durakken's Demon Knights #1 - Seven Against the Dark review

A not so poetic demon

I was going to do this whole thing in rhyme, but I'm just not that good at this time. Demon Knights is not well written for a comic book. It seems to me that the writer wanted to use several cheap techniques he stole from Screen play writing. They don't work in comics the same way. They art is basic and doesn't break the mold at all. What you would expect from an Etrigan centered book is what you get.

That being said the general pace of the book, the introduction of lore, and the several characters introduced were more or less done adequately. Vandal Savage seems off, but he's been around for a while so he might have changed over the years.

My only real complaint as far as why someone who like Etrigan or one of the several characters also introduced that might not be in there a long time (Xanadu, Mordruu, Morigan Le Feye [name not stated, but presumed], The Shining Knight, and Vandal Savage) is that Etrigan doesn't do the thing he is known for. I always thought that the rhyming was natural to him since his origins so that he hasn't rhymed yet looks like the writer couldn't do it or something...

edit: Another complaint is that the story takes place starts 400 YA (1600s) and then jumps AT LEAST 90 years ahead place it in at least the late 1600s to early 1700s. The dark ages were 400s-1400s. The Renaissance happened between the 1400s and 1600s, and if that 90 year jumps was more than a few years after the 1600CE mark it would place these guys at pretty much the beginning of the American Revolution and as it is well into colonial america and the British Empire era. This writer needs to learn some history.

This isn't a disaster but it's nothing special either. Given the characters it could get better later and you'll want to pick up this when it does so if you have any interest in Etrigan, or the characters I listed, pick up the book. Otherwise, you can pass on this.

Posted by JonesDeini

DCnU Time line works differently?

Posted by Asymmetrical

umm, I believe by four centuries ago, it meant four centuries before the main story...that was my natural conclusion, why else would it say "NOW" for the rest of the book if it was actually 310 years ago?

Posted by Durakken

@aztek_the_lost: Regardless of which way it is it is bad writing.

Either he got it wrong due to not doing research OR he doesn't realize that now means "present" in universe time...especially for this new 52 launch. So while Camelot's fall could be 400 years ago indicating 400 years from the time in the comic (which is the darkages) and is denoted as not the darkages it would mean that camelot fell in 400 CE and the story takes place in 800 CE and they saw Vandal Savage in 710 CE roughly. The fact it isn't clear is still a worthwhile criticism of his writing.

ps. sorry I PMed you... I'm not used to this system and meant to reply here.

Posted by daak1212

Yeah the begining part was 400 years before the dark ages

Other reviews for Demon Knights #1 - Seven Against the Dark

This edit will also create new pages on Comic Vine for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Comic Vine users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.