Pretty long rant about Michael, how abuse and neglect from William is a huge part of his character and the choices he makes, and how a lot of people don’t really talk about for some reason
I’ll start by saying that I haven’t been in the fandom since 2021 until recently, so it’s not like I’ve seen every single post or analysis about Michael. The spaces I’m around and have been around before do tend to talk about and explore the abuse. So I’m not saying literally no one does, because that’s not true. But the FNAF fandom is large and has multiple spaces and groups, and there are others where this aspect seems to be forgotten. You’ll probably pick up on the fact that what inspired me to make this post is Michael analysis videos on YouTube. I kinda want to see if anyone agrees with me on all of this or if I’m thinking too hard.
Lots of people always start their summary of the tragedy of Michael’s life with the bite of 83 and it’s like, no. I think it began the day he was born to a father that didn’t love him and would go on to neglect and abuse him.
I think Michael is a good bit older than the other two Afton kids, meaning he was by himself for a while. I don’t know, I feel like some people are really dodgy with talking about Michael’s abuse and how it affected him and his decisions, because that’s everywhere in his character, the bite of 83 included. So many people boil that down to “he was an immature asshole, but he changed after that.” No. He was reaching a breaking point after being mistreated for so long, and the final straw was being forced to take care of his very emotional little brother like a parent when he was still a teenager due to his parents not being around much anymore. All of that is implied in Step Closer, which I analyzed in this post, but even if we didn’t have that I think you might still be able to arrive at that conclusion with just thought and intuition. We have on screen instances of abuse and neglect towards all his other kids, even the ones he simultaneously had “affectionate” moments for (the complexity of what I’m implying here could probably be another post for another day, but I promise you it’s not the “William isn’t all that bad and he’s a good father!” bullshit). What I’m saying is that if it can happen to the ones that we don’t know for sure he hates, then what exactly do you think was happening to the only one of his kids that we have 100% confirmation that he does? Not even just indifferent or lack of love, but HATE. To a point where he legitimately wishes he wasn’t his son. I do think that’s the implication with The Immortal and the Restless, because Michael and William looking like each other is hammered into you over and over, and Vlad is just refusing to believe this kid is his, but it’s obvious because they look so alike (and are both vampires). I don’t think it’s meant to be taken literally, like William genuinely doesn’t believe it or something, I think it’s just supposed to represent that Michael was unwanted and unloved by William. From day one. What do you think years of that during the most psychologically vulnerable years where you don’t even know who you are or have an identity yet would do to someone? And I think it’s just kind of a fact that a lot of the time the misbehaving kids who act out and cause problems come from troubled homes. I knew a few in school growing up. I’m sure a lot of you did too.
It just irritates me that it apparently needs to happen on screen for it to be a worthy talking point when it comes to his character. Seriously I’ve watched like 7 YouTube videos about Michael’s character and all of them kind of failed to bring this aspect of his character up. Not that all of those videos don’t have any good points, it’s just that you’re missing a HUGE piece of the puzzle.
I’m kind of neutral on Mikeaccomplice. For years I thought this theory implied Michael was a willing participant, which obviously left a sour taste in my mouth, but recently I realized it could also have been unwillingly, and I can see that happening. And many of the people in those videos seem to be Mikeaccomplice believers, but still there’s not much discussion about why that would be happening. If it was happening, it’s absolutely not because he admired William or trusted him (one of the videos said this actually lmao). And now we have Vanessa in the FNAF movie as a wonderful example of what Mikeaccomplice would be like - fear and manipulation. When Mike asks Vanessa to come to Freddy’s with her where William will be, she gets visibly distressed and stumbles backwards a bit. But again, I don’t think we needed her and the movie to arrive at that conclusion in the first place.
This is something that I see said in Michael character analyses, and this has been said for yeaaaars, “it’s his path of redemption to make up for his sins.” And every time I hear that I think to myself “what sins?”
Now the bite of 83 is a huge mistake that absolutely made him back up and think about who he is, and it 100% contributed to his change as a person, but that’s not something William did. It may be indirectly caused by William like I was saying earlier, and William clearly didn’t do anything about the way Michael was treating CC, but it’s not part of the string of atrocities committed by William. And Michael ESPECIALLY isn’t going to think to himself “well isn’t it technically dad’s fault because the way he treated me made me act like that?”
Other than the bite of 83, I can’t really identify anything else Michael did wrong, and anything you could argue (like Mikeaccomplice) is very much William’s fault either way. So what is up with the “path of redemption” talk? What’s he redeeming himself from by stopping William? Not a god damn thing William did is his fault, and I think THAT is where the tragedy lies actually. It shouldn’t have to be his burden to bear, but he feels like it is. Why does feels responsible for everything his father did? Because years of abuse and neglect have psychologically shaped him to be that way. And I also think he’s just a good person too.
The tone of the message to William says a lot about that first part. If I’d experienced the treatment that Michael did from William for so long, and then found out about the things William had done, and had just been sacrificed, I would’ve had some MUCH harsher words for the man. Michael may hate William, and I think he’s hated him for a long time, but he is still scared of him. And he also, deep down somewhere, still wants approval even if he knows that won’t ever happen. P.J. Heywood said it sounded to him like that element of wanting approval was there in the monologue. And he also said Scott gave very clear directions in what he wanted Michael’s voice to imply and be like.
Now, you could say that what people mean when they say this is “Michael did help William and HE feels that those are his sins even if we as outsiders might place the blame on William.” And I can absolutely see that because it would be very much like him to see it that way. But if that’s what they’re trying to say then I wish they’d spend time talking about why Michael would end up in that position in the first place (manipulation, threatening, history of abuse) because then it makes the message more clear.
And even if that’s true, I think framing it like Michael is doing it to redeem himself more than he is for the sake of the people that were hurt and killed by William and to put a stop to it is a bit skewed too.
How I always interpreted it was William went missing, then out of the blue contacted Michael to ask him to go get Elizabeth. Michael was tricked, because he ended up being a sacrifice/tool/puppet (literally). He might have chosen to let that happen at the end when he didn’t run just to fulfill what he said he’d do. Says a lot. But also, becoming aware again, waking up when he wasn’t supposed to, that’s when the reality might sink where he felt he was deceived, and how truly disposable he is in William’s eyes. Other than that, I didn’t see him assisting William in any way when the murders were occurring. That had been my takeaway for years so I think you can understand why the “path of redemption” thing confused me, but I’m recently starting to consider Mikeaccomplice being a factor, but even if it’s true I still wouldn’t describe what he did as his “path for redemption.”
Either way, I don’t know why William’s hatred for him and abuse of him isn’t that talked about a lot of the time in stuff like this.
I’m gonna come full circle here. Imagine post scoop Michael who’s been at it on his mission for a decade or two. It’s easy to think “I wish I could go back to before any of this ever happened” but I’m sure it would hurt to remember that if that happened, he’d just be back to being the eldest son who can’t do anything right, who William always looks at like he killed the good mood by walking into the room, and subject to a good amount of physical and verbal abuse too. Every day. That’s the real tragedy of it. Michael’s life would still be tragic even without the murders, possessed robots, remnant, being scooped, etc.
Anyways I think I’m going to make my own Michael analysis video. I just finished writing the outline.