Pet Shop (1994)

How bad is it? It has some terrible puppetwork and poor comedy aimed at children.
Should you see it? Only if you're a huge fan of Charles Band films, or of "Prehysteria."

Aliens land on Earth and buy a pet shop, with the plan of abducting children for their interstellar zoo. There's a subplot about mafia and witness protection, but most of the film is a small monster causing mischief and children trying to keep their parents from noticing it; this involves puppetry that those same children could probably do, as they merely rock from side to side or bounce up and down on the wires from which they're held. There are some terrible makeup and clothes for the supposed cowboy characters, combined with accents that are rootin tootin durned near codswallop. There's some minor laughs to be had, but not enough.

The Party at Kitty and Stud's (1970)

aka The Italian Stallion

How bad is it? It's low-rent 1970 porn. Different versions exist, what I saw was pretty bad.
Should you see it? If seeing Sly Stallone's genitals is your idea of fun.

Supposedly paid $200, Sylvester Stallone did a porn film before becoming famous. In it, there's an orgy that lasts way too long, anal sex, lesbianism with Sly flexing in the background and a violent rape scene that turns on the woman - the reason this film is generally despised. The pretentiously arty filming and soundtrack are laughable as are some odd unintentional similarities to "Rocky." It's been said that there are some hard-core scenes edited out, but I'm thinking that someone edited some in to the finished version, trying to make it seem even worse (and that version I haven't seen).

Overlords of the UFO (1976)

How bad is it? It's incredible. Literally.
Should you see it? Half is filler, but half is pure gold. Yes.

After the Mondo movies of the 1960's and the early shockumentaries, there came a slew of television-friendly alternative views of science documentaries - enough, in fact, to generate a couple of television series ("In Search Of" comes to mind, as host Leonard Nimoy died this week). This one purports that flying saucers are from a place called Ummo in another dimension. One of the experts is "psychic" Uri Geller. They state that their claims were confirmed by Carl Jung, who just happened to be dead at the time. They show photos of invisible flying creatures - think about that for a second. This film circles subjects, creating a web of misinformation to confuse the viewer into thinking that something has been said. It's often laugh out loud ludicrous.

Octopus (2000)

How bad is it? It's one of the lesser giant sea monster films.
Should you see it? This has potential to be seen as so-bad-it's-good in the future. It doesn't qualify yet. Watch at your own risk.

Radiation from a 1960's Russian submarine creates a giant octopus. An American nuclear sub is carrying a terrorist to the U.S. and, of course, encounters it. The terrorist's henchmen hi-jack a cruise ship and go after the sub - never mind the lack of detecting equipment, lack of speed and lack in numbers. The main laughable features of the film are the characters: the hero is incredibly wimpy (especially for a government agent), he female doctor is preposterous (Denise Richards in "The World Is Not Enough" suddenly looks like a believable physicist) and every other character is a one-dimensional cliche. The action scenes, late in coming, are poorly staged.

Octaman (1971)

How bad is it? It's a  bad 1950's rubber suit monster flick done a generation late.
Should you see it? It's not top shelf entertainment, but worth a look.

The stories behind this film are more interesting than the film itself. Pier Angeli stars, but she committed suicide (pills) before filming was complete; she had said that she didn't want to live to be over 40, as there was no place for women, especially actresses, at that age - she was 39. The bad monster was designed by Rick Baker, who went on to become famous and developed a talent not in evidence here. The story is the standard pollution transforming a creature, in this case making a walking octopus that kills for no apparent reason in Mexico. It's all very silly, not done well, but not as much fun as you'd hope.

Ninja Terminator (1988)

How bad is it? There's no terminator and darn little ninja. Substandard chop-socky action.
Should you see it? The small group who like bad martial arts films may enjoy this.

Godfrey Ho directed 100 ninja films, most of which had no ninjas or, like this one, had a few minutes of ninja action spliced in, ruining the continuity and ruining what plot was there. The golden ninja warrior statue has magical powers and is being sought by Sho Kosugi and two other martial arts students; it comes in three parts and has to be assembled. This film has no connection to "The Terminator" except the title. It is actually better than the other, unrelated, "Ninja Terminator" film directed by Lo Mar, which came out about the same time.

Night Claws (2013)

How bad is it? It's a dimestore Bigfoot replacing the shark in Jaws, with one real twist.
Should you see it? Sure, go ahead.

I'm starting to become a fan of director David A. Prior, whose terrible films are at least fun to watch. This, as usual, stars his brother Ted Prior and also has Reb Brown and Frank Stallone, who have been in their own shares of bad films. A scientist, sheriff and deputy hunt a Bigfoot who is on a killing spree. There's also a hunter with two henchmen trying to bag the creature himself. The sheriff ends up thinking the hunter is really responsible for the Bigfoot killings, so he arrests him, but then the female scientist - SPOILER ALERT - kills the sheriff, because she's a bounty hunter, not a scientist and the hunter killed her boss's son during black ops in Nicaragua. Then a slew of Bigfeet kill her.

The effects are bad, the acting laughable - you can actually see actors rehearsing their lines before delivering them - and, if you don't mind a completely predictable plot before it completely derails, it's a good viewing experience.