Having finished Red Country I have mixed feelings.
In lots of ways, it's great:
** It's very well written.
** The characters are strong (even with his cameo characters, Joe can nail personality even in a short scene).
** More than Joe's other books, it will appeal to readers who like more sympathetic characters and/or happier endings.
I think my problems with it come mainly from a change in my reading tastes. Specifically, these days I prefer stuff that feels more 'real'. Now, of course, you could argue that Joe is at the "realistic" end of fantasy. Certainly, going by the lack of magic and the sheer proliferation of **** and whores in Red Country, it's hugely "realistic". The trouble for me is that while the humour is, well, funny, the dialogues and monologues sometimes read as scripted, contrived to comic effect.
Another problem was that possibly my favourite part of the book (characters like Lamb, Savian and Sweet philosophising on old age) felt like a repetition of Craw in The Heroes. The Heroes remains my favourite Abercrombie.
Joe has said himself that he felt a little flat at times when he was writing Red Country and now he's taking a short break from the first law world (writing a short viking-based piece, I believe). I'm not totally sure how much he's looking forward to writing the forthcoming trilogy. Personally I think he'll be glad when he's free to stretch himself with some quite different projects. I'll be glad to see that too because he is such a huge talent.
At the time I read The Heroes I felt it was a sharp and intellectually stimulating (as well as funny and entertaining) anti-war polemic. I would have given it 10/10. For me Red Country lacked that sharp edge, so (again, for me) it was more like 7/10.
Coragem.