Having been raised in the cult of bad cinema, I am well-versed in the holy books: The Golden Turkey Awards and The Son of the Golden Turkey Awards by the Medved brothers. While I appreciate the effort made by Mr. Scimia to contribute to the canon, this particular book falls short in many ways.
Mr. Scimia does a good job in the very beginning, outlining the qualities that make a truly "so bad, it's good" movie, using the classic Plan 9 from Outer Space as his example. These are the readily identifiable characteristics of the best of the worst: bad writing, bad acting, poor production values, the X-factor (in the case of Plan 9 he fingers this as Bela Lugosi's posthumous non-sequitur appearances), and sincerity. Of these, I think sincerity is the most valuable in taking a merely bad movie to the level of a masterpiece of incompetence. I would add in a certain level of auteur-ship on the part of the director, which is tied into that sincerity. Really good bad movies just do not tend to be made by big studios; they make bad ones, for certain, but not enjoyably bad ones. And, in this age when making a theater-release movie costs real money, and a certain self-conscious cynicism and detached irony pervade most short works on media such as YouTube, find a really great bad movie is becoming more and more rare.
That was my biggest complaint with this book: I think that the author lists too many movies that are just bad, without being entertainingly, joyously, enchantingly bad. There are too many big studio releases that are annoying or boring without the charm of the low-budget offerings of the 1950's and 1960's. Mr. Scimia also relies too much on MST3K; he breaks very little new ground. I did not come away from reading this book with a list of new baddies I was eager to see. That is a shame, because the world of bad cinema rivals the oceans in the percentage left to be explored.