So basically, because you don't understand how to properly manage exposures or dodge/burn, you lean on gimmicky feeling HDR that anyone with Photomatix can do in minutes?
Right?
It just reminds me of some kid who picked up a dSLR, couldn't manage to take compelling shots with dark room style editing, and so starting spot coloring and HDR. There are mountains and mountains of HDR that look like yours on Flickr and else where, it is hardly unique or distinct in approach or methodology. For instance, that highlight below the front tire with the Corvette is entirely the result of excessive HDR use. If you feel your work is just "point and click" without the HDR, then maybe you should consider using different angles, or shooting a longer/faster lens to give more pop... I suspect you're using F/4 zooms mostly rather than fast primes.
If you toned down the HDR so it was subtle, I would understand, but you dial way the hell up and suddenly things that the brain thinks should be darker are brighter. I have sprawling HDR panoramas that people have paid good money for, but they don't have the typical CG over the top mapping. Or do HDR selectively by processing the image, using masks, and keeping shadows somewhat natural feeling.
Go for it if it makes you happy. But most people with experience in photography will look at and write it off as just more half baked HDR to be "different" that just comes off as lacking in tasteful editing. You might as well just do selective coloring and masked blurring for "bokeh" as well.
.
