AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > Anime Discussion > Older Series > Retired > Umineko

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2009-09-03, 12:50   Link #2041
Volcanic
fire of fires
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Vesuvius
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronotrig View Post
Spoiler for .:
This is exactly what I thought when I came up with this theory. It would be going away from Ryukishi's norm, but it would work. I doubt it, though.

Quote:
So.... Whose hand is in Erika's portrait?
Never explained. It could be anyone or nobody, just a metaphor. (I personally like to think it's either Beato or Battler, yes)
Volcanic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-03, 12:59   Link #2042
Kaiba
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Houston
Alright, a basic theory of mine. I'll be describing how the murders were actually pulled off later, but for now, here is what I suspect to be sort of the background to the story:

Spoiler for General Theory:


So that's it for now. Thoughts?
Kaiba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-03, 13:37   Link #2043
Raneh
Storyteller
 
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaiba View Post
Alright, a basic theory of mine. I'll be describing how the murders were actually pulled off later, but for now, here is what I suspect to be sort of the background to the story:

Spoiler for General Theory:


Spoiler for ep4 red truths included:
__________________
Raneh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-03, 13:52   Link #2044
Volcanic
fire of fires
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Vesuvius
Agreeing with Raneh, although it's an interesting theory.

Coincidently, quick, minor, and random theory:

Spoiler for Quick, Minor and Random!:
Volcanic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-03, 14:24   Link #2045
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronotrig View Post
Spoiler for .:
Spoiler for episode5:



Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaiba View Post
Alright, a basic theory of mine. I'll be describing how the murders were actually pulled off later, but for now, here is what I suspect to be sort of the background to the story:

Spoiler for General Theory:


So that's it for now. Thoughts?
Different reasoning but similar conclusion compared to my theory. There is just a noticeable error: the riddle wasn't disclosed until 1984, so in 1980 didn't exist, and Battler couldn't have made such a promise.
__________________

Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-03, 14:26   Link #2046
chronotrig
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Buffer overflow
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marina2 View Post
So.... Whose hand is in Erika's portrait?

Spoiler for ep.5:
Probably the tool used to knock on the door at midnight...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan-Poo View Post
Spoiler for episode5:
Well, you can never "prove" a theory in science. All you can do is collect overwhelming evidence supporting your conclusion. Both aspects of quantum theory and relativity are supported by a huge amount of experimental evidence. Unless they're only a special case of a larger theory, there's almost no debate about whether they are true, at least in most situations that we can observe.

The largest difference between good sci-fi and fantasy is that sci-fi provides a plausible explanation. Good sci-fi is impossible to disprove with current scientific knowledge. Good fantasy is almost always impossible, and obviously so. (unless you're willing to buy an extreme twist in the known laws of physics)

The only ones who seem to care about strict mystery standards are Bern and friends, and they only care about it on the game board.
Obviously, the Meta world cannot fall under the same rules by the simple inclusion of the colored texts, among other things.
__________________
"The only moral it is possible to draw from this story is that one should never throw the letter 'q' into a privet bush. But, unfortunately, there are times when it is unavoidable."
--Hitchhikers


www.witch-hunt.com Theory page

Last edited by chronotrig; 2009-09-03 at 14:37.
chronotrig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-03, 14:30   Link #2047
Jan-Poo
別にいいけど
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: forever lost inside a logic error
Spoiler for episode5 portrait:
__________________

Jan-Poo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-03, 14:34   Link #2048
Volcanic
fire of fires
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Vesuvius
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan-Poo View Post
Spoiler for episode5 portrait:
I like to think the figure is Natsuhi. It would fit her place in the game. ...However, why would she be in a cloak...

I bet we'll get more into the portrait in EP6-7, because it has too much symbolism in it not to be at least mentioned.

...W-Wait, there was another figure in the trees?!?
Volcanic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-03, 14:43   Link #2049
Marion
The Great Dine
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan-Poo View Post
Spoiler for episode5 portrait:
Well we don't get an explanation for the hand either XD; Maybe red herrings to throw us off?
__________________

Sig by nocco
Marion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-03, 14:44   Link #2050
Kaiba
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Houston
Quote:

However, one thing I remember is in ep4
The sin I am now demanding that you remember is not between Ushiromiya Battler and Beatrice.
"Ushiromiya Battler has a sin."
"Because of your sin, people die."

Your theory doesn't really support this and I think it's more vital in this mystery. By your theory the motive for killings are actually not connected to Battler at all, it's about George and his ambitions. I don't think it's going to be as simple as George killing everyone in order to live a rich life with his love.
The first truth doesn't work against it because the sin is not between Battler and Beatrice, it is between Battler and Shannon. I guess I would apply my Shannon = Beatrice theorem loosely. Shannon isn't Beatrice directly, she acts as the Beatrice of the island throughout the murders and so forth.
Battler's sin is that he didn't keep his promise to Shannon, and if he had kept his promise, Shannon probably would not have been persuaded into the whole murder plan of George, and thus the plan would not have gotten off the ground as George would not have had not nearly as much motive to kill everyone and without Shannon would lack much of the means in the first place to commit those murders.

Quote:
Using your theory it would be pretty weird that the "masterminds" Shannon and/or George die so often, and early too.
Not really. I'll basically sum up what I think happened in the episodes:
Episode 1: Shannon fakes her death, the two are working with Nanjo, who persuades the others that Shannon is dead. Shannon proceeds to run amok afterwards and kills virtually everyone else (Kanon's death is explained by a trap being laid there as Shannon uses the place as an escape route, but I have also not completely ruled out Shkannon.)
Episode 2: The two work with Genji and Nanjo at first, and things go according to plan for a bit. However, someone figures out those two and kills those two, but the rest of the family kill each other out of fear and paranoia.
Episode 3: For whatever reason, Shannon starts backing out of the plan, and George in a panic ends up killing her and all the servants as a way to cover it up and follow the epitaph. The pair thus this round don't really do anything, but someone else (depending on the situation, but I suspect Kyrie in a lot of the scenarios) starts killing people, and the family breaks down as once again they kill each other out of fear and paranoia.
Episode 4: Not really sure, that arc was so damn weird. I'll have to think harder about that one later.
Episode 5: The two are planning to work with Genji, but Battler solving the riddle throws everything in disarray. George and Genji want to keep going so they can keep the gold all to themselves, but Shannon, due to her love for Battler, decides "fuck it" and kills George and Genji, and then kills the other three because they're in the same room as George to make sure she gets away with it. I really don't know anything about the rest of the arc, so I can't really explain Krauss's and Hideyoshi's deaths as I don't know anything about them.

Quote:
Different reasoning but similar conclusion compared to my theory. There is just a noticeable error: the riddle wasn't disclosed until 1984, so in 1980 didn't exist, and Battler couldn't have made such a promise.
Oh dear, I didn't realize that. Perhaps then the promise was just a childhood marriage promise and Shannon didn't want to reveal the gold's location as she wanted Battler to be the first to see it. I guess that works them.
Kaiba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-03, 18:11   Link #2051
Ssol
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaiba View Post
but I have also not completely ruled out Shkannon.
I think the Shannon = Kanon theory is gone due to episode 5. However, Kanon pretending to be Shannon or vice versa is very probable like Higurashi's Shion and Mion.
Ssol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-03, 18:29   Link #2052
Megaolix
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Not that I completely disagree with your theory Kaiba, but was there a bit of a clue between Shannon and Battler? We are supposed to be able to know and deduce all elements now. As long as that part as a single hint of it, it can stand.

Besides, we've seen reason for the murders, but for 'Battler's benefit' has never been denied, right?

Also, let me add something. You made a solid point with the gold. What about the ring then? I doubt Shannon had a key to wherever Kinzo was.
__________________
I hate sad and bittersweet endings. Why? Because I think the real world is sad enough as it is. Must our stories be sad too?
Megaolix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-03, 18:46   Link #2053
Volcanic
fire of fires
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Vesuvius
Quote:
Originally Posted by Megaolix View Post
Not that I completely disagree with your theory Kaiba, but was there a bit of a clue between Shannon and Battler? We are supposed to be able to know and deduce all elements now. As long as that part as a single hint of it, it can stand.
IN EP1, it's mentioned Battler had a crush on Shannon when he was younger.
Volcanic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-06, 13:40   Link #2054
Kitsu
The unlucky one
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Hiding
My take on the actual discussion

Quote:
IN EP1, it's mentioned Battler had a crush on Shannon when he was younger.
And where was it implied that this cursh was kinda returned? On the other hand it was implied that Shannon didn't act all nice with the cousins and really improper for a servant.
And to be honest...the Shannon did the killing thing seems reasonable but the promise thing feels really fishy. Especially the "marriage promise" which girl who is still a bit right in the head would take such a promise of a 12 year old after six years not seeing him at all serious? And even start killing for it (cause because of the broken promise (the sin) people die, you cannot tell me that george convinced her doing it for their relationship if it is about Battler's and Shannon's broken marriage promise ) and as if killing his family would make him remember and even marry her. I mean
Spoiler for Higurashi kai:

And maybe I missed it or something were was it actually said that Beatrice loves Battler? I will be ashamed for missing that... Also I think we are to much focusing on romatic love, after all this is a story which main characters are a family. and even between none blood-related characters love was shown. Best examples are Shannon/Kanon, Kumasawa/Shannon (it was said that Kumasawa was like a mother for all servants) and the friendship love Shannon/Jessica (Jessica describes Shannon as her oldest friend etc).
Also why even show us all those totally nice George/shannon secnese be it in the past or the magic scenes if Beatrice wants Battler to remember their love. i mean it's like trying to sell somethign but praising the other merchants stuff instead of your own (okay that example is a bit badly choosen)
Furthermore doesn't it feel odd that Shannon in her POV never thinks about Battler at all? Not even in the past events (her date with George, the talks with Jessica about love (and why even talk about hwo wonderful George is with her if she loves Battler etc.) if she loves him so dearly? And why even get close to George? That doesn't make sense to me...

Again about that promise thing...if there was ever a promise wouldn't it be something more like "I'll get you off this boring island" ? That sounds more like Battler to me and more like somthing Shannon would cling to. Waiting for him to get her of the island not doing it herself. (I still think the promise thing is fishy but oh well)

I am still pretty found of the idea that Beatrice is still just metaphorically and represents someone who kills out of love. (sounds hypocritical ^^; And Eva-Beato represents someone who kills for the inheritance/gold or for becoming the head.
Also @Kaiba
I think your explanation for motives and how the murders are done are really well to be frank really unrealistic and at times even hypocritical. Most people seem just to be killed to follow the epitaph in ep 5. Which is strange cause you explained that Shannon just says "Fuck it" if she really thinks that then why follow the epitaph anyway? In ep 3...yeah george just kill all the servants to cover up one or two deaths and then play innocent and do nothing anymore. Cause the killings of 6 people is so much more decent and makes people search for the culprit much lesser than if you only kill 2 persons especially since it's rather well known that George loves Shannon...that would make him really supicious, I mean everyone kills her/his loved ones, George you are a genius!
The whole the family kills each other out o paranoia seems unlikeable, you guys know why? If I kill someone out of paranoia I don't start searching for a stake then comeback and stake that person (or the dead body) (though I think this might have happened in Ep 3 but I kinda don't buy it)
In Ep 1 ...Kanon can't be killed with a trap as you say cause it was stated in red that he wasn't. Shkanon? Wouldn't make much sense in your theory cause why would she even do that? 'cept
"The person dead in the shed at the first twilight was actually Kanon, Shannon killed him and then dressed up as him for the rest of the episode. This way she could fake her death without having Nanjo as an accomplice and trick Hideyoshi at the same time." Seems still unlikely but oh well.

Also your "Genji and George wanted the gold all by themselves", well excuse me but loyal Genji and already rich George who doesn't have an financial problems would have done that?
and about the rest of Ep 5
Spoiler for Ep 5:
__________________
Thanks for the Signature, Vandakiara
Kitsu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-06, 15:04   Link #2055
Kaiba
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Houston
Quote:
I think your explanation for motives and how the murders are done are really well to be frank really unrealistic and at times even hypocritical. Most people seem just to be killed to follow the epitaph in ep 5. Which is strange cause you explained that Shannon just says "Fuck it" if she really thinks that then why follow the epitaph anyway?
They were killed to follow the epitaph? Like I said, I really don't know very much about what actually happens in Episode 5 so I can be completely wrong here, but if the killings in Episode 5 were meant to follow the epitaph, why did only five die in the first twilight and only two more died after that? Can you explain that to me?

Quote:
In ep 3...yeah george just kill all the servants to cover up one or two deaths and then play innocent and do nothing anymore. Cause the killings of 6 people is so much more decent and makes people search for the culprit much lesser than if you only kill 2 persons especially since it's rather well known that George loves Shannon...that would make him really supicious, I mean everyone kills her/his loved ones, George you are a genius!
I'm not really sure what your point is here, but my theory on it goes like this: George intends to kill Shannon and possibly Genji, but kills all the servants so that no one realizes that the deaths of those two were the really important point and to follow the epitaph (I realize this means that George realizes that Kinzo is dead, but I'll submit that he found that out somehow through Shannon). However, he collapses from guilt out of killing the one he loves, and hence kind of blanks out the rest of the arc out of pure guilt for what he did.


Quote:
The whole the family kills each other out o paranoia seems unlikeable, you guys know why? If I kill someone out of paranoia I don't start searching for a stake then comeback and stake that person (or the dead body) (though I think this might have happened in Ep 3 but I kinda don't buy it)
Who ever said that the person doing the killings is the same person doing the stakings? And given that the family is indeed in a struggle for wealth and power, it is indeed reasonable to assume that they would commit murders over it especially over a scenario like this.

Quote:
Shkanon? Wouldn't make much sense in your theory cause why would she even do that? 'cept
I said I hadn't completely ruled it out, not that I had accepted it - I'm 85% sure it's false from what I've seen.

Quote:
Also your "Genji and George wanted the gold all by themselves", well excuse me but loyal Genji and already rich George who doesn't have an financial problems would have done that?
and about the rest of Ep 5
A little more gold never hurt anyone and George would definitely like to be with Shannon and it seems that he would sacrifice his entire family to do it from what we saw in the Fourth Episode. And what proof do we have that Genji's loyal to Natsuhi and Krauss? He's definitely loyal to Kinzo, but he's dead, and it's possible that Genji would have a huge issue with those two propping him up as alive so they can keep up their greedy desires - I would argue that Genji is possibly dragged along as revenge against those two more than any desire for gold.

Quote:
it's strongly implied that the victims of the first twilight faked their death or something. (I think the seven sisters of the Purgatory did that while attacking Erika in the Tea Party) I could be wrong though.
Regarding the unidentified corpses, all of their identities are guranteed. Therefore, no body double tricks exist
Who were the only two identified corpses there? Shannon and Krauss. And yes, that does mean you can argue Krauss is alive, though I don't think so and I think half of his face was smashed so we wouldn't be all suspicious of Shannon being the only person with half her face gone.
Kaiba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-06, 15:22   Link #2056
Kitsu
The unlucky one
 
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Hiding
Quote:
They were killed to follow the epitaph? Like I said, I really don't know very much about what actually happens in Episode 5 so I can be completely wrong here, but if the killings in Episode 5 were meant to follow the epitaph, why did only five die in the first twilight and only two more died after that? Can you explain that to me?
Krauss belongs to the first twilight. I think I misunderstood you with what you actually ment there. (i thought you know that Krauss belonged to the first twilight)

But isn't it rather well strange for Shannon just killing of a little innocent girl and her best friend just to get away with it?

Quote:
Regarding the unidentified corpses, all of their identities are guranteed. Therefore, no body double tricks exist
Who were the only two identified corpses there? Shannon and Krauss. And yes, that does mean you can argue Krauss is alive, though I don't think so and I think half of his face was smashed so we wouldn't be all suspicious of Shannon being the only person with half her face gone.
Well the red truth is completely useless since all corpses were identified. For example BAttler identified one of the corpses as his father since he saw the clothes. And this happened with all corpses. Also I was talking about the Fifth Game first twilight

Quote:
Who ever said that the person doing the killings is the same person doing the stakings? And given that the family is indeed in a struggle for wealth and power, it is indeed reasonable to assume that they would commit murders over it especially over a scenario like this.
This is an rather popular theory but who would do the stakings and why? If the masterminds are dead who would bother doing that?


Quote:
I'm not really sure what your point is here, but my theory on it goes like this: George intends to kill Shannon and possibly Genji, but kills all the servants so that no one realizes that the deaths of those two were the really important point and to follow the epitaph (I realize this means that George realizes that Kinzo is dead, but I'll submit that he found that out somehow through Shannon). However, he collapses from guilt out of killing the one he loves, and hence kind of blanks out the rest of the arc out of pure guilt for what he did.
Why would he even intend kill Shannon if like you say
Quote:
George would definitely like to be with Shannon and it seems that he would sacrifice his entire family to do it from what we saw in the Fourth Episode
???

Quote:
He's definitely loyal to Kinzo, but he's dead, and it's possible that Genji would have a huge issue with those two propping him up as alive so they can keep up their greedy desires - I would argue that Genji is possibly dragged along as revenge against those two more than any desire for gold.
Why even be angry at those two? I mean they didn't kill Kinzo Krauss only tried to solve his buisness problems with his death. And that's something Kinzo would have done himself. So there is no reason for genji to seek somethin like revenge
__________________
Thanks for the Signature, Vandakiara
Kitsu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-06, 17:11   Link #2057
mizou
Observer
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Unreality
Age: 24
I've read a theory , and I think it's the most appropriate
the culpirit(s) is not one of the 18, but an outsider
since beato stated in red on the end of the four game that there's no one on the island and she will kill battler .. that's don't exclude that on that time the culpirit was on the harport of kuwadorian on a boat ( he's on the sea , not on the island ) and he can join the island and kill battler
mizou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-06, 17:55   Link #2058
momobunny
◔ ◡ ◔
*Artist
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: ImaginaryLand
Age: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by mizou View Post
I've read a theory , and I think it's the most appropriate
the culpirit(s) is not one of the 18, but an outsider
That would break on of Knox's rules, which the game seems to follow. Only one or more of the characters shown at the beginning can be the culprit, I believe.
And that's one of the 17. (as Kinzo is dead and Erika is confirmed not to be the culprit)
__________________

momobunny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-06, 18:06   Link #2059
Tjfarmer
I'm almost there!
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Bay Area, California
Age: 20
Send a message via AIM to Tjfarmer
Than one of the 17 pretended to be dead, fled the island, and than came back to kill him!

....That would be a really cheap way to answer that red though, but whatever.
Tjfarmer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-09-06, 23:38   Link #2060
Kaiba
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Houston
Quote:
Krauss belongs to the first twilight. I think I misunderstood you with what you actually ment there. (i thought you know that Krauss belonged to the first twilight)

But isn't it rather well strange for Shannon just killing of a little innocent girl and her best friend just to get away with it?
Didn't realize about Krauss, that's a bit of a problem. Will have to think about it.
And as I view Shannon as a murderer in at least Arcs 1 and 2, no I don't really have any problem with her murdering Jessica and Maria, especially if she didn't, they'd blab on her killing George.

Quote:
Well the red truth is completely useless since all corpses were identified. For example BAttler identified one of the corpses as his father since he saw the clothes. And this happened with all corpses. Also I was talking about the Fifth Game first twilight
While all corpses were identified in that they said "This is Rudolph" "This is Rosa" etc Batller acknowledged on the Gameboard that it was possible for one of the corpses to not really be one, and I would argue that the completely smashed faces do fall under unidentified. And yeah, this first twilight conversation is a bit confusing.

Quote:
Why would he even intend kill Shannon if like you say
I think Shannon wanted to back out of the entire killing plan in Episode 3 and threatened to tell, and George just plain panicked and killed her, possibly by accident or just out of sheer panic out of fear of being found out. However, since he loved her, he felt ridiculously guilty afterwards for what he did, which is why he doesn't really do anything in Episode 3, as I would argue he simply blacked out of guilt.

Quote:
Why even be angry at those two? I mean they didn't kill Kinzo Krauss only tried to solve his buisness problems with his death. And that's something Kinzo would have done himself. So there is no reason for genji to seek somethin like revenge
They propped him up as alive for completely selfish reasons, did not give his corpse any form of respect (as it looks like it was just sitting around for two years), and just hid his death. Those are my grounds for why Genji would have a grudge towards those two.
Kaiba is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 14:39.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.