Red Lanterns #5

Summary

After the “shocking” ending to last month’s issue, Atrocitus begins to search the whereabouts of Krona’s stolen corpse. However, Atrocitus’ concerns of a traitor in his midst seem minimal in comparison to an even more shocking possibility...

What I liked

· Fleshing out the characters: Last issue I complained that the back stories to these new characters were forced and underdeveloped, here they felt a bit more natural and relevant. But only a bit more. It feels strange that a total of three characters got their intellect back, but only two of them are preaching about their origin stories. Nevertheless, both of these origin stories are quite cool and if they are eventually further expanded upon, or even became central to a storyline/ arc; this would not be a bad thing.

· A genuine twist: The story about the bloke (again, I still cannot be bothered to learn his name) and his brother (ditto) has started to develop and has given us a twist that I actually didn’t see coming. It is still taking forever to progress, but nonetheless I was still pleasantly surprised.

· We have a mission: This issue gives us a mission for our Red Lanterns to embark on. Why anyone other than Atrocitus would want to embark on it makes little sense, but at this point I am happy the story finally has a focus.

What I didn’t like

· Pointlessness: There is an idiotic hypocrisy to every action taken by the Red Lantern Corps which seems to be hindering the very mythology of the comic. Put simply, the idea of Red Lanterns as heroes (or even just as characters to root for) is inherently flawed. Rage is an incontrollable act of aggression, but in this series it is justified by linking it to the idea of vengeance and retribution. Yet, as pointed out by one of the story’s characters, some members of the Corps (and especially Atrocitus), are bad people and have inflicted the same pain as their “enemies”.

The idea of a Red Lantern seeking retribution does not work. Here is an example scenario: a man robs a store in order to feed his child and an innocent bystander is killed in the process. Atrocitus’ Red Lanterns rectify the rage felt by the innocent person’s family by killing the robber. But now the robber’s child is angry because his father was killed for trying to help feed them. Therefore, trying to present Red Lanterns as noble or at least justified always backfires. What makes this worse is the fact that many of the Red Lanterns are in control of their actions now, so cannot help but notice this backwards logic.

I know I have got pretty hung up on this point, but intentional or not, it makes the whole idea of the Red Lantern Corps pointless. Before this series began, we could accept that Atrocitus was trying to carry out his own flawed sense of justice and that his Corps members aided him because they were mindless rage-imbued minions. However, now that some of the Corps members have their minds back, how could they possibly agree to Atrocitus’ sense of morality? Who knows, maybe this will become a plot point later on – but as it stands this just irritates me.

· Is this even about Rage anymore?: I was going to add this argument into the point above, but I thought it deserved specific attention. A key component to rage is irrationality. The rings take people at a moment of great rage (this has even happened to Hal Jordan before), and through the ring that rage is perpetuated – putting them in a mindless frenzy. Without that frenzy, are these people still enraged? They seem fairly rational to me, just perhaps a bit annoyed. If so, what is the point in them being Red Lanterns, and why would they even care about following Atrocitus?

· Why is there no more blood?: I know the chosen Lanterns have been given back their minds (which makes little sense anyway, when Atrocitus suspected them of conspiring against him), but why do they no longer spit out the blood/plasma? It can’t be a side-effect of being back in control, because Atrocitus still spits it up.

· Some of the dialogue: Some of the internal dialogue in this comic is really expositional. Atrocitus’ monologues to himself simply to give some sort of clarity to the plot, whilst other characters speak aloud like old cartoon villains.

· The mission: Yes, I know I made this a plus point, but I am already building myself up to expect this mission to not be what it seems. If Krona has apparently resurrected, this would have a massive impact on the Green Lantern universe and would not be confined to this one title. It might turn out to be something interesting and exciting; however I just can’t help feeling a bit let down by the transparency of this plot point. Of course, if all is exactly as it seems, then I apologise – but come on, that shadowy figure Atrocitus was fighting was obviously not Krona, it looked nothing like him!

Verdict

This issue does improve upon some of the last issue’s flaws and I do appreciate the fact the story has been given bit of purpose, but I am still finding it hard to like or even care about this series; and believe me I want to. I love the Green Lantern mythology; however I am just finding it hard to see how the Red Lanterns can be at all expanded upon to give a decent enough story, let alone an ongoing one...

4/10