From the bland color to the boring lines, one can’t help yawning at the sight of this car.
It’s like a kiddie toy-car met a sports’ racer and this is what they produced as off-spring.
The design had potential but the makers didn’t give the car the booty it deserved.
A picture is worth a thousand words.
The car looks edgy. Perhaps a little too edgy. It looks murderously angry somehow.
We’re afraid the ‘Anglia’ looks bad from every angle. Is that what Ford was aiming for?
Why, oh why? Why would anyone want to show this to their date?
Size matters, yes, but in the right places. Whoever wanted a super long bonnet?
The car’s look matches the scenery in the backdrop – dull and dreary.
Fancy buying a taxi that’s actually a car, anyone?
Big booties are all the rage, but this just looks unnatural. No, not on a car.
The car looks like a joke. Like humor in motion.
Not particularly ghastly, but something’s just not right about this one.
This car needs to know, curves are beautiful. It could do with some.
Because every Bond and every bug travels on three wheels. Not.
This car looks distinctively like one that’s been broken down and patched up hastily. That couldn’t have been intentional.
This is a classic example that proves that everything that’s old is not gold. Not at all.
From the name to its design, nothing is appealing about this 1970 Gremlin.
Now this is just unfortunate. Launched at a time when the world was seeing some really new-age automobile design, Justy just didn’t impress anyone.
One can look hard but not find a redeeming quality to this car. We challenge you to try.
This car looks straight out of a cartoon. And is named as such. Mission Accomplished!
Now let’s be fair. This one is not so bad. Unless of course, you like your car to have some distinctive character other than a typical angular form.
A front grill with assimilated headlights in the ‘70s? How very original!
Maybe the car would have been a success if the makers put some effort in the design.
Another uninspired design. We guess car makers weren’t much into out-of-the-box thinking in the 70s.
The car’s bonnet is so boxy, it’s like the pug of cars. Okay, that was a bad one, but look at the car – does it deserve any better?
The car is photographed in black-and-white to dim its unappealing contours (much like the selfies of this age).
Good old Chevy launched this model to people questioning repeatedly “Is this a hatchback or a sedan?”
Now, it’s hard to hate on a Jag, but seriously, some things are hard to appreciate, no matter how hard you try.
What were they trying here? Was “pseudo-bird-look” the design brief?
This one could possibly look good, but only at some angles. Some, very few angles.
No matter how shiny the car’s paint may be, nothing can distract one from the odd shape of its luggage compartment.
Clearly, the design team was severely underpaid on the Renault team that was in charge of Alliance.
What’s even going on here? These are the kind of cars we imagine aliens to travel in.
We wonder if this car was meant exclusively for non-adults. It doesn’t look like average-sized adults could fit into it.
This looks like the fusion of a toy car and hatchback taxi.
Ambassadors are an acquired taste anyway, but this one is particularly hard to appreciate.
This car looks like it should be parked inside a vintage discotheque. That too, as a joke.
They probably photographed the car against the backdrop of beautiful flowers to draw attention away from its unsightly form.
Some cars are more functional than beautiful. This is most definitely one of them.
One of the most expensive cars of its time, 1976 Rolls-Royce Camargue was deemed clumsy and ridiculous.
Another one that was rejected outright for its non-appealing looks and unflattering style – 1976 Bristol Blenheim.
This one was dismissed as tacky, and no one liked its interiors or the exteriors.
A Sports Coupe? Which sport may that be? A family outing maybe.