The title’s two promises need a little care: “bad” is a judgment, and a show with scant current coverage is not necessarily forgotten. The 30 picks below are therefore an argued retrospective, not a definitive ranking or a claim about what audiences remember. The first group highlights series whose execution can frustrate, while noting what they tried to do; the second looks at shows with strengths that reward a return. The selection favors distinct premises and contrasts between dated presentation and lasting craft. Where the available evidence establishes only a premise or critical disagreement—not a broad reputation—the entry says so.
15 animated shows whose weaknesses are part of the story
These are not 15 objectively worst cartoons. “Notoriously bad” is the provocative half of the title, not a verified consensus: the available sources do not establish a shared list of notorious failures. The entries below are better read as shows that can be divisive, uneven, or especially vulnerable to the passage of time. Some are included because criticism offers a clear point of discussion; others because a premise or format invites a fair assessment rather than a verdict by reputation.
| # | Preview | Product | Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
|
Daria: The Complete Animated Series | $16.95 | Buy on Amazon |
| 2 |
|
Batman: The Complete Animated Series (DVD) | $27.99 | Buy on Amazon |
| 3 |
![Back to the Future: The Complete Animated Series [DVD]](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51ukNmfhzUL._SL160_.jpg)
|
Back to the Future: The Complete Animated Series [DVD] | $9.49 | Buy on Amazon |
| 4 |
|
GODZILLA: THE COMPLETE ANIMATED SERIES DVD DVD | $8.29 | Buy on Amazon |
| 5 |
|
Batman Beyond: The Complete Series (Rpkg) (DVD) | $24.96 | Buy on Amazon |
1. Fanboy & Chum Chum
Fanboy & Chum Chum is a Nickelodeon children’s animated adventure series whose first season was released in November 2009. Its energetic leads are fantasy and science-fiction fans, joined by their wizard friend Kyle. That comic setup can be a draw for viewers who enjoy broad, high-volume slapstick; it can also make the show feel exhausting when the antics overwhelm the stories. A Screen Rant review reproduced on the season page criticizes its weak storylines and reliance on the leads’ antics. That is one critic’s assessment, not proof of a general verdict or of the show’s obscurity.
2. Problem Solverz
Cartoon Network’s Problem Solverz began in April 2011 and follows three young men running an unconventional detective agency. Its oddball setup and conspicuous visual identity are easy to remember once encountered, but the show’s existence alone does not settle whether its strangeness is inventive or off-putting. The Rotten Tomatoes season page lists no critic reviews, so it cannot support a claim of negative critical consensus. Consider this a curiosity for viewers interested in eccentric television animation, not a documented critical flop.
Recommended Free Tools
#1 Best Overall
- Featurette pilot: Sealed With a Kick
- Music video: Mystik Spiral music video "Freakin' Friends"
- Featurette: Daria Day Intros
- Featurette: Top Ten Video Countdown Hosted by Daria & Jane
- Interview: Cast & crew interviews
3. Duckman
Duckman, an adult animated comedy that ran from 1994 to 1997, is a useful reminder that “bad” can depend on which part of a show a critic values. Its Rotten Tomatoes season-one page gathers sharply critical and appreciative responses. The A.V. Club’s Nathan Rabin is quoted there as saying, “Duckman was ahead of its time,” while the same page also records a negative assessment from Entertainment Weekly and praise from other critics. Rather than treating the mixed reception as a settled verdict, watch for yourself whether its abrasive comic voice works for you.
4. A caution about calling a cartoon a failure
For a fair retrospective, separate a show’s documented details from a judgment about its quality. A premise, run date, network, or individual review can establish useful context; none by itself proves that a series was widely disliked or forgotten. That distinction matters especially for shows with little critical coverage: absence of reviews is not evidence of bad reviews.
Rank #2
5. How to approach the rest of this half
A genuinely evidence-led “worst 15” list would require show-specific reporting for every pick: production and broadcast details, representative criticism, and a clear explanation of what does not work. The sources available here provide leads for only a handful of series and do not substantiate 15 notorious failures. Rather than inventing a reputation for 12 additional cartoons, this retrospective keeps the negative half limited to the cases it can responsibly discuss.
15 animated shows worth revisiting
The positive side also needs discernment: current editorial recognition is not evidence that a show is forgotten, and a nostalgic reputation does not guarantee a rewarding rewatch. These entries focus on what can be said from the available show-specific evidence and explain where a viewer may find value. The source base supports only two concrete examples here, so the remaining 13 are not filled with guesses.
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minute2Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errors3Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitches1. Beast Wars
Beast Wars pits the Maximals against their enemies in a science-fiction conflict rendered with computer-generated imagery. That visual approach can now look dated, but the Rotten Tomatoes season page also reflects praise for character work and storytelling. Those are different questions: dated rendering may make the series a tougher sell for viewers focused on visual polish, while viewers willing to meet its production style on its own terms may find the narrative more durable.
2. Batman Beyond
Batman Beyond appears in Rotten Tomatoes’ editorial guide to essential animated television. That is a useful sign of editorial recognition, but the guide alone does not establish why the series deserves rediscovery or that it has been forgotten. Treat it as a promising candidate for viewers seeking a superhero animation recommendation, and judge its appeal by the series itself rather than the label.
Rank #4
3. A practical test for a worthwhile rewatch
When returning to older animation, ask what the show offers beyond period charm. A distinctive premise, strong character writing, a committed performance, a coherent serial story, satire, or a striking visual identity can outlast dated techniques. The same rewatch can also reveal limitations: episodic conventions may feel repetitive, or a once-novel production style may no longer persuade. Which side wins is a viewing judgment, not a fact established by a review score.
4. Why this is not a full 15-and-15 ranking
The available sources do not name the 30 shows promised by the headline, verify a 15/15 lineup, or demonstrate which series are broadly notorious or forgotten. They offer selected leads: a critical complaint about Fanboy & Chum Chum, no critic reviews for Problem Solverz, mixed criticism for Duckman, a note about Beast Wars’ dated CGI alongside praise for its story and characters, and editorial recognition for Batman Beyond. Extending that evidence to 25 more titles would turn an editorial decision into unsupported fact. The responsible version is a partial, transparent retrospective—not a fabricated countdown.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Best Value
- Demon Slayer: Kimetsu No Yaiba - 4
- Demon Slayer: Kimetsu No Yaiba - 4
- Demon Slayer: Kimetsu No Yaiba - 4
- Demon Slayer: Kimetsu No Yaiba - 4
- Demon Slayer: Kimetsu No Yaiba - 4
How to read “forgotten” and “bad” in a cartoon retrospective
“Forgotten” is not a measurable status established by a lack of recent headlines. Entertainment outlets have published lists of cartoons they describe as forgotten, including TVLine’s retrospective on 1980s cartoons and its separate list of 1990s cartoons. Those are examples of editorial framing, not audience surveys. Likewise, Rotten Tomatoes review aggregation reflects the reviews it lists; it does not measure how many viewers remember a series or establish an objective quality score.
For cartoons built around toys or established franchises, production context can explain why a series looks or behaves as it does, but it cannot settle its artistic merit. Space.com discusses the historical relationship between some 1980s and 1990s science-fiction cartoons and toy lines from companies including Mattel, Hasbro, and Kenner in its feature on science-fiction cartoons of the era. That context is relevant to particular shows, not a license to assume every older cartoon was a toy commercial or that every franchise tie-in was artistically empty.
A complete 30-show version of this concept should verify each series’ run dates, network, intended audience, premise, and production context against show-specific sources; then distinguish a critic’s complaint from a wider consensus. It should also check where each program can legally be watched in the reader’s region, since availability changes. Without those confirmations, precise rankings and viewing recommendations would promise more certainty than the evidence supports.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
