To Bay or Not To Bay?

Here's a recent article written by Johnathan Foster discussing the two differing schools on Michael Bay: explosions vs art. Foster's makes a pretty simple argument

I gave up on Michael Bay movies having great stories or strong characters long ago, and yet, I find that he continually fails to deliver thrills. He wields explosions around as gracelessly as bad comedies do jokes, and yet his pyrotechnic fervor has wrongly come to symbolize the entire genre: the bigger the fireworks, the better the film.

but I think Bay's validity in cinema is a bit more complex. Bay's films are so overtly pro-American, patriotic in the truest sense of the word, that it's almost hard to ignore. Take Armaggeddon, for example, in which some variation of red white and blue can be found in every frame. While he may not have 'style', his aesthetic is so well defined that it alone can distinguish a film. Maybe its similar to the way people appreciate Ed Wood - bad, but so distinctly bad.

I haven't seen Transformers yet (or any of the other major blockbusters this season, they're all so crummy!) but I am definitely interested. I figure, if Hollywood can't get gigantic fucking fighting robots right, then they should really just stop making movies. Just stop.