I have to say, I'm with Darien, on this one. I can think of several self-awarely bad movies that I don't feel inferior for liking, including Bubba Ho-Tep, Jesus Christ Vampire Hunter, The Return of Captain Invincible, Brain Dead, Frankenhooker, The Toxic Avenger, Attack of the Killer Tomatoes, and (yes) The Rocky Horror Picture Show...

I don't think anyone can claim that any of those was trying to be anything but bad, and yet, they succeed amazingly well, making a movie every bit as enjoyable as some of those that try to be good and fail spectacularly. Of course, not all deliberately bad movies are entertaining, just as not all failed good movies are Sinbad, or Plan Nine. Surely we need a more nuanced metric than "not being self aware" to decide if a bad movie is enjoyable?

I've not yet seen Snakes on a Plane, but it seems to be pretty clearly on the self-aware side, and yet, from what I hear, it does its job well, and entertains many people. To quote a friend of mine, "Some people will hate this film, and many will love it, but no-one will come out of the theatre thinking that it failed to be Snakes On A Plane." The review as a whole seems relevant to the discussion, and I think it's worth pointing people towards.

In short, not all entertaininly bad movies were aiming to be the next Citizen Kane, and I don't quite understand why people with taste that otherwise seems to mirror my own very closely have a blind spot here; if Darien and I were the only people who found these movies entertaining, then I'd be forced to accept that we were objectively wrong, but all the films I've named have huge fan clubs.