I like this book for every reason that I dislike Red Lanterns.
Sinestro has understandable motivations and purpose -- and he acts on them. What he does isn't always pretty, but at least he does something.
... unlike Atrocitus of the Red Lanterns, who spent two years playing Hamlet until he was finally deposed.
Sinestro is a terrible person, a villain -- but it's evident that he thinks of himself as the hero of the story, like all villains do. (This also explains his hatred/resentment of Hal Jordan, who always ends up being the hero of the story, no matter how badly he screws up, or acts counter to Sinestro's view of the universe.) That gives the reader a handle on the character -- not to empathize, necessarily, but to understand, and thereby get invested.
... as opposed to Atrocitus, who knows he's a bad guy and not the hero of the story. I don't know anybody, in real life or history, who thinks that way. Heck, it's like Atrocitus is a bad actor who's read the script, knows he dies in the third act, and doesn't really try to convince the audience that he's trying to win.
Sinestro has a plan. An inscrutable one, a not always consistent one, a not always a plausible one, but one he's trying to achieve. He's a "hero" who is trying to plow through the obstacles to his goal. And, yes, he's good at that. He's also good at rationalizing what he's doing. He's also good at ... well, being rational, in a cold way, instead of acting like a cartoon villain.
... as opposed to Atrocitus, who IS a cartoon villain.
So, nice story. And the Dale Eaglesham art is FANTASTIC.
Replies