Wait... So my choices are:
1) a poor public speaker
2) a poor public speaker (with subtitles)
3) a poor public speaker (with pictures and sound effects)
Shucks... Those all suck. But...
With #1, you can do your best to focus. Take notes, use a recorder or memorization tricks... You'll probably miss some portions, and misunderstand others, but with a bit of luck you'll manage to come away with the gist of it.
With #2, you can try to get a copy of the presentation and just read it later, so even though your time has been wasted at least you can still get the information. If you can print out a copy before hand, you can take notes in the margins, or just use the time to read it, thus avoiding some of the waste and potentially allowing you to ask questions.
With #3, you're screwed. There's no verbatim print-out, and now you have flashing images and sounds to compete for your attention span.
A good presenter uses the tools available - whether software, whiteboard, or merely his own voice - to complement the material he's trying to communicate. A bad presenter takes the same tools and distracts himself and his audience. The problem isn't powerpoint - it's thinking that sprinkling powerpoint on a dull, dense presentation magically makes communication happen, expecting that the same folk who couldn't manage to streamline their verbal communication will somehow manage to extract the key points when faced with a dizzying array of new tools for amplifying and emphasizing whatever garbage is fed into them...