Night of the Owls - a typical sequel?

[serd]

We all know the stereotypical opinions about sequels: they have to be bigger in every aspect. More thrills, more Bad guys, higher stakes, more bang.

Does Anyone else think, that you can say all these things about Night of the Owls? Exspecially if you compare it to Court of Owls(issues 1-6)?

In the first part the tension was perfectly build in the course of the first 5 issues and unleashed in the epic throwdown between Bruce and the Talon in the maze and the model of Gotham. It was a awesome showdown( even if it wasnt supposed to be one). We also had great issues with the creppy issue 3 and the genius issue 5 ( simply one of the top 5 issues since last september).

But since issue 7 it feels a Little meh. � For me Night of the Owls has the feell of a typical sequel. A Typical mediocre sequel. Now we have more Talons, we use the same locations, we have more bang( BAT Armor) and the stakes are higher.

I dont think its bad. I just feel, that the jump from issue 6 to 7 hurt the build up of the tension. It just doenst feel like one single story and more like two.ï

Has anyone else the same feeling?

Sorry for the mistakes, but i'm writting with my mobile phone.

[-BMC-]

Yeah I can definitely see that but it makes me love it even more. I just love sequels though and the story itself is just great to me. Just awesome fun batman that is still definitely very dark sometimes and incorporates a lot of cool things (and Capullo!).

[Concept Coop]

It's not a sequel. DC just broke the story up to make more money on the graphic novels.

[Concept Coop]

You can't blame Snyder for this, in my opinion - it was likely DC's doing - but, the crossover hurt the book a bit, in my opinion. The build up was for something that didn't take place in the main book.

That said, it is really odd to hear so much complaining about such an amazing book.

[serd]

I dont want to complain. I just say, that the First six issues were so perfect with right build-up and an awesome showdown. They were so good, that the next just arent THAT good in comparison.

Perhaps it would have been more effectiv, if we had some Time between the two chapters. Like Morrison took some time with Dr. Hurt between RIP and Must die.

[Concept Coop]

I dont want to complain. I just say, that the First six issues were so perfect with right build-up and an awesome showdown. They were so good, that the next just arent THAT good in comparison.

Perhaps it would have been more effectiv, if we had some Time between the two chapters. Like Morrison took some time with Dr. Hurt between RIP and Must die.

For me, personally, every issue I read leaves me in awe and desperate for next months issue. That never stopped for me.

There was a change in pace bewteen the first 6 and the last 4, but I think that is what happens in a lot of good stories: the pace follows the action. When Batman and the Owls are moving closer to each other, they act and are written accordingly.

[Seattle Freeze]

Night of Owls isn't a sequel to Court of Owls any more than Two Towers and Return of the King are sequels to Fellowship of the Ring, they are a continuance of the overall arc.

[serd]

I'm totally aware, that it is One arc, One Story, One Thing.

I just say, that it feels for me like watching a great movie (1-6 or the first trade) and the good, but a little disapointing sequel as a double feature.

[Seattle Freeze]

I feel like the story arc is like a chess match. In the first part, the players are studying each other and trying to maneuver the board to fit their strategy. The second part is open confrontation with many pieces in open conflict. Now we are in the end game with just the last few strong players left trying to finish the game.

[Concept Coop]

I'm totally aware, that it is One arc, One Story, One Thing.

I just say, that it feels for me like watching a great movie (1-6 or the first trade) and the good, but a little disapointing sequel as a double feature.

And that's fair. Who is anyone to say you are wrong about the last issues being a let down - it's your opinion. But, the "sequel" thing doesn't really work, as it's not a sequel.

[DarkKnghtJared]

When I see this idea, I interpret it more as the difference between Alien and Aliens--one isn't worse than the other, they're just the same story told in different genres. Court of Owls was the horror movie, and Night of the Owls was the action movie. Hell, if Harper appeared a little later, she could have been the Zoot.

[nightwing1124]

I don't have any problems with this, but I understand what you're saying.

Btw, mobile phones suck for writing. The new iPad's awesome!

[Quinnhop]

Night of Owls isn't a sequel to Court of Owls any more than Two Towers and Return of the King are sequels to Fellowship of the Ring, they are a continuance of the overall arc.

Worst example ever. Those are totally sequels. Are The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi not sequels??

That said, Night of the Owls isn't a sequel.

[Seattle Freeze]

I don't find those Lord of the rings movies/books to be sequels. A sequel is added to a story which could stand alone on its own. A continuance means the first story didn't conclude the central plot line and the new addition follows the same plot. I would consider the Star Wars and Lord of the Rings movies to be continuances while the Avengers, X-men, and Batman films have sequels.

[Mac]

Wait. What.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought "Night of the Owls" was just the sort of the shit-hitting-the-fan climax in the middle of the first arc of Snyder's 3 or 4 part Batman tale?
If anything, issues 1-11 are all just the Court of the Owls story, with the NotW climax used to toss a banner onto other Bat books for a cash grab (Well, except for maybe the Nightwing book.)