Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy

It Is Him wrote:

JazZeke wrote:I just wanna add; between Bumblebee pissing, Devastator's balls and now this, Bay has a knack for making me feel embarrassed to be a Transformers fan.

Don't forget Mudflap's "I never learned to read"

Triptykon wrote:England makes sense, as much of the architecture to the layman is similar to what he's looking for, and production costs were probably cheaper than say...Czech Republic or whatnot (as many formerly oppressed nations would laugh at the idea).also, just about any reference to Nazi's, has been erased from German history, not even taught in schools, and the swastika is illegal. New groups have formed entirely new graphics around their movements as a result.

Insurgent wrote:why not just use another place then and call it Churchill's?

Kurona wrote:That doesn't really help. You don't get to just do something like this and then say "Oh no it's okay because I done this nice thing for him in exchange!!!"
There's absolutely no good reason to specifically use his home for this. None at all.

Apollo-XL5 wrote:

Kurona wrote:That doesn't really help. You don't get to just do something like this and then say "Oh no it's okay because I done this nice thing for him in exchange!!!"
There's absolutely no good reason to specifically use his home for this. None at all.

People are talking like Michael Bay is just doing what he wants, regardless of what others think. But he 'obviously' had permission from the owners (having told them what he planned to do).

Plus this isn't the first time that someone was making a film and used a famous building for a Nazi scene, causing an uproar from others.

But this film, like others in the past is a a 'work of fiction' and should be treated as such.

Talk about over-reaction.

Autobot N wrote:I don't really know how I feel about this. On one hand, I'm not offended since I'm an American and I don't know anyone who was around during WWII. On the other hand, it seems rather distasteful to drape Nazi symbols all over the house of one of their greatest enemies. It's like going to Abraham Lincoln's birth home and putting Confederate symbols everywhere or hanging Straxus posters all over Scrounge's hab-suite.

Randomhero wrote:

Apollo-XL5 wrote:

Kurona wrote:That doesn't really help. You don't get to just do something like this and then say "Oh no it's okay because I done this nice thing for him in exchange!!!"
There's absolutely no good reason to specifically use his home for this. None at all.

People are talking like Michael Bay is just doing what he wants, regardless of what others think. But he 'obviously' had permission from the owners (having told them what he planned to do).

Plus this isn't the first time that someone was making a film and used a famous building for a Nazi scene, causing an uproar from others.

But this film, like others in the past is a a 'work of fiction' and should be treated as such.

Talk about over-reaction.

THANK YOU!!!

exactly what I said yesterday. It's not all Michael bay,, its the producers, the studios, the country, and the owners of the house.

In order to shoot somewhere like that, the script is read multiple times over the span of weeks, has to be approved and there are consultants ON SET to make sure it's done right.


This the not the first move to shoot nazi locations in England. All the nazi scenes and locations like the nazi rally and the castles in indiana jones and the last crusade were all shot in England and at historical locations. That's were a lot of WWII stuff is shot not because it takes place in the U.K. but because it has that feeling(castles, historical looking buildings, etc.

People need to get off the offended train and if you say "I'm not offended, I'm just uncomfortable with this" or "I'm just not okay with this" news flash you just described being offended

Jeddostotle7 wrote:

Randomhero wrote:

Apollo-XL5 wrote:

Kurona wrote:That doesn't really help. You don't get to just do something like this and then say "Oh no it's okay because I done this nice thing for him in exchange!!!"
There's absolutely no good reason to specifically use his home for this. None at all.

People are talking like Michael Bay is just doing what he wants, regardless of what others think. But he 'obviously' had permission from the owners (having told them what he planned to do).

Plus this isn't the first time that someone was making a film and used a famous building for a Nazi scene, causing an uproar from others.

But this film, like others in the past is a a 'work of fiction' and should be treated as such.

Talk about over-reaction.

THANK YOU!!!

exactly what I said yesterday. It's not all Michael bay,, its the producers, the studios, the country, and the owners of the house.

In order to shoot somewhere like that, the script is read multiple times over the span of weeks, has to be approved and there are consultants ON SET to make sure it's done right.


This the not the first move to shoot nazi locations in England. All the nazi scenes and locations like the nazi rally and the castles in indiana jones and the last crusade were all shot in England and at historical locations. That's were a lot of WWII stuff is shot not because it takes place in the U.K. but because it has that feeling(castles, historical looking buildings, etc.

People need to get off the offended train and if you say "I'm not offended, I'm just uncomfortable with this" or "I'm just not okay with this" news flash you just described being offended

You guys are missing the point of why people are getting mad. It's not that it's just any castle in England; it's that, for some unknown reason, they decided to specifically use Winston Churchill's home, A.K.A. one of the people who fought hardest against Hitler, as the place to turn into a Nazi castle. Not just any place, WINSTONE CHURCHILL's. You gotta be able to agree that that's at least in poor taste, right?

Randomhero wrote:Michael bay didn't sneak in 200 cast and crew and shoot what they needed before security chased them off the property. They have permission and if the owners and everyone affiliated with shooting there are okay with it than maybe people need to stop complaining.

Jeddostotle7 wrote:

Randomhero wrote:Michael bay didn't sneak in 200 cast and crew and shoot what they needed before security chased them off the property. They have permission and if the owners and everyone affiliated with shooting there are okay with it than maybe people need to stop complaining.

Just because they had permission from the current owners of the castle doesn't mean the owners of the castle weren't making a mistake.

SlyTF1 wrote:I hate how people get mad about everything. Has this decision threatened the end of the world? No? Then get over it.

Randomhero wrote:

Jeddostotle7 wrote:

Randomhero wrote:

Apollo-XL5 wrote:

Kurona wrote:That doesn't really help. You don't get to just do something like this and then say "Oh no it's okay because I done this nice thing for him in exchange!!!"
There's absolutely no good reason to specifically use his home for this. None at all.

People are talking like Michael Bay is just doing what he wants, regardless of what others think. But he 'obviously' had permission from the owners (having told them what he planned to do).

Plus this isn't the first time that someone was making a film and used a famous building for a Nazi scene, causing an uproar from others.

But this film, like others in the past is a a 'work of fiction' and should be treated as such.

Talk about over-reaction.

THANK YOU!!!

exactly what I said yesterday. It's not all Michael bay,, its the producers, the studios, the country, and the owners of the house.

In order to shoot somewhere like that, the script is read multiple times over the span of weeks, has to be approved and there are consultants ON SET to make sure it's done right.


This the not the first move to shoot nazi locations in England. All the nazi scenes and locations like the nazi rally and the castles in indiana jones and the last crusade were all shot in England and at historical locations. That's were a lot of WWII stuff is shot not because it takes place in the U.K. but because it has that feeling(castles, historical looking buildings, etc.

People need to get off the offended train and if you say "I'm not offended, I'm just uncomfortable with this" or "I'm just not okay with this" news flash you just described being offended

You guys are missing the point of why people are getting mad. It's not that it's just any castle in England; it's that, for some unknown reason, they decided to specifically use Winston Churchill's home, A.K.A. one of the people who fought hardest against Hitler, as the place to turn into a Nazi castle. Not just any place, WINSTONE CHURCHILL's. You gotta be able to agree that that's at least in poor taste, right?

Michael bay didn't sneak in 200 cast and crew and shoot what they needed before security chased them off the property. They have permission and if the owners and everyone affiliated with shooting there are okay with it than maybe people need to stop complaining.

SlyTF1 wrote:I hate how people get mad about everything. Has this decision threatened the end of the world? No? Then get over it.

budmaloney wrote:
I'm not hating, but Bay's actions speak for themselves.

Bronzewolf wrote:
Alright, alright. It's gettin' a bit too heated here. Please be repectful of the fact that everyone has a right to an opinion. Thanks!

Deadput wrote:

Bronzewolf wrote:
Alright, alright. It's gettin' a bit too heated here. Please be repectful of the fact that everyone has a right to an opinion. Thanks!

Considering what kind of news this subject in everything is going to get heated.

What else was going to happen?

Bronzewolf wrote:

Randomhero wrote:

Jeddostotle7 wrote:

Randomhero wrote:

Apollo-XL5 wrote:

Kurona wrote:That doesn't really help. You don't get to just do something like this and then say "Oh no it's okay because I done this nice thing for him in exchange!!!"
There's absolutely no good reason to specifically use his home for this. None at all.

People are talking like Michael Bay is just doing what he wants, regardless of what others think. But he 'obviously' had permission from the owners (having told them what he planned to do).

Plus this isn't the first time that someone was making a film and used a famous building for a Nazi scene, causing an uproar from others.

But this film, like others in the past is a a 'work of fiction' and should be treated as such.

Talk about over-reaction.

THANK YOU!!!

exactly what I said yesterday. It's not all Michael bay,, its the producers, the studios, the country, and the owners of the house.

In order to shoot somewhere like that, the script is read multiple times over the span of weeks, has to be approved and there are consultants ON SET to make sure it's done right.


This the not the first move to shoot nazi locations in England. All the nazi scenes and locations like the nazi rally and the castles in indiana jones and the last crusade were all shot in England and at historical locations. That's were a lot of WWII stuff is shot not because it takes place in the U.K. but because it has that feeling(castles, historical looking buildings, etc.

People need to get off the offended train and if you say "I'm not offended, I'm just uncomfortable with this" or "I'm just not okay with this" news flash you just described being offended

You guys are missing the point of why people are getting mad. It's not that it's just any castle in England; it's that, for some unknown reason, they decided to specifically use Winston Churchill's home, A.K.A. one of the people who fought hardest against Hitler, as the place to turn into a Nazi castle. Not just any place, WINSTONE CHURCHILL's. You gotta be able to agree that that's at least in poor taste, right?

Michael bay didn't sneak in 200 cast and crew and shoot what they needed before security chased them off the property. They have permission and if the owners and everyone affiliated with shooting there are okay with it than maybe people need to stop complaining.

Alright, alright. It's gettin' a bit too heated here. Please be repectful of the fact that everyone has a right to an opinion. Thanks!

Randomhero wrote:

Bronzewolf wrote:

Randomhero wrote:

Jeddostotle7 wrote:

Randomhero wrote:

Apollo-XL5 wrote:

Kurona wrote:That doesn't really help. You don't get to just do something like this and then say "Oh no it's okay because I done this nice thing for him in exchange!!!"
There's absolutely no good reason to specifically use his home for this. None at all.

People are talking like Michael Bay is just doing what he wants, regardless of what others think. But he 'obviously' had permission from the owners (having told them what he planned to do).

Plus this isn't the first time that someone was making a film and used a famous building for a Nazi scene, causing an uproar from others.

But this film, like others in the past is a a 'work of fiction' and should be treated as such.

Talk about over-reaction.

THANK YOU!!!

exactly what I said yesterday. It's not all Michael bay,, its the producers, the studios, the country, and the owners of the house.

In order to shoot somewhere like that, the script is read multiple times over the span of weeks, has to be approved and there are consultants ON SET to make sure it's done right.


This the not the first move to shoot nazi locations in England. All the nazi scenes and locations like the nazi rally and the castles in indiana jones and the last crusade were all shot in England and at historical locations. That's were a lot of WWII stuff is shot not because it takes place in the U.K. but because it has that feeling(castles, historical looking buildings, etc.

People need to get off the offended train and if you say "I'm not offended, I'm just uncomfortable with this" or "I'm just not okay with this" news flash you just described being offended

You guys are missing the point of why people are getting mad. It's not that it's just any castle in England; it's that, for some unknown reason, they decided to specifically use Winston Churchill's home, A.K.A. one of the people who fought hardest against Hitler, as the place to turn into a Nazi castle. Not just any place, WINSTONE CHURCHILL's. You gotta be able to agree that that's at least in poor taste, right?

Michael bay didn't sneak in 200 cast and crew and shoot what they needed before security chased them off the property. They have permission and if the owners and everyone affiliated with shooting there are okay with it than maybe people need to stop complaining.

Alright, alright. It's gettin' a bit too heated here. Please be repectful of the fact that everyone has a right to an opinion. Thanks!

Everyone also has the right to grow some common sense and think about the situation at hand before pointing fingers and yelling "poor tatste! Poor taste!" Before jumping to rediculous conclusions and throwing in their two cents,just think about what it takes to make a movie and shoot at certain locations.

Bronzewolf wrote:

Randomhero wrote:

Bronzewolf wrote:

Randomhero wrote:

Jeddostotle7 wrote:

Randomhero wrote:

Apollo-XL5 wrote:

Kurona wrote:That doesn't really help. You don't get to just do something like this and then say "Oh no it's okay because I done this nice thing for him in exchange!!!"
There's absolutely no good reason to specifically use his home for this. None at all.

People are talking like Michael Bay is just doing what he wants, regardless of what others think. But he 'obviously' had permission from the owners (having told them what he planned to do).

Plus this isn't the first time that someone was making a film and used a famous building for a Nazi scene, causing an uproar from others.

But this film, like others in the past is a a 'work of fiction' and should be treated as such.

Talk about over-reaction.

THANK YOU!!!

exactly what I said yesterday. It's not all Michael bay,, its the producers, the studios, the country, and the owners of the house.

In order to shoot somewhere like that, the script is read multiple times over the span of weeks, has to be approved and there are consultants ON SET to make sure it's done right.


This the not the first move to shoot nazi locations in England. All the nazi scenes and locations like the nazi rally and the castles in indiana jones and the last crusade were all shot in England and at historical locations. That's were a lot of WWII stuff is shot not because it takes place in the U.K. but because it has that feeling(castles, historical looking buildings, etc.

People need to get off the offended train and if you say "I'm not offended, I'm just uncomfortable with this" or "I'm just not okay with this" news flash you just described being offended

You guys are missing the point of why people are getting mad. It's not that it's just any castle in England; it's that, for some unknown reason, they decided to specifically use Winston Churchill's home, A.K.A. one of the people who fought hardest against Hitler, as the place to turn into a Nazi castle. Not just any place, WINSTONE CHURCHILL's. You gotta be able to agree that that's at least in poor taste, right?

Michael bay didn't sneak in 200 cast and crew and shoot what they needed before security chased them off the property. They have permission and if the owners and everyone affiliated with shooting there are okay with it than maybe people need to stop complaining.

Alright, alright. It's gettin' a bit too heated here. Please be repectful of the fact that everyone has a right to an opinion. Thanks!

Everyone also has the right to grow some common sense and think about the situation at hand before pointing fingers and yelling "poor tatste! Poor taste!" Before jumping to rediculous conclusions and throwing in their two cents,just think about what it takes to make a movie and shoot at certain locations.

Okay enough! Second warning. Tone down the aggression, please.

Sabrblade wrote:

SlyTF1 wrote:I hate how people get mad about everything. Has this decision threatened the end of the world? No? Then get over it.

Seems like people getting mad is making yourself mad, yes? Well, their decision to get mad isn't threatening to end the world either, so by your own reasoning, you yourself must get over that.

EunuchRon wrote:If Nazis had invaded England, they'd have totally done that. So... if the movie has Nazis invading England, then they'd have to show that, right? I mean, what would happen if that was real? I played a video game where Nazis invaded America and took over the white house. It had Nazi flags all over it, and you ended up having to shoot the president. It's all fiction! Too many people getting butthurt over fiction. Hey, maybe Churchill shoots the Nazis with a Tommy Gun and gets his house back in the flick. Wouldn't that be cool? I think he'd approve of that.

Sabrblade wrote:Here's a different side of the story. Bay claims that Churchill is going to be a hero in this movie. This is our first confirmation that Winston Churchill is going to be a character in this movie, right? Well, who's going to play him?

I have one idea. We know that Anthony Hopkins is in this movie, but we don't know who he's playing. All we know is that his character, based on the video featuring him and Britain's Loneliest Dog, appears to be a British man dressed in old-timey clothing and owning a dog. Well, what if he's actually playing Churchill himself?

Burn wrote:Please keep your comment respectful, and if you disagree with certain comments, do so in a respectful way.

... This NOT limited solely to members of Seibertron.com. Personal attacks/threats against non-members (e.g. Comic book Writers/Artists, Movie Producers/Stars/Directors, Toy Designers etc) will also not be tolerated.

Hellscream9999 wrote:

EunuchRon wrote:If Nazis had invaded England, they'd have totally done that. So... if the movie has Nazis invading England, then they'd have to show that, right? I mean, what would happen if that was real? I played a video game where Nazis invaded America and took over the white house. It had Nazi flags all over it, and you ended up having to shoot the president. It's all fiction! Too many people getting butthurt over fiction. Hey, maybe Churchill shoots the Nazis with a Tommy Gun and gets his house back in the flick. Wouldn't that be cool? I think he'd approve of that.

Yeah, I'm seriously interested in seeing how this fits in with apparent time travel, merlin, king arthur, dinobots (maybe) and everything that's going on with o/p - this may be a case of a movie being either too cluttered, or needing to be over 3 hours to tell its story (which is easily possible, considering that aoe was pushing 3 hours and had much less going on in it)

Caelus wrote:I've been thinking about this for a couple of days, and I somewhat agree with what randomhero said above. Posters are reprimanded if they speak inappropriately about one another, but I've not seen them reprimanded for doing so about a non-member (maybe that's all done by PM). Recently it's bothered me in the Megatoronia (sp?) thread and here. Anyway, I was thinking, 'man, that seems like a major over sight in the rules' but when you mentioned people overstepping the rules, I went and checked:

Deadput wrote:

Caelus wrote:I've been thinking about this for a couple of days, and I somewhat agree with what randomhero said above. Posters are reprimanded if they speak inappropriately about one another, but I've not seen them reprimanded for doing so about a non-member (maybe that's all done by PM). Recently it's bothered me in the Megatoronia (sp?) thread and here. Anyway, I was thinking, 'man, that seems like a major over sight in the rules' but when you mentioned people overstepping the rules, I went and checked:

The staff are human too I don't think it's expected that they will all keep the rules perfectly strictly enforced 100% of the time.


Not an insult I'm just saying trying to keep the peace on a website is a difficult task when we are getting angry all the time.

Stuartmaximus wrote:Sooo.....what will these mini dinobots be like? i take it there's no artist renderings of those yet

Quantum Surge wrote:Not sure if he's up to something interesting or it's just a standard Bay excuse. This film gets weirder and weirder the more I think of it.

Kurona wrote:The problem isn't the idea of Churchill's home in the movie being occupied by Nazis. I think it's a very weird tangent for this movie to go on considering we've already got knights in the mix; but whether it's a good story or not aside, that's fine. I don't mind and very few people would, a billion stories have done that sort of thing before.

The difference here between this movie and those thousands of stories that have done the same thing before it, is that they didn't literally use the real-life location. They used some other place, some other building. The problem isn't that nazis occupy Churchill's home in the movie, that's silly. The problem is that literally, at this very moment, there are Nazi flags physically hanging from what was the home of Churchill in real life. That's what people don't like.

Apollo-XL5 wrote:

Kurona wrote:The problem isn't the idea of Churchill's home in the movie being occupied by Nazis. I think it's a very weird tangent for this movie to go on considering we've already got knights in the mix; but whether it's a good story or not aside, that's fine. I don't mind and very few people would, a billion stories have done that sort of thing before.

The difference here between this movie and those thousands of stories that have done the same thing before it, is that they didn't literally use the real-life location. They used some other place, some other building. The problem isn't that nazis occupy Churchill's home in the movie, that's silly. The problem is that literally, at this very moment, there are Nazi flags physically hanging from what was the home of Churchill in real life. That's what people don't like.

This story is nothing new, just last year there was a similar incident involving a film crew, a real life location and Nazi flags/banners.

Here is a link to the news story.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... lfies.html