I think we've had this kind of argument before, one where you level an evaluative and objective statement about a film you don't dig. I want to lay out the problems I see with your stance on Transformers, and get some sort of systematic response from you.
You say TF is awful, beyond bad awful, bad as The Core awful.
And you do so in some objective sense.
Okay, what exactly does "awful" mean?
It can't mean "didn't make money." It made 650 million dollars. This means that not only did other people disagree with you on the film's merit (I have several friends who dug it), but that they decided to watch the film in the theater more than once.
It can't mean that critics loathed it (that is, a critical layer of opinion that hovers above the hoi polloi with disdain while the common audience laps it up), because it has Bay's best Rotten Tomatoes rating of all his films.
So...does it mean "Morally repugnant"? If so, how (in some other way than its aesthetic failures...i.e. it's so bad a film that it becomes a sin to watch it)?
Does it mean aesthetically awful? How are you judging this?
What "I" think it means is that you won't watch Transformers again. I'm fully willing to take that as a workable answer. Moral judgments? I guess I can see you coming down hardline on it. Aesthetic judgments? Um...not so much. Your stubbornness regarding this film lets me know it's something more personal rather than some objective standard. Unless...you can articulate a program of judgment on which to base your claim.