of the Freddy's story", so I don't think we should infer motivations onto Afton 1 based on events that happened to Afton 2, which may not have happened to Afton 1. Particularly when it comes to jealousy of Henry.
THIS. This exactly what i mean when we say that Afton is just evil. Because that's what he's been always portrayed like. Because it has a narrative weight to it. Because it allows us to think of him in much more interesting ways, motivations and interpretations.
And i would say that, while most people say that making him sympathetic doesn't mean that they justify his actions... they sometimes do, even unwittingly. They do not say "Afton because a serial killer because of the loss of his son", they say "Afton became a villain after the tragic and painful loss of his beloved son..". It's not the same! And make him sympathetic inherently and unconsciously makes us rationalize his actions. I've seen it much more in non-theorist portions of the fandom, where William's actions are depicted not as a man killing children, but as "a poor man that lost everything he had, whose only wish is to bring his beloved son back!". His actions are not explained, they are justified. And that's, i think, my biggest issue with this sympathetic interpretations of the character: the line separating explaination from justification is VERY fuzzy. It's like, why are you trying to justify and humanize a man that literally killed like 11 kids, and his own family!? And while i understand that making Afton just evil because yes might sound depthless, i would say it's more a way of not justifying the villain's actions, and giving him a much more deep and even religious arc as a monster, disguised as a man, doing all he can in order to reject his humanity and mortality. I think it has a lot of narrative weight!
This video is a really good dive on Afton's character, and why he probably isn't, and shouldn't be seen as, a sympathetic villain. I love the editing, the pacing, and the writting. Amazing!
I'm sure someone else has said it somewhere already, but I've always seen William Afton's motivation of "fixing" his dead children to be more about control and possession than grief. In his mind he owned his children, and it's his job to put the crying child back together like you might glue together a broken vase. A popular fanfiction by pearlandpine on ao3 exemplifies the type of characterization I've always read from William.
Why do people try to use fnaf 4 as a way of Willian being a shit dad when we don't even know if afton was supposed to be a father💀
YES? THIS! I posted a video joking and implying they fact he DID NOT care about his kids like so many others believe and I got so many replies about how I’m wrong and “actually he only hates Mike” and it blows my mind.😭
Please tell me that I wasn’t the only one who thought of the opening quote of avenged sevenfold’s bat country when she said the last line of the closing statement. “HE WHO MAKES A BEAST OUT OF HIMSELF GETS RID OF THE PAIN OF BEING A MAN.”
I’ve been watching your videos and I totally agree 100 percent. *Despite* the many strange lore points pointing toward Afton in some way grieving the loss of his children, (for example the SL passcode 1983, telling Mike to free Elizabeth, Steelwool mentioning they want a villain to have buildup by being at first somewhat normal) we should NOT feel sympathetic for him whatsoever, as the series goes on, he becomes more deranged and demented, notably Scraptrap, in fnaf 6 he’s seen in my eyes even more egotistical, insane, and lacking any and I mean ANY empathy even for his children that are in the same building. Glitchtrap for example is an extremely violent and dangerous version of him that clearly points he only wants what he wants. Even if it’s cannon that he did grieve for a little, no sympathy for him should be what we’re doing.
Saying William Afton loved his kids is like saying Mother Gothel cared for Rapunzel for more than just her hair
Why? What did Afton "get" out of his kids? If he weren't a loving father, how would he benefit from their existence.
Bingo.
Afton did this when his son died and killed Charlotte to get even with Henry which was pretty unfair. Afton soon found out Charlotte and BV possessed Puppet and Golden Freddy. Afton needed to understand the concept. This leads to Remmnant(link of a soul to whatever the remmnant is attached to) and dark remmnant(bad emotions like hatred, sadness, wickedness and of course agony). Afton is quite evil and wickedness to a point so deep where all his humanity is gone and Afton is pure evil to the creation of Shadow Freddy and RWQFSFASXC. Afton is someone who becomes pure evil.
This was stated many times in the books of Fazbear Frights in The man in room 1280.
This is why people justifying him or Whatever pisses me off so Much
The evidence is EVERYWHERE like open your eyes!
They always say "oh no the books Aren't canon to the games" or "the movie Aren't canon to the games and that was Vanessa not Elizabeth" like yeah it's not Canon TO THE GAMES but! They ARE still canon UNIVERSES like the book universe, movie universe and game universe are all canon the games are just the MAIN universe we follow
Nice to see someone who gets it.
But then you have something like this, he doesn't care for Elizabeth in books but seems to care for Vannesa in movie
@@BurningFlamesofDivineDragonnot exactly, he doesn't care for Elizabeth in books but seems to care for Vannesa in movie
@@Void-r3b no he dosen't
He manipulates her, blames her for he's mess, and he literally stabs her and chokes her
Not to mention the scene Where Mike Asks her to come with him to save Abby and She says "i won't be any use to you BELIEVE me" and mike says "wow he Really messed you up didn't he?" Implying her obvious trauma of it All and is terrified to face her own Dad
He only cares About her in the way that She can be useful to him
Think About it
She's a cop
It's Perfect for William
She can Help and has helped him Get away with he's crimes by leading the police to a dead end
He's Manipulative and Abusive towards her and it's wild Some of ya'll can't See that
@@nat_479 thats why I said "seems to care" also after he stabs her you can see what seems to be regret on his face
Bruh, purple dude in the games did not pay attention to his son's bullying, then tried to kill his eldest son, if we take the theory that he is an orange guy, then it gets even worse because he insulted his child. In the trilogy, he beat his daughter and did not feel grief when she died, then told her In front of her that she was not enough and used her as an ordinary minion to achieve his vicious goals. In Fazbear Frights, he is described as an evil who wants to cause pain. In the movie, he fucking stabbed his daughter with a knife.
And people keep saying that he loved his children in his own way? He has self-awareness and he doesn't give a shit about his children and the people around him. He doesn't love anyone, he can't even love in his own way. He is a psychopathic narcissist and pure evil.
To be honest I think losing his family all but his oldest son to his business would drive anyone insane
I wonder... Did william have a bad childhood? That also made him more mental? Its williams fault for this, but hey thats just a theory a game theory!
Interesting
I personally think that william afton is supposed to have a reason to become the villian we have since steelwoll talked about how they wanted him to be a more sympathetic villian since they found that more interesting.
I do believe william cared for his children, just not in a way normal parents do. There might be a bit of love in there but i think he mostly cared about them because they were his and he had controll over them and they made others think more highly of him.
Yeah, I put the line "if he has a reason it's before the events of FNAF as we know them" because it DOES feel like Steel Wool is setting something up to explain his origins.
I just don't think the reason is being gried stricken over the loss of his kids.
If they try to make it that, they'll be retconning so much of what we know about Afton and that will infuriate me 😂
I think your thinking is far too narrow and lacking in nuance. William can absolutely be a bad father, a horrible person, a control freak, and deeply envious of Henry, while ALSO being a grieving father who (believes he) loves his children and has actual reasons for the horrible things he does. He can simultaneously be a complex villain that doesn't just do things for the heck of it without being a sympathetic character.
Somehow I missed this video when it dropped. Anyway just wanna say I love ur editing
Wow! This was very interesting to watch! You've convinced me that William is just bad. Nothing good.
The WandaVision comparison is so interesting. I agree Wanda was absolutely the villain of her story. She wasn't intentionally or knowingly trying to hurt anyone but that doesn't make the events any less harmful.
Afton as he has almost always been portrayed is much more sinister. Maybe less enjoyable of a villain for some, but absolutely realistic. Many of us wouldn't like to admit it but some people see their children as tools and not much else.
So both are similar with different intentions. But at the end of the day both are acting the role of villain. Abusers can come in all shades, learned behavior, manipulative liars, absentee parents... these can all lead to abuse. Thank you for discussing this topic and putting words to things I had been sensing from some places in the fanbase but couldn't fully put words too.
FNAF has enough sympathetic villains, William is one of only 2 pure evil ones in this entire franchise (the other being Elenor) and I wish more people would see it that way
..Michel is Afton's son though. Henry only has a doughter that died
You are correct. Henry, in the books, ignores his living child (Sammy) and "similarly to Henry, William's grief causes him to ignore his only living child - Michael."
They both (in different continuities) end up neglecting a living son.
Though to further clarify- I don't actually believe William ignored Michael out of grief. That's just me explaining what others have stated. I think he ignored Michael because he blamed him for CC death and overall thought he was useless and thus not worthy of his attention.
He only reached out to Michael when he thought his son could be of use to him.
@@ShesNervous honestly I see your point in the whole video. I don't know a part of me just wants William to have at least some shred of humanity and I'm not sure why, I'm not exactly one to look for the good in people if I don't see it
@@daviddimitrov3696I completely understand and I don't think you are alone!
Steel Wool (seemingly) wants to reach that human part of Afton we've yet to have explicitly shown to us in the franchise.
I'm excited to see how they potentially tackle it with Fall Fest.
I'm not against him getting that back story, I'm just against the idea that he was a loving father. 😂
The books are a separate continuity. It’s really simple to understand. Just like the Marvel comics are not happening in the MCU ,the books are not happening in the games or the movie please stop acting like it’s all the same story 🫡
Themes/patterns and literal crossover are not the same thing.
At absolutely no point did I make the assertion otherwise.
I am saying Scott Cawthon has never, in any iteration of William, made him a sympathetic character.
It's important to point to Scott's intention with the character.
It would be so silly to act like the books and movies are some complete departure from how Scott FEELS about Afton and who he wants that character to be.
The Marvel comics are not literally happening in the MCU, but Wanda Maximoff in the comics is /also/ a sympathetic villain whose motivation is finding a universe where she can be with her twin boys. Her journey to that moment is objectively different, but the core of her character is still the same/very similar.
There are character traits that crossover. I don't think Charlie-bot is a part of the games. I don't think Afton only has one child. I don't think Golden Freddy is a kid named Michael.
I could go on and on. I DO think Afton, across all of his different iterations, is ALWAYS a bad father who has a jealous heart and unsympathetic motivations.
@@ShesNervous My comment was more a bulletin for the comments section, rather than trying to imply that different continuities contradicted your argument. I’m sorry if it came off this way.
I agree that we are not meant to sympathize with Afton at all. The way I have interpreted the game (I’ve only read the Silver Eyes and gotten a synopsis of the other books and the movie isn’t enough to bite into yet) has made me sympathetic towards him as losing your wife(whether she’s dead or just left him) and two of your children, one at the hands of your own son would make anyone snap. I think that’s the REASON he kills children I think things can be reasonable and still unacceptable and he is not to be redeemed nor should he be imprisoned for all eternity “leave the Demon to his Demons”. What’s done is done and now all that have suffered deserve to rest.
There is also this wonderful quote in The Silver Eyes about William: "Before him stood someone who had spent so much of his life fighting like a cornered rat that he had taken on the mantle of bitter sadism as an integral part of himself. He would strike out against others and revel in their pain, feeling rightously that the world owed him his cruel pleasures."
To me he seems to genuinely revel in causing harm to others. It seems like exerting control and killing is one of his main motivators. I even believe he likes the idea of being viewed like the boogyman and a monster. His voice lines do reflect that in the AR game.
I was thinking the same thing that C.C's death lead to the man's madness it kind of reminds me of Miraculous as where Gabriel lost his wife and went mad to harm people to resurrect his wife. But Afton's madness went to extreme that he cared for his own life over his son and daughter as he didn't wanted to die and killed kids to become immortal. Similar to Gabriel he could have saved his wife in the episode Evolution where he travelled back in time and could have left the recipe of to fix a damaged jewel that caused his wife's death. But he feared for his opponent taking his miraculous and cared for his miraculous over his wife.
Actually, it has been confirmed by the lorekeeper that he did snap due to his kids deaths, but you should not sympathize with him, because he still did an evil act, and the fact he snapped was because he did have dark thoughts, and was not truly a mentally stable man. His heart was filled with greed and jealousy.
William Afton is that meme of the guy who doesn't want to cure cancer, he wants to turn people into dinosaurs.
William: "I love all my kids equally! Lackey, Elizabeth, aaaaand... [squints at smudged writing on his hand] Crybaby."
Hahahaha oh my god I can see this as an animated short so clearly.
@@ShesNervous Ha ha, it really does feel like it could be one. 😆
Yee in canon William is pure evil but how most of the fandom try depict him as a monster who cares about his family making him more three-dimensional and make him more interesting.
Dude I could listen to you talk about fnaf for literal hours, you got a phenomenal voice !!👌
Thank you! 🥹
I am so glad im not the only one who thinks that.the only time i can recall gaining sympathy towards william was when i was a newbie to the lore and worked my way in with the help of popular headcannons.and ever since that,it just makes me rage whenever i see a theory that portrays william as poor sad dad killer .if you think about it,the only reaspn why i wouldnt mind killing for my child is if someone directly intented to hurt them .but in williams case,no one harmed him except his narcissistic beliefs and ego.henry never created fredbear with the intention of murdering cc and even if he did charlie didnt help him .also,i hate it when people use "ill put you back together"or him warning Elizabeth not to go near baby as proof that he cared about them. I've interpreted "ill put you back together"as william just doing it to satisfy his curiosity as what will happen.if he really cared he would just let cc rest in peace,also it doesn't make sense that after he neglected him and did nothing to stop micheal from bullying him and setting his birthday at the place of his worst nightmares that he'd be willing to get his son back .and him warning Elizabeth, 99.99999% of parents know that words do absolutely nothing to convince children to be obedient,and not just that.i especially hate it when people make it seem like Elizabeth was his favourite so he didnt hurt her,he just was too broken.NO HE WASNT.literally there is millions of proof that he abused her,manipulated her and neglected her in the books.i've always viewed william as a heartless father who only used his children as trophies,and when he found that neither micheal nor cc could represent him as the perfect business man,Elizabeth was just the perfect tool for him,but after circus baby killed her ,william,seeing that not only did she fall short of his expectation, but also ruined his experiment ,he decided to let her suffer knowing he has the knowlege necessary to save her.also a head cannon i have is that he saw micheal as a substitute or replacement for Elizabeth in case something happened to her which ofcourse,she dies and now there's only the other child left he can manipulate for the sake of his curiosities.i just feel like everypne is so focused on theorising to the point where the story is just irrelevant and everyone is trying to find the occams razor for those "unnecessary"bits to continue theorising.it makes me sad because what got me into fnaf was the story and i see very little people on youtube atleast do character analysis and stuff that expands on the story.im glad i found this video ,keep going!
Just a suggestion you might want to split and space your stuff into paragraphs. As your wall of text is kind of hard to read. This would be much appreciated thank you.
Makima from csm is telling me fnaf lore! Best day ever!
Thank you for making this video.
Your voice reminds me of circus baby
He seems to care for Vannesa in movie universe
I recently had a small thought, but I'm not sure if it's relevant... What if William was a single father? It would make more "sence" to be neglectful of him for that, since he'd have to try to balance work and his family (And since he's a narcissist, and prefers his craft, he'd obviusly priorotize work.), plus we never see Mrs. Afton anywhere in the games! Unless you think the person on the couch in the "Later that night" is her (And in that scene, she's just also being neglectful), or the wierd Angel-like being(?) from Fnaf World is her, then we've never seen her!
Thank you for this video i really agree that William isn't really a sympathetic villan.
If we take information of William from the books, his video game counterpart is likely will be the same just like the books, a Mad Scientist.
Afton the murderer the thing he swore to destroy ending up becoming springtrap and the rest is history on great content
WRONG Epic fail
New viewer. Wonderful video. Definitely subscribing. Lots of love.
The tone of her voice makes the vid feel like a true crime thingy
im 99% afton is just a killer with no filler.
in the reasonable 1% chance otherwise, cc dies first, then 4 kids, then charlie
but that kinda only works if the 4 kids he killed were related to cc death so imma shut up now
You mean 5? Jeremy, Fritz, Susie, Gabriel, Cassidy
Holy shit I adore your voice. Very soothing
This video is just absolute peak
Honestly you got a sub
THANK YOU!
Nice
he's mean cause he's purple, duh.
Purple is a great color
@@Forgottensnapdragon That's a good point, hmm....