will the next generation find this stupid? Like most do

>>11833957
Superman looked pretty good with a mullet

Yes it looks fucking retarded

>>11833957
White-collar mullet

>>11833957
The generation who wore it thinks it looks fucking stupid

>>11833959
which brings me to the question, why don't we see this much in movies? Like on the Jokah in Suicide Squad e.g.

File: Adventures-of-Superman-505-B-624x965.jpg (379KB, 624x965px) Image search: [Google]

379KB, 624x965px

>>11833959
That's cus superman's mullet is drawn like long hair. Actual mullets look like redneck shit.

>>11833957
It's good for sleeping/work if you have some length on top and don't want it falling into your face.

slicking it back is usually good enough for me to keep it out of my face but sometimes I'm doing shit that requires a hair tie.

please don't butcher a timeless classic for the working man, such as the undercut.

didn't the mullet last quite a while? the top knot was only a few months desu

>>11833957
everybody who looks like this should be taken out and shot

>not buzzing your head

It is so easy. I wake up. Wash my face and that's it. No shower or styling saves me at least 20 minutes

>>11834329
Because it makes the majority of people look fucking ugly

>>11833957
Yes, the sides shaved pony was a look in the nineties that followed (what everyone here calls) young leo. The nineties version was less memey and widespread though and was more just part of growing out your step cut. The low pony received much more derision in hindsight, especially when combined with a goatee. It was the mark of the hipster douchebag and became terribly unpopular as boy bands and the early 2000s metrosexuals popularized very manicured facial hair and beards, a reaction to which sprung up around 2009 with the hypermasculine lumberjack.

What I'm trying to say is, it will be ridiculed (especially the top of the head versions). And a generation or two it will come back anyway. See: late 80s glam (laughingstock in the anti-glam 90s, brought back with emo/scene in the 2000s.)

>>11833957
everyone already finds this stupid