Owl #3

[Guest]

Any of the 'old' (odd word to use, it only started a few years ago) PSP fans buying this? Enjoying it? Hating it? Ambivalent?

I am enjoying it so far, the contrast between the code of honour of the Owl and the more violent approach of Owl Girl and how their collision will play out. It fits well in the feel of the wider PSU in my humble opinion. Glad to see the line back with this mini, and I still hope (or is that pine?) for the Ghost mini series to appear.

[comixfan1980]

This series has been a great bridge into what everyone hopes will be Project Superpowers vol 3, I just hope that people are really enjoying this book enough to show Dynamite that these characters deserve to be published. I'm personally really enjoying The Owl, especially the way that they've been using Owl Girl, it's been a "hoot". Hahahahaha, get it?

[pulphero]

It's been ... OK. While it's good to have any PSP rather than no PSP at all, I'd be lying if I said I can't wait for each new issue. I am reminded of the scores of Marvel and DC miniseries released over the last few decades, many of which featured characters which I like, yet most of which I now have only the vaguest of memories regarding what they were about. I wish there were more of a feeling that this was an integral piece of the PSP mozaic, that it was somehow building toward the future, but I'm not really feeling it. I continue to buy it, though, out of loyalty and in hopes that more and better PSP comics are in the offing.

[Guest]

The point of stories not being that memorable is something that can be applied to many on-goings too IMHO.

After 30 odd years of comics reading, for me there are few stories month to month that really stick in my mind. After reading thousands of individual issues, the stand-outs are not a high proportion, so for me it is perhaps nothing really that new.

I am enjoying this as much as the other PS spin-offs, but obviously that will vary by reader.

The tone of this series feels right to me (in context of the previous PS books), and I am glad it picks up on themes from the earlier stuff, especially from the Bring On The Bad Guys series which had the clash of the old guys versus a more bloodthirsty generation.

If the Owl; gets collected it is something i will pick up and look forwards to re-reading.

[JewishHobbit]

While I'm enjoying being back in the PSP world, I can't really say I'm enjoying this title too terribly much. I don't dislike it, it's just not really wowing me. I think the main problem is that we spent so much time on so many characters, then after a long hiatus we're brought back in with one of the least shown characters and no guest stars from other more beloved characters. It's probably my least favorite of the PSP stuff so far, but it's still not bad. I'm definitely buying it though to support the line in anticipation for more projects in the PSP world. I too am eager to get a hold of the Ghost mini.

[pulphero]

Owl #4 had a page which left open an unresolved question, and requires further explanation (which would seem not to be forthcoming, since this is the last issue). I refer to the page in which three women attack some of same gang that Owl Girl was attempting to take down. One woman says that "Owl Girl ain't dead" while another refers to "...there's been a change of plans. Actually, more like a change in management." My admittedly unsure interpretation of this scene was that Owl Girl was part of a vigilante group together with these same women, and they intend to carry on in her name (with perhaps one, or all of them in turn, taking on the Owl Girl costume). But it sure could have been made clearer to the reader if that was what the writer was hinting at.

[JewishHobbit]

I'm pretty sure that was Owl Girl in the end.


And I'm happy to say that I found the final issue of The Owl to be really good and upped my opinion of the mini overall. Now I'm hoping for some news on more PSP projects.

[pulphero]

I'm pretty sure that was Owl Girl in the end.

I questioned that, because it seemed unlikely to me that the real Owl Girl would use "ain't". Vicious she may have been, but she seemed to have a better than average command of common English. Or if it was the woman with the blonde wig, why she would have mentioned a "change in management".

[JewishHobbit]

I don't think the grammar thing really matters much. As for the change in management, I figured she was going the villainous route after her fight with Owl.

[pulphero]

I don't think the grammar thing really matters much. As for the change in management, I figured she was going the villainous route after her fight with Owl.

It's a damn shame when a writer can't write a scene clearly enough for it to be unambiguous. Or is it the artist's failing for not being able to draw an individual character distinctly enough without a costume that there's no doubt in the reader's mind who that character is supposed to be? Maybe there's blame enough for both to share.

What do you mean "going the villainous route"? If it IS Owl Girl, virtually nothing has changed here. She was already pretty much a villain, despite The Owl trying to 'save her from herself'. Nope, no "change in management", just (lethal) business-as-usual (gee, working without a costume sure beats having annoying goody-goody interlopers like The Owl spoiling all the fun). I figured the "change in management" to be someone else picking up where the other OG left off, since we've never seen Owl Girl working with confederates before this. "Owl Girl ain't dead"-- there's just been a "change in management". (AKA "The Queen is dead -- long live the Queen!") Either that or the writer thinks a reader will accept that after falling a few hundred feet out of the sky, OG just picked herself up and dusted herself off, with nothing worse to show for it than a teensie-weensie scar (already well-healed) in the middle of her forehead (maybe he forgot to tell us she had a blood transfusion from Wolverine?) A tiny scar that affects her appearance so little, by the by, that she's able to pass herself off as a hot-looking hooker in order to infiltrate the gang. If I accept your theory, then I just have to call it bad writing.

Another thing -- why is this scene even here? It's not like the book was cancelled due to low sales before the writer had a chance to tie up ongoing subplots. The book was announced to be a 4-issue series, and the writer already KNEW there was no 'next issue'! So why tease a situation that can have no resolution? It's not as if Dynamite is cranking out enough PSP-universe related series that the subplot can be resolved in some other character's book.

[Tulku]

Gee, I was going to start an "Owl #4" thread, but apparently we have decided to discuss it under the heading of "Owl #3." How clever of us! The NSA will never think to look here!

As for the ending with Owl Girl, my reading was that Megan (disguised as a blonde because we all know men can't tell women apart if they change their hair color)(so, yeah, poor writing), anyway Megan kills off Antony declaring that she, Owl Girl, isn't dead. The use of "ain't" doesn't bother me. I am well educated but I occasionally use it. If you have read Dorothy Sayers' mysteries, you know that Lord Peter Wimsey also has a fondness for saying "ain't" on occasion. There is no reason Megan couldn't choose to use it herself. As for the "change in management" she wasn't talking about a change in the management of Owl Girl--she was taking over Antony's criminal enterprise. A change in management because she was declaring herself the new head of his criminal enterprise. After all, all you have to do is kill the boss to convince the rest of the gang that you should be in charge. That is why every presidential assassin becomes president....oh, wait. That doesn't happen, does it? Oh, well. Chalk that up to poor writing too.

I agree that the ending leaves the door open for more stories, but that is okay. If I recall correctly, Black Terror did a 4-issue run, then stopped for a few months before coming back as a regular monthly. Perhaps DE wanted the door left open: if sales are good enough, then The Owl can come back on a regular basis starting with issue #5. I have no problem with that. There is a lot of gold to be mined in this series.

But what bothers me most about this issue (#4) is that it really doesn't address the core issue--the dispute over proper superhero tactics. Owl Girl states that a more violent approach with a "permanent solution" is justified because it is a colder, harder,meaner world. And, at the end, the Owl seems to accept that it is. But that is a freakin' load of crap. The world he came from, the 1940s, had a nation systematically exterminating the Jews. It has robed Klan members lynching "uppity" negroes without any fear that the white authorities would bother to investigate. It had criminal gangs running cities and pulling off things like the St. Valentine's Day Massacre and regularly killing each other with machine guns and putting people's feet in cement and tossing them in the river. Today is not any colder, or harder, or meaner than that. Oh, our weapons are more efficient at killing, but the basic human nature is the same. The argument that violence is justified today because things are worse now merely demonstrates a lack of knowledge of history. The 1940s was a cold, harsh, mean place. Just like today. It does not justify vigilante killing.

We also didn't get any discussion about the anarchy inherent in Owl Girl's approach--where everybody gets to decide for themselves who "deserves" to be killed; who it would be a "gift to the city" to kill. That isn't a justice system. As the old saying truly states: if you follow 'eye for an eye,' then the whole world will be blind. Superheroes cannot take the law into their own hands and decide who "deserves" what punishment. That is the function of society and society's justice system. And if one thinks that the justice system is failing, then you reform the system--but you cannot dispense with it. Society needs to make the call, not a bunch of lone avengers killing whoever they think needs it.

That is the sort of discussion and argument I was hoping would be raised in this issue, not the fallacy of modern times being somehow "harsher" than the "good old days." As any history student will tell you, the good old days weren't all that good.

[Ghornet2]

Owl survived the fall so why not Owl Girl? And the caption in the first panel of the scene just says 'later' with no time frame also the villian that Owl Girl 'scratched' has healed enough to drink scotch (not to well but) and Owl's injuries seem to have healed as well.

Ain't could simple be her tring to sound a little harder, less educated to gain the respect of the criminals she wants to control.

I did take the 'under new management to mean that she was now in charge. In crime organizations (at least in fiction) cut of the head and you're the one in charge.

[pulphero]

Good discussion guys. OK, I'm pretty much convinced now of (A) the writer's intention, and (B) the writer's lack of finesse in what he's attempting.

But let's not let the artist off the hook, either. Of course the crooks can't tell one woman from another with the mere addition of a blonde wig... neither can the reader, because the artist has one standard "woman" face/body type. In fact, this partially lets the writer off the hook on this particular point, since there's no reason to think Anthony would have recognized Megan's unmasked face.

The real point of confusion here is the sudden interjection into the story of "Owl Girl Henchwoman #1" and "Owl Girl Henchwoman #2" (both un-named, but one of them announces that Owl Girl "ain't dead", so that explains the sudden change in speech pattern, again letting the writer off the hook for a seeming inconsistency). Now, that's a minimum of two henchwomen. Those are the two that actually help Owl Girl to attack the gang members. At least 5 hookers were shown on the preceding page, so it's unknown how many of them may have been in on the infiltration of the gang.

Back to the subject of bad writing again. We have no idea about Owl Girl having any confederates prior to this, so their sudden introduction into a scene where (A) Owl Girl is "supposed" to be dead, and (B) Owl Girl is out of costume, and the artist isn't up to the task of making her identifiable to the reader, both create confusion in this scene, as does the fact that in a sudden change in tactics, Owl Girl is now deciding that instead of 'just' killing gangsters as she tried to do before, she'll institute a "change of management" and take over as leader of the gang. To what purpose? Maybe it's just more efficient to get a well-oiled machine of gang warfare going, thereby getting them to kill themselves off all the quicker (lots more practical than trying to pick them off one at a time). Except, since Owl Girl has hired help now (at least two, but who knows how many potentially) doesn't she already have some sort of organization in place?

Now, as to the idea of Owl Girl surviving the fall. Oh sure, it happens in comics ALL the time. So does bad writing, and that doesn't excuse it. Essentially, the Big Dramatic Moment in this series was supposed to be The Owl's failure to save Megan from going down the path of "an eye for an eye" vengeance. Not ONLY his failure to make her realize the wrongness of her actions, but his being the direct cause of her death, by ripping out the guts of her flight pack hundreds of feet in the air. What was he thinking, that he'd catch her in time before she fell? (Oh, and The Owl has some sort of glider cape at the very least, if not some sort of enhanced physiological changes rendered to him by his sojourn in the urn, so that explains how he can survive a fall from the same altitude with little or no damage.)

But here was the Big Dramatic Moment (Batman fails to save Jason Todd from the Joker, Spider-Man fails to save Gwen Stacy from Green Goblin, fill in your favorite Comic Book Death Scene). Sure, point taken that all those characters eventually came back -- but there was a long dramatic pause in there of say, ten, twenty, thirty years (even then it's always a questionable decision to bring them back, but the Memorable Moment has already passed and left its mark, so Other Marketing Considerations come into play). Where is the drama when the Burden of Guilt and Responsibility For Our Hero is undercut a mere few pages later? It doesn't matter that The Hero Doesn't Know. We, the readers, know, so there's no sense of drama.

So yeah, bad writing. Pretty much. Also, the sort of cliche'd conclusion of "THE END . . . ?" where the writer has to toss the final twist in there, knowing there's no follow-up definitely coming.

[pulphero]

Wait a minute, why am I being so circumspect in assigning the blame here?
J.T. Krul
he's the guy to blame.

[Tulku]

Ha!

I don't disagree with any of your comments. As pulphero points out, we have seen the "character survives deadly fall" hundreds of times. As Ghornet2 points out, in fictional criminal circles, killing the boss does mean you take over. We have seen that hundreds of times. In fact, this whole series we have seen hundreds of times. Back when we met the new Owl Girl I wrote that I hoped they wouldn't go the trite route of having her be the Owl's granddaughter. Well, they didn't do that exactly, but they did make her the original Owl Girl's granddaughter. Boring and predictable! We have seen that "plot twist" so many times that it doesn't even count as a plot twist.

And I think that is the problem with this book: there is no originality or inventiveness to it. It is a standard superhero comic taking no risks whatsoever. Even the "surprise" plot twists were all predictable. And the blame for that falls with J.T. Krul. He just mailed this one in and cashed his paycheck. That is a pity because it is a part of the Project Superpowers Universe, which has had many truly creative and inventive concepts. The Owl deserved better.