Oakley Medusa Head Thinger


Oakley exhibits some of the worst product design in the entire Plastic Crap Industry, but I think they may have finally gone so far over the top that they've fallen back to something appealing. The "Medusa" is a $500 full face mask with leather dreadlocks. It can be accessorized with a $250 set of snap-on goggles.

Oh, wait a second. I think the black plastic mask is just their mannequin head and the Medusa itself is just some sort of hat, not a Gigereqsue Aztec war helmet. I think it's safe to go back to hating Oakley again.

Catalog page [Oakley.com via Uncrate]

Join the Conversation


  1. I think it looks cool; if someone made it for themselves, it might even merit a steampunk post! It being made by Oakley does give it about -400 cool points to work its way up from though.

    What the hell kind of mannequin head is that, anyway? Are they selling to angry retro-future Neanderthals? Oh, wait…

  2. Has anybody been in a bigger O-Store? (Oakley store) They have some strange items for sale sometimes, like body armor vests.

    The only thing I ever bought at the O-store were a pair of $130 shades, but I must attest, these are the best shades I’ve ever owned and I still use them.

  3. Wow, that’s sleazy. This is a pretty obvious copy of Elope’s Madman hat.

    I just got one of these at Disneyland (for a comfortable $28, I might add). According to the Elope website, it’s been manufactured since 2006.

    Way to go, creeps.

  4. Medusa is in production at least for 5 years, in 2003 I got Oakley product catalog with that hat. It looks really cool

  5. Not that I can call myself an Oakley loving fool, but you may want to check your facts Tyrsalvia.

    Check this archive.org link

    Oakley has been making the Medusa since at least 2002, so Elope may be the knockoff (albeit vastly more affordable)…

    Way to go, creeps 🙂

  6. That the hat is *not* cool, despite it comprising many elements of cool, is testament to the warming effect of Oakley’s branding field. The overall concept is almost scintillating, but look at each element of how it is realized: incongruity and a lack of consistent hat ideology throughout.


  7. this product is at LEAST 5 years old, and as of several months ago was discontinued.

    going back to hating Oakleys? do you even own a pair? because everyone who does swares by them (myself included); and if you don’t have/use them, what basis do you have to hate them, envy?

    at that price and with such aesthetics, the hat and goggles are obviously not targeting the general consumer and is more of a prop for those (very) few who would want it, ensuring that very few would, thanks to the price. think overpriced/limited production steam punk collectibles, etcetera.

  8. I saw this about 5 years ago in a high-end sports lifestyle shop in Taichung, Taiwan.

    It looks just as cool in person, but I don’t know anyone who would look good wearing it.

  9. The Medusa was released in 2002. http://www.o-review.com/timeline.asp

    Put me down in the Oakley loving camp. You will not find a better pair of sunglasses. The optics are extraordinary and the quality is even better. I’ve now had my eyes saved twice from wheel-shot rocks while riding my bike. And they last. I have one pair that is 10 years old and another that is 8. I’m lucky if any other brand or non-brand has lasted me 8 months.

    All of their designs aren’t “out there” any more either. There are so many styles now that they can fit just about any taste. While I wouldn’t wear some of them I like the fact that Oakley isn’t afraid to try something different.

  10. I want the headdress, the Doombot head and that cretin Reed Richards cravenly cowering at my feet!

  11. I’ll have to agree with some of the earlier commentors: if this very item were made by an enterprising artesan, it would be hailed as major steampunky goodness.

    Would someone care to satisfy my curiosity: why _does_ Oakley, as opposed to any other manufacturer, raise such ire in gadget bloggers? Maybe it’s an American culture thing, but that’s not obvious to us faraway foreigners.

    (Yes – I tend to use Oakleys. The models I use cover the whole field of vision, have saved my eyes more than once (sports hobbies), tend not to fall apart from abuse, and just have a solid build feel. They’re the manufacturing – and maybe marketing – equivalent of Apple in sunglasses.)


  12. I have a personal bias against them because they have atrocious product design coupled with outrageous prices. $100 sunglasses? Get the fuck out.

    There may also be a cultural bias in America. At least in the midwest, where I grew up, after a brief moment in the sun, Oakleys were the glasses always worn by “hardcore” douchebags and faux extreme sports twats. It still isn’t uncommon to see some fat, goateed smegma factory waddle over to his pristine Harley Davidson-branded Ford truck and pop on a pair of Oakleys, mistaking the egg-shaped swoops for something that transmuted his sweat soaked button-up and power slacks into a suit of leather fuck armor.

    In short: I’m bitter. But I really don’t like the style of most of their gear. It’s not even stylish. It’s like anti-style. So much of it seems like it was designed by people who forgot that The Matrix‘s S&M leather daddy look was horribly out of vogue even before The Matrix came out.

    But if you guys say they make a quality product, okay! I just can’t imagine what a $100 pair of sunglasses does that a $5 pair does not.

  13. Yeah, that’ll look fucking hot with my first generation Thump mp3 shades. Let the females swarm to me!

  14. #19 the lens in Oakley glasses are some of the best out there. The lens in your $5 glasses are made from melted down poker chips. They’re horrible for your eyes.
    Aside from that, Oakley has a lifetime warranty on their glasses. I’ve returned pairs several time and Oakley always gets a new pair sent out right away.
    I agree with you about the stylings of oakley and I totally agree with the douche factor. You can buy Oliver People’s eyewear instead. They’re owned by Oakley and have the same quality and warranty.
    I don’t work for a sunglass company even though it may sound that way. LOL

  15. don’t hold back joel, say what you mean. this seems like alot of personal trauma. i do although, completely agree. thermonuclear bullshit.

  16. Wow Joel, at first I thought this piece was written by a teenage girl who had been looking at W magazines all day. Your desire to judge all things around you, and massage your own ego, is precisely why 5 year old boys don’t like to hang out with 5 year old girls.

    Your comments about what constitutes out-of-fashion are amusing. There’s no such thing as fashion. Or in fashion. Or out of fashion. Oh yes, women believe it exists. There is a whole industry that tells them what’s in fashion every few months, so that they can spend more money. I suppose you don’t have enough testosterone to avoid flocking with the rest of the sheep.

    Sorry princess, maybe you’re not ready for anti-style yet.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *