I don't think Bay will return either, but for different reasons.

For one thing, Bay has said that he doesn't like working in established movie series. He said he'll never do a Marvel movie or a Star Wars movie. Now that someone else has contributed to the movieverse, It's not really Bay's singular vision anymore, and I'm not sure he'll want to continue because of that.

For another thing, I'm not sure Hasbro will let him back. They seem to want to include the movies in their "brand unification" plan. Considering Bay's stuff was very out-there in comparison to Hasbro's more "safe", G1 oriented stuff, I'm not sure he'll fit their vision for the brand. I think they liked the money he brought in before, but that was before TLK flopped.

 

I don’t mean to sound dumb, but what’s this “brand unification” thing? Just wondering because I’ve seen people comment it before.

 

It means that it will all look the same..everything in the brand goes all G1 and stuff and the movies did too now at least with this one movie so by brand unification they're really saying:This is Transformers and this is how they look..doesn't matter if it's a game,movie or show..toy.Every single thing will be the same.

 

Except the part where Knight and Bay sat down for hours and Bay explained his philosophy on Transformers to Knight, for which Knight said he took into consideration and was grateful for.

 

There have been so many stories and interviews that indicate that Bay has been ready to leave Transformers for a while. He's been getting into the producer thing with movies and TV, plus all those other projects he's wanted to do but couldn't do when he was directing movies.

I'm not even sure that Bay would be all that upset if Paramount went and rebooted the whole thing. Before Paramount decided to see if they could drive the franchise into the ground Bay said the movie after Dark of the Moon would be a reboot. If he was okay with another director taking over back then and he was okay with a reboot back then, why would he be upset about those things now? He's been in the movie business long enough to know for a series to go forward something you have to radically shake things up.

 

Basically what Primal789 said. It's the idea of tying the various stories together more, so the different mediums more closely resemble each other. From what I understand, a lot of the backstory and lore would also carry over, so people can apply knowledge of one universe to another.

To an extent I'd argue it's a positive thing. It is important for different aspects of the brand to be identifiable as part of the same brand. I actually like the idea of being able to apply knowledge of one universe to another. I've found that a lot of non-fans are very confused by our lore. It's confusing to have to learn what the Allspark cube is in the movieverse, and then learn what the Allspark is in Aligned all over again. Imagine if lightsabers functioned differently in all Star Wars stories. I think there needs to be a good balance between things that are uniform between stories, and things that can differ.

 

I totally disagree.
1. Even if Bay was very unenthusiastic about Knight's movie, Knight still had to say something like “I really admired Bay's vision" for the sake of politeness. Knight is an adult not a 6-year old kid who says everything that is in his mind.

2. Different transformer characters need different directors. How about terrorcons for Del Toro? I bet that Toro can produce a very good movie on the origins of terrorcons.

 

1. My point was that, from all indications, Bay was very supportive of Travis during the whole process of production; basically, Bay let Travis do what he wanted and openly said he admired Travis' vision for the film. Travis has said nothing but positive things about Bay; I've read the interviews and none of the things he's said about Bay come off as backhanded compliments or things just said because he's trying to be polite. The two had a fairly good working relationship.

2. Different directors for each instalment would bring differing qualities to the series; I'm not against that at all. In fact, if we have a cinematic universe, different directors for each installment are the best thing to have. However, we're not going to get Guillermo del Toro no matter which group of Transformers the movie is about.

Why? del Toro has never said anything that indicates he's interested in Transformers at all. The only thing that could possibly motivate him is if there was a really, really good script (which, since del Toro tends to write his own material, I doubt will ever happen). The same applies to Peter Jackson (who's also often brought up in these discussions); he was pretty much an unknown before he did Lord of the Rings and King Kong was a passion project for him.

Basically, we're not going to get Guillermo del Toro or Peter Jackson or Ridley Scott or James Cameron. Why? These directors have the money - and clout - to make the movies they want to make. None of them have ever expressed any interest in Transformers; or any other popular movie franchise that they weren't involved in from the very beginning. We're being overambitious to think the franchise has enough clout to attract Oscar-winning directors.

And that's alright. Even the MCU doesn't get "big name" directors very often, instead, they get relative unknowns who've never done big studio films before; that's the best model to have and something that we should strive to copy, because it lets talented filmmakers get a big gig. Look at the 2014 Godzilla; it was Gareth Edwards' second film and it's one of the best monster movies ever made. Or Guardians of the Galaxy; James Gunn had never helmed a big Hollywood film before and he ended up making one of the MCU best films in the MCU.

 

Bay hasn't wanted to return to Transformers since DOTM. I'm sure he's satisfied with the present situation where he gets to act as a producer, probably do a lot less work, and possibly get as much, if not more, money.

 

Yeah. A position as producer means he gets to do less work and have more time to do the films like 13 Hours and Pain and Gain that he feels artistically satisfied by. From his statements, I think he wanted to step back after DOTM and merely produce (whilst doing other work), but Paramount and Spielberg wouldn't let him.

And honestly, I'm glad he's not directing any more; The Last Knight was rather tiring to sit through. Bay's movies aren't bad per se, but existing alongside an MCU which shows that you can do action movies with a sense of nuance, they're exhausting to watch (except the first).

 

Look at Godzilla he my have different looks and design but he’s still the same monster

 

Spielberg's the same way: "one for the masses to make money for the studio, then one for me." He even "phoned it in" and outsourced the finishing of Jurassic Park to George Lucas while he ran off to go make Schindler's List.

 

Yeah; a lot of directors are like that, with the possible exception of Edgar Wright. Now, credit where it's due, from all accounts, Bay actually invests time and effort in the "BOOM! EXPLOSIONS!!" films when most directors wouldn't give a shit. A producer's position is perfect for him, because he has just as much money and more time to make the stuff he really wants to make; that's what Spielberg and Peter Jackson ended up doing.

Which is why you're not going to get them directing a TF movie.

 

No No more Michael Bay and No more of his Evil Explosions!

 

Again, he is still involved, just not as a director. Besides, he's wanted to step back since 2011; he's probably very happy with the present status quo. It means he can scan the script, say "That's OK", and go off and do the films he really wants to make, like 13 Hours and Pain and Gain.

 

*reads thread title*

Thank god

 

You know, he's still involved in the franchise; he's just no longer directing. He was a producer on Bumblebee and his production company is one of the companies listed in making the film; I wonder how many people bothered to read the credits.

Travis Knight also said that he met Bay multiple times and that Bay was very supportive of him; basically, Bay let Travis do what he wanted and openly said he admired Travis' vision for the film.

Besides, Bay is probably very happy with the present status quo. It means he can scan the script, say "That's OK", and go off and do the films he really wants to make, like 13 Hours and Pain and Gain.

 

This spinoff is still Bay-verse and Bay is still a producer. I'm not sure where you're getting your info from but I'm sure Paramount doesn't care as long as you're still giving them your $upport.

 

On the other hand, Avi Arard produces the Raimi series, Webb series, animated Spider series and such.

Christopher Nolan produced Man of Steel. Doesn't mean Superman exists in the Nolanverse.

Doesn't mean they're in the same universe.

 

Well, no, but this is somewhat of a different case. Unlike those cases (where it was fairly explicit that they were different canons), Travis Knight explicitly stated that Bumblebee links into the previous films. Until we get explicit confirmation otherwise, Bumblebee exists in the same universe as the earlier films.