There is a tendency among film critics to scoff at blockbusters, action flicks, and movies with copious amounts of CGI. They complain at the direction Hollywood has been taking, which sees more and more action-heavy movies each year. But their complaints are misplaced, and at times, seem a bit snobbish to movie fans like me, who love Oscar winners and blockbusters with equal passion.

Movies such as Lincoln, Schindler’s List, and Good Will Hunting tell tremendous stories about history or the human condition and allow us to look inward. But movies heavy with special effects and action aren’t necessarily bad movies. Often, they allow us to look outward, challenging our ideas of right and wrong in new and powerful ways, while pushing us to think of where we could be and where we could go. Others just offer us unique stories which look incredible in IMAX 3D.

There are movies, however, which deserve their criticism. They are films that ignore basic storytelling, choosing instead to focus only on action, violence, and explosions.

The first Transformers trilogy offers a good example of both types of big-budget blockbusters. Transformers has long been used by film critics as the example of everything wrong with Hollywood today, but I am inclined to disagree in two out of three cases. Transformers 1 and Transformers 3 both tell good stories with heart and humor, while Transformers 2 falls into the same trap as some of the less popular action-heavy movies.

So what is it that Transformers 1 and 3 got right? It is important to remember that a movie should be judged for what it is and not what it isn’t. The Transformers movies were never intended to earn an Academy Award for Best Picture. They weren’t made to question the human condition, and they weren’t made to raise awareness of a disease or illness. The Transformers movies were meant to bring children of the ’80s and ’90s back to their childhoods in ways that would still appeal to their adult sensibilities. They were made to be fun and to push the boundaries of what computer animation could do. In these ways, the Transformers movies were very successful.

Fans of the 1980s cartoon show were thrilled when the first movie began and the voice of the original Optimus Prime, Peter Cullen, could be heard again. They were fascinated by a movie that honored their childhood fantasy without talking down to them. And people new to the franchise got to enjoy watching high-octane battles and explosions in a simple good versus evil story. The movie was escapism at its best.

But there are plenty of escapist movies out there that fail the test of a good movie, including Transformers 2. So why is it that I feel the first and third succeeded where the second failed? Put simply, there is a fair way to measure blockbuster films within the range of what can be expected. Look at the good blockbuster movies: Star Wars, The Avengers, The Dark Knight, The Winter Soldier. What stands out about these movies as opposed to the bad blockbuster films?

The late Roger Ebert put it this way: “The very best films in this genre, like Christopher Nolan’s The Dark Knight and Sam Raimi’s Spider-Man 2, had compelling characters, depended on strong human performances, told great stories, and skillfully integrated the live-action and the CGI.”

Man of Steel, Godzilla, and Transformers 2 lack what all movies need: heart. The characters are cliched, with only minimal development. Transformers 1 and 3 have heart. Yes, Shia LeBeouf is annoying. Yes, Megan Fox is not the best actor. Yes, the explosions and battles are ridiculous. And yes, Michael Bay is probably a misogynist. But these movies took time to get to the action-heavy payoffs and built up the relationships and personalities of the characters first.

The slow buildup to the big action scene is a great idea, but it requires characters who can carry the story while we wait. Our concern for these characters then increases our interest in the big payoff, because we care about their safety. In poor blockbusters, like Man of Steel and Godzilla, we are given one-dimensional characters while waiting two hours for the big payoff in which an entire city is leveled with little concern for the humans who died.

Transformers 2 lacks the discipline of its predecessor and falls into another common trap of the blockbuster. Revenge of the Fallen cost an exorbitant amount of money and spent all of it on explosions and destruction, without any sense of pacing or character development. It gives away too much action and keeps the big scenes from feeling special. It also fails to live up to the expectations of a good movie in a plethora of other ways.

The first movie was about first contact with heroic and not-so-heroic alien races who were bringing their war to Earth, but it was also about a boy and his car — and a boy trying to score with a girl who was way out of his league. We can relate to Sam Witwicky, who is seen as a slacker in school and a loser to most people. He is the everyman who rises to the occasion and saves the Earth.

But what is the plot of Transformers 2? Robots are killing each other and Sam is afraid to tell his smoking-hot girlfriend that he loves her. Sure, he’s starting college, but his personal difficulties are hardly even addressed in the movie.

The movie instead plods along with poorly designed robots continually propositioning Fox, while we have to see robot testicles and, at times, pretty blatant racism. It’s Bay at his worst, relying far too heavily on the robots and explosions while lacking the heart that makes the other films so fun.

Transformers 1 and 3 do things right by starting in reality and slowly building to the absurd. They start by showing the problems of the young Sam, whose world is about to be shaken. He faces the same difficulties that most young men face — problems in school, trying to impress a pretty girl, troubles finding a job, and more. It just so happens that his new car turns out to be a sentient alien robot.

And that’s what the movies do so well: they take this absurd concept that was created specifically to sell toys and make it at least somewhat believable, not to mention fun to watch, just like when we were children who found the cartoons so fascinating. The movies will never be in contention for any acting awards, but they are fun, decent movies for the audience that loves to see giant robot fights.

Going forward, before Hollywood invests millions of dollars into a movie, it should use the Transformers films as a litmus test. Build to the big moment, like Godzilla did, but make the human characters compelling so that we can enjoy the ride, like Godzilla was unable to do. Don’t sacrifice story for spectacle, like Transformers 2, but make sure the spectacle holds even more power, because we care about the characters, like in Transformers 3. Explosions and good CGI may guarantee you a triple, but why settle for that when you can hit a homerun?