So Bad, It's Horrible is one of the more flame-bait-y parts of the site, so a cleanup thread is needed to ensure that works aren't added simply because someone doesn't like them.
If you want to list a work under this, keep the following in mind:
- The work must have very few fans or defenders (both genuine and ironic). It should fail to appeal to any type of audience.
- Being offensive in its subject matter isn't enough.
- It isn't horrible just because a certain critic disliked it, though their reviews can be used as sources and citations.
- The work should have notably poor reviews (e.g., less than 3/10 on IMDb, or single digit scores on Rotten Tomatoes)
- For a Moral Substitute to qualify, it cannot even appeal to its target demographic.
- Please be polite while writing and as much as possible, avoid falling into Complaining About Shows You Don't Like. Instead, focus on explaining why the work is horrible.
In addition, per No Recent Examples, Please!, a work must be at least one month old before it can be added, to prevent knee-jerk reactions.
Edited by GastonRabbit on Oct 6th 2024 at 3:34:45 AM
Plus Lucas Cruikshank had a fandom of kids. The point is this didn't even do well with them.
I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.
Berserk Button: misusing Nightmare Fuel
I should point out to ~Skyla Noivern that arthritis isn't a mental illness, it's a problem with the joints. Richard Benson's guitar skills didn't degrade because of a mental illness, but because his fingers weren't able to move as well anymore.
I feel as if the write-up for Marvin Marvin focuses too much on the show's premise, and not enough on what truly makes it So Bad, It's Horrible.
Edited by jandn2014 on Jan 25th 2021 at 11:21:32 AM
I agree.
Off topic, but are we cutting Cherry Sisters? That discussion never really got resolved.
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper WallIf it drew crowds due to Bile Fascination, Cherry Sisters sounds more like it could be So Bad, It's Good. If they mostly just repelled people then it can probably stay as Horrible. I don't think not having archival footage of the show should deter it from being on the page, as long as we know why it got such a bad reception. Otherwise the rest of the Theater page would be likewise fucked.
I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.Yeah, my issue was less that we have no footage and more that the example seemed way too focused on the sisters themselves and barely described the act that was so horrible.
Working on: Author Appeal | Sandbox | Troper WallOn the Topic of entries that barely explain why a piece of media is horrible, there is Mr. Personality in the Game Show section. Due to an IMDB Rating of 2.8/10, it's the only game show on my cleanup list that remains.
The only point made in favor of it being "horrible" is the fact that none of the participants were truly ugly, which defeated the entire point of the show. I think the entry needs to be expanded on.
Also, Our Little Genius never actually premiered, and the entry mainly talks about behind the scenes drama mirroring the 50's quiz show scandals. Should it be removed?
Edited by magnumtropus on Jan 26th 2021 at 8:07:23 AM
I removed Tentmoot from Horrible.Other Media a while ago because the con never actually happened, so I guess Our Little Genius would have to go by the same metric, as it never got audience reception anyway. It might better fit something like Overshadowed by Controversy or whichever trope describes shows that were filmed but cancelled right before they air.
I noticed some excessive bashing in the SBIH pages, and when I posted it in the "removing bashing" thread they sent me here.
Basically I noticed that Live-Action TV often uses too harsh wording in certain entries. While they may be bad and all, there is no excuse to call A Night at Joe Piscopo "toxic shit" among other things.
I was the one who sent you here. I think that, even though this is Horrible, entries still shouldn't be too bashy. Some entries, such as the Joe Piscopo one you mentioned, could use some less insulting language I agree. What we have to do is be able to talk about a work being bad without being insulting or getting too personal or natter-y. I think it can be done, but some discussion might be needed as to how. What does everyone else think?
I found "toxic shit" and the usage of a Fridge Horror pothole to be overreacting on the Piscopo entry. Amusingly, when I first skimmed that entry I thought it was literally about something toxic infecting the audience members on the cruise line.
I do some cleanup and then I enjoy shows you probably think are cringe.I feel like Horrible.GameMods should be removed, as it essentially counts as fan-made content, when there's a rule against fan-made content in Horrible pages to my knowledge.
There's a rule about fanfiction having its own page due to content policy issues and difficulties judging the qualiy. Other pages like Horrible.Webcomics have fan works listed (though that page is contentious as well).
I think the problem with Horrible.Game Mods and Horrible.Fan Games is that they're applying the standards of professional works to works that were probably made by only one person, rather than the problems that got Horrible.Fanfic cut.
In particular, the latter's description claims "the same principle applies" to commercial works and fan games, and says the developers might not really be fans just because they can't make something on par with the original.
Edit: I meant to put Horrible.Fanfic and put Horrible.Fanfiction by mistake. I fixed that.
Edited by GastonRabbit on Jan 28th 2021 at 7:07:51 AM
I got a rock for Halloween.Wasn't around for when Fan Fiction got cut. Was it because it became more about hating the person who wrote the fanfic then the actual fanfic itself?
No, Horrible.Fan Fiction was cut because it was a repost of Horrible.Fan Fic. That page was cut in 2012 b/c of the 5P cleanup (see also
) as noted in Permanent Red Link Club, nothing about edit warring. Horrible.Fanfic Authors was cut in 2011 because of a dispute which is documented on the discussion page.
This example just seems to fall under merely being offensive. It dosen't really explain why it's horrible other than that.
- Baby Shaker was a thankfully now-discontinued iOS app where you were given a picture of a baby and have to shake the device to prevent it from crying. After enough shaking, red crosses appear over the baby's eyes, indicating that you just killed the baby. The app was removed from the iTunes App Store after a protest led by a couple who felt their babies were being victimized. Here
is a news report showing the app in action.
I actually meant to put Horrible.Fanfic. I typed Horrible.Fanfiction by mistake and didn't know the latter existed.
Edited by GastonRabbit on Jan 28th 2021 at 7:08:53 AM
I got a rock for Halloween.![]()
From the description it just feels like one of those old flash games that only exist for being edgy. Not sure how it got on mobile phones, though.
Not sure about cutting Baby Shaker. The main reason it's seen as horrible is due to how offensive it is, but it doesn't seem to have any appeal outside of that. It's a low-effort app that's only reason to exist is shock value. If it was just some random Flash game in some forgotten corner of the Internet then I would agree there's not much point listing it. But given that it somehow managed to get on the app store and received enough of a backlash to be mentioned on the news and removed makes me think it counts.
Edited by TommyFresh on Jan 28th 2021 at 6:09:00 AM

"Plus, the premise of an alien that comes to live on Earth was already overused by the time of its release, and here it's not even constructed properly."
Edited by PhantomDusclops92 on Jan 24th 2021 at 7:02:16 PM