I don't really understand this whole concept of ugly cars. Half the cars people are calling ugly look fairly attractive to me, especially the S-Cargo, but also the PT Cruiser (I know as an actual car it's rather awful, I've been in one before).
Often what I think people are seeing is cars which do not meet their platonic ideal of what a car should look like, perhaps because it looks like it was designed to be practical rather than to go fast, or because it was designed with a completely different target demographic in mind.
If a car was clearly designed to appeal to 38 year old middle class mothers of two then it should be judged as a car of that type, and not compared to a Lamborghini or whatever.
Even then, unless a car has had racial slurs or images of bodily fluids vinyl wrapped all over it, I don't really see how a car can be ugly. Some cars can be more aesthetically pleasing, certainly. An Aston Martn DB4 Zagato or a Citroen DS or a Toyota 2000GT can be appreciated as a beautiful work of art, but that doesn't mean one can't also find a utilitarian appeal to the Volvo 240 as well.
Ultimately, the Multipla is to me a bland looking vehicle elevated to a status of being somewhat interesting by its highly unusual windscreen and roofline. Cover up the car above window height and it looks shockingly reminiscent of a Chrysler Neon, and I think I prefer the Multipla to that, in all honesty.
At least the Multipla is interesting, and will likely remain so as the decades wear on, the Neon will only ever be the epitomy of 90s blandness.