Bad Boys stars a smooth-talking Will Smith and a, surprisingly, not as annoying as he is now Martin Lawrence. I think it was made before Lawrence started believing his own hype. The guy, since then, has been average at best.
A buddy cop thriller with smatterings of comedy throughout, I had a great time with it.
The same can be said about The Rock and Armageddon.
Films where the plot took a back seat and the actors let the action do the talking. What's not to love about Nicolas Cage and Sean Connery getting involved in chemical warfare from a prison in the middle of the water?
And Armageddon? If you tell me you didn't enjoy it then fair play to you. I had a blast. It's throwaway fun that does exactly what it says on the tin.
If you're after something a bit more cerebral, why not look out something by Gaspar Noe. Or the Coen brothers. May I add I enjoy films from both sets of directors greatly. I'm just aware some films are there for us to enjoy and then forget. Others are made to be discussed and dissected.
For Bay, his first foray into films based on real events - Pearl Harbour - was where the vitriol started. Critics lambasted his version of events.
I'll be honest, I detest the film. From the soft-focus filming style to the 'charge of the light brigade' bravado of America saving the world (again, if cinema has taught us anything), it's a nauseating experience.
Josh Hartnett is a good actor. Ben Affleck not so much - but he is becoming a very impressive director. However, Pearl Harbour will forever remain a black mark on their respective acting biographies.
Bad Boys II was fun. Not as much as its predecessor, but it didn't suck ass.
The Island was distinctly meh! (It's a proper term now, Ed, I promise!)
This is where it gets interesting - or not, if you're that way inclined.
His decision to make an action movie franchise surrounding alien robots that could transform into almost any mechanical or electrical object baffled many.
Transformers movies were on the horizon after a deal was struck with makers Hasbro.
The first was funny and brought to life the toys I played with as a kid. Again, it was throwaway action, but fun nonetheless. And the visual effects were brilliant!
Starring Shia LaBeouf (and I might write in support of him down the line), Megan Fox - before she fell out with Bay and was replaced by another sexbot in the guise of Rosie Huntington-Whiteley - and Josh Duhamel, it evoked memories of childhood for us kids of the 80s.
The sequel was appalling. Where the first was exciting and new, this was annoying, offensive and a bit of a mess. Robots fighting robots became something of a who's-who. And don't even start me on the racially stereotypical bots that were as annoying as Sam Witwicky's parents!
The third Transformers film - Dark of the Moon - is where I think the anger and hatred being spat at Bay became, for many, just an excuse to jump on the bandwagon.
Many will provide valid points as to why they don't like it. Others are just following the crowd.
TF3 is a good film. About an hour too long. But, for me, minus the 60-minue sag in the middle, it's solid. The stuff on the Moon is good. The destruction of Chicago is simply stunning - especially in IMAX 3D. In fact, I couldn't help think that's what inspired Joss Whedon's finale for Avengers Assemble, given it's pretty much ripping it off - there, I said it!
It's no longer cool to admit you like Bay apparently. It's clearly much easier just to join the growing throng of naysayers rather than have a voice of your own.
Well, here I am, Garry McConnachie - the guy who cites American History X as my favourite film of all time - saying: "I like Michael Bay films - for the most part!"
Have I lost some street cred? Maybe. I'm unsure just how much I had left when I admitted I've never been a huge fan of Whedon.
But Bay isn't the pariah many make him out to be.
The defence rests. Your witness.
