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

Saturday, September 24th, 2016 2:00AM CDT

Categories: Movie News, Interviews
Posted by: Bronzewolf Views: 36,966

Topic Options: View Discussion · Sign in or Join to reply

Seibertronians, in response to the story we reported on earlier today about how the TF5 filming had chosen Winston Churchill's birthplace to use as a Nazi base, and the controversy it spawned, Michael Bay has released a statement in a short interview with the BBC.

People haven't been fortunate enough to read the script and they don't know that Churchill in this movie is a big hero

He said.

Transformers News: Re: Transformers: The Last Knight Discussion Thread

Another notable quote from the interview, available in full on the BBC Website, is that Bay believes "Churchill would be smiling" at his inclusion in the movie.

This begs the question: was Churchill made a hero just in response to the uproar? Or was he always intended to be in the movie? Tell us what you think in the comments below.

And, as always, stay tuned to Seibertron.com for all the latest and greatest transformers news on the net!

Credit(s): The BBC

News Search

Got Transformers News? Let us know here!

Most Recent Transformers News

Void Rivals #21, Spawn Universe, Batman, Feral #14, Facsimiles and more at the Seibertron Store

Posted 8 hours ago

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1827917)
Posted by Samsonator on September 24th, 2016 @ 2:44am CDT

This movie gets more ridiculous every time I hear something about it... sadly, that means I'm gonna have to watch it...

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1827920)
Posted by Insurgent on September 24th, 2016 @ 3:03am CDT

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"

To be fair, I think he was meaning they can't read ancient cybertronian, not read in general.

And anyway, if he can't read in general, what if he has dyslexia?

As for Bay's comment... why not just use another place then and call it Churchill's? We've seen geography in these movies aren't 100% accurate with that plane graveyard behind that air museum. And.... I'm really curious about Churchill's role in this film now.

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1827922)
Posted by Jeddostotle7 on September 24th, 2016 @ 3:24am CDT

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.

Not to get involved in this conversation too much, but fun fact: Germany actually hasn't erased anything about Nazi Germany from their history books. In fact, they teach it all very explicitly, especially the Holocaust, to show how bad it was. Link to sources (aka German people), if allowed: https://www.quora.com/How-do-Germans-to ... -Nazi-past

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1827931)
Posted by Stuartmaximus on September 24th, 2016 @ 5:16am CDT

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

rsz_8023snn1833b471637a-1.jpg

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1827951)
Posted by Kurona on September 24th, 2016 @ 7:22am CDT

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.

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1827961)
Posted by Apollo-XL5 on September 24th, 2016 @ 8:32am CDT

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.

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1827964)
Posted by Autobot N on September 24th, 2016 @ 8:49am CDT

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.

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1827970)
Posted by Randomhero on September 24th, 2016 @ 9:42am CDT

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

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1827980)
Posted by Randomhero on September 24th, 2016 @ 10:24am CDT

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.

Or it'd be like if the original transformers cartoon did something distasteful and had a scene of Megatron shooting the Lincoln memorial and sitting on the chair in a episode about Megatron taking over earth and enslaving the human ra-....oh...oh dear...

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1827981)
Posted by dragons on September 24th, 2016 @ 10:24am CDT

People are dumb and sensitive who cares about character past and future it's called movie not true storie movie

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1827987)
Posted by Jeddostotle7 on September 24th, 2016 @ 10:59am CDT

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?

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1827998)
Posted by Randomhero on September 24th, 2016 @ 11:40am CDT

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.

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1827999)
Posted by Jeddostotle7 on September 24th, 2016 @ 11:43am CDT

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.

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828000)
Posted by Randomhero on September 24th, 2016 @ 11:51am CDT

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.

Considering they're the owners and its their heritage and theyre allowing it, they have complete right to and as I've said so many times they had to approve it by reading the script. Something you and everyone else here acting all sensitive hasn't done.

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828015)
Posted by Quantum Surge on September 24th, 2016 @ 12:50pm CDT

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. :michaelbay:

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828016)
Posted by SlyTF1 on September 24th, 2016 @ 12:53pm CDT

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

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828032)
Posted by UltraPrimal on September 24th, 2016 @ 1:41pm CDT

This reminds me of the Justin Beiber and Anne Frank thing.

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828043)
Posted by It Is Him on September 24th, 2016 @ 2:34pm CDT

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

No. Failing to understand why people are offended and shocked by this doesn't give your the right to dismiss the problem.

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828049)
Posted by budmaloney on September 24th, 2016 @ 2:45pm CDT

To go and put the Nazi flag on the home of Churchill...well in bird culture that's considered a dick move. It doesn't matter if it's a movie or if the owners approved of it or even if Churchill is a hero in the movie. The act itself desecrates the antithesis to the Nazis. It's arrogant and insulting to the British people.

It feels to me like a child who wants to challenge everything anyone ever liked.
"oh you like Devastator? I'll make him look completely different, so weak and give him wrecking balls"
"oh you like Optimus Prime? I'll make him go against every single hero trait that made you like him in the first place"
"Dinobots? Not even gonna say a single word"
"Decepticons? I'll kill them all."

It's the same style. Sure freedom of speech and all, and it can be considered an over reaction, but the dude just doesn't respect these things. And when he disrespects things , people are gonna get angry about it. People overreacted when Ironhide wasn't red, what do you think they'll do when he puts a freaking Nazi flag on Churchill's house?

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

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828055)
Posted by Bronzewolf on September 24th, 2016 @ 3:05pm CDT

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! ;)^

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828056)
Posted by Sabrblade on September 24th, 2016 @ 3:08pm CDT

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.

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828064)
Posted by Deadput on September 24th, 2016 @ 3:32pm CDT

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

Yeah and the overreacting fans actions also speak for themselves.

This place is a bunch of bull.

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828065)
Posted by Deadput on September 24th, 2016 @ 3:33pm CDT

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?

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828073)
Posted by Bronzewolf on September 24th, 2016 @ 3:43pm CDT

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?

I understand this was guaranteed to be a touchy subject (heck, I even fell pray to it.), I just ask that we all respect the fact that other people can have a differing opinion. We can discuss things in a civil manor, correct? Thank you.

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828082)
Posted by Randomhero on September 24th, 2016 @ 4:00pm CDT

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.

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828095)
Posted by Bronzewolf on September 24th, 2016 @ 4:53pm CDT

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.

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828112)
Posted by Deadput on September 24th, 2016 @ 6:20pm CDT

Maybe we should block comments until this cools down in a couple days or different news pops up.

There are plenty of car pics on instagram right now with Bee, Crosshairs, Hound, Hot Rod, Cogman and the red McLaren.

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828117)
Posted by Randomhero on September 24th, 2016 @ 6:31pm CDT

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.

sorry once again i forgot this is Seibertron.com where you can insult Michael bay, call him any name in the book, accuse him of of terrible things, make ridiculous claims while he doesn't a voice here to defend himself and be all hunky dory but the second someone steps in and plays devils advocate and tells people knock it off and use common sense and stop being so damn close minded and do some actual research on a topic, you get put in your place.

Kudos man, kudos.

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828120)
Posted by SlyTF1 on September 24th, 2016 @ 6:40pm CDT

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.

I can't get over something I was never mad at to begin with. I just think it's stupid.

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828123)
Posted by EunuchRon on September 24th, 2016 @ 6:50pm CDT

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. :-?

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828124)
Posted by Sabrblade on September 24th, 2016 @ 6:54pm CDT

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?

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828125)
Posted by Hellscream9999 on September 24th, 2016 @ 7:06pm CDT

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)

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828129)
Posted by Kurona on September 24th, 2016 @ 7:13pm CDT

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.

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828144)
Posted by Burn on September 24th, 2016 @ 7:47pm CDT

I understand that people are upset about Churchill's home being turned into a Nazi building, and you know what? I'm not exactly okay with it either.

BUT ... some of you are coming incredibly close to overstepping the forum rules. Please keep your comment respectful, and if you disagree with certain comments, do so in a respectful way.

Staff members have tried to defuse things on multiple occasions in the last few days, I'm tired of seeing this thread reported. Keep it respectful because this is the last time staff are stepping in. It's warnings from now on.

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828149)
Posted by Sabrblade on September 24th, 2016 @ 8:27pm CDT

Different but related topic:

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?

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828176)
Posted by Dr. Caelus on September 24th, 2016 @ 9:21pm CDT

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

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:

... 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.

I'd completely forgotten that was actually in there. Now, granted, I don't think Bay cares what people say about him on the internet, but I think it's a good rule to enforce even in that case, because (in my opinion) letting it slide affects the tone of the discussion and even the culture of the board. Unfortunately, I think when the rule is enforced, the people being reprimanded don't necessarily realize that they in particular are being reprimanded for that specifically. I think people might assume they're only being cited for their participation in any ensuing conflict.

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828188)
Posted by Starsaber468 on September 24th, 2016 @ 9:29pm CDT

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)

Heres how a 4 hour movie that has bad writing, multiple main villans, explosions, murderimus prime, and constant killing of decepticons so much so that they don't develop, and guess what even more BUMBLEBEE

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828200)
Posted by Deadput on September 24th, 2016 @ 9:41pm CDT

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.

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828205)
Posted by Dr. Caelus on September 24th, 2016 @ 10:09pm CDT

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.

Yeah, I'm sure I have no idea what that's like.

Anyway, it's bothered me quite a lot, so I felt I needed to say something, and have tried to do so respectfully.

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828232)
Posted by Burn on September 25th, 2016 @ 2:32am CDT

ANY FURTHER OFF-TOPIC POSTS WILL BE REMOVED.

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828254)
Posted by Stuartmaximus on September 25th, 2016 @ 6:57am CDT

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

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828257)
Posted by Autobot N on September 25th, 2016 @ 7:06am CDT

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

If I remember correctly, there was some concept art of them from the last movie.

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828282)
Posted by Logan. on September 25th, 2016 @ 8:33am CDT

Sir Anthony, from Transformers on Facebook

https://www.facebook.com/transformersmo ... 650864247/

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828351)
Posted by JazZeke on September 25th, 2016 @ 12:37pm CDT

"Don't you think he looks tired?"

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828400)
Posted by superchook6909 on September 25th, 2016 @ 2:51pm CDT

Poor taste or not, we will never know what the script is about, maybe due to the decepticons going back in time, they help the Nazi's in some way to conquer England, and the Autobots had to correct history.

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828401)
Posted by D-Maximal_Primal on September 25th, 2016 @ 2:54pm CDT

Or, how about this:

it goes like a Clive Cussler novel, uniting 2 separate events strangely. There is something that happens in the era of king arthur and the knights, and then the nazis discover it somehow, and it ends up in the modern day as something of interest that drags the Transformers in, such as an ancient cybertronian relic or something, and the nazi-house thing is just supposed to symbolize a nazi headquarters or something and there is no time travel?

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828407)
Posted by OptimalOptimus2 on September 25th, 2016 @ 3:07pm CDT

I wouldn't be surprised if Hitler had some Decepticons as allies during WWII. That's the only reason I would think the Nazis will play in this film.

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828409)
Posted by Apollo-XL5 on September 25th, 2016 @ 3:22pm CDT

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.

How is the film getting weird? I mean, if going by what everyone is saying, then the film will have the Transformers fighting across time with King Arthur against Hitler and the Nazis.

Well, I don't know what the guy who first came up with this was smoking at the time, but it is far more likely that the scenes with Arthur are probably flashbacks to his time to show us how he and Merlin are connected to the Macguffin that the Autobots and Decepticons are fighting over in this film.

Now, the Nazi scenes could either be an alternate time-line or just some castle that they have taken over somewhere in europe and showing how their events are connected to the film's plot.

I highly doubt we will see King Arthur punching Adolf Hitler (Captain America style) in this film.

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828410)
Posted by Apollo-XL5 on September 25th, 2016 @ 3:26pm CDT

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 just last year involving a film crew, a real life location and Nazi flags/banners in Nice, France.

Here is a link to the news story.

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

Re: Transformers 5: The Last Knight: Michael Bay Responds to Churchill Controversy (1828411)
Posted by Kurona on September 25th, 2016 @ 3:28pm CDT

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

Well okay, I don't doubt it's happened before; but I don't really keep track of every occurrence of it happening. The point is that most people are wise and thoughtful enough not to do it.

Click here to view additional comments about this topic ...