I guess it depends, if you talk about panned films that are still to this day considered bad by critics - I cant think of any at the moment, but I know theres some. Much of my concept of what constitutes a genuinly good film depends a lot on the technical aspects of the film. Direction, cinematography, dialogue, etc; and those aspects usually are what critics take into consideration for their reviews, so I tend to agree with them... mostly. Its easier to find examples of the opposite for me, "movies that were praised by critics but arent that good".
So sure, theres a lot of poorly reviewed films that are enjoyable, specially in comedy, a lot of average films that sort of trascend the medium and become a cultural trend, a lot of "popcorn" franchises that sell a lot, but yeah, rarely they'd be what I would call a good film.
But as with any art form, theres revisionism because perspective and understanding changes with time, films like The Shining or The Thing were poorly received when they originally released and are now considered almost masterpieces of their genre, something I agree with, cause they are that good.
"Too bad they're good" is an entirely different thing tho. These are bad films - its in the name. We just find them enjoyable because they're ridiculous. Like, Tommy Wiseau's The Room or 2006's Wicker Man.