Let’s go back to the idea that our main characters can die. In our opinion, this approach keeps the stories from having to become over-dramatic. Our heroes don’t have to outsmart schemes that become larger and more intricate with each passing story, in order to keep readers interested. Of course readers may wonder which characters will still be standing at the end. On that subject, Brian Michael Bendis and Geoff Johns wrote (at www.comicbookdaily.com, “Whosoever Holds this Hammer”) that the reason Marvel is more interesting than DC is that characters in the Marvel universe don’t have an aura of invincibility. And this gives the stories more appeal.

One of our readers wants to know if we are going to kill off all of our main characters. Naturally, the answer is no, but it’s important to keep in mind the context of the story. There are two secret organizations involved in a brutal clash and each one does what’s necessary to disable the other. It would be abnormal if no one died, even among the good guys.

While he’s mortally wounded, Wally triggers the explosive device in his shoe and blows himself up. This device was first introduced in “The Arrival,” which is part of “The Damned” storyline.

The scene on page 29 is very important—not to say crucial—to the establishment of our comic’s universe. As we’ve said before, our bad guys are not idiots. When they capture a member of the Black Orchestra, they kill him or they torture him brutally (and they don’t use over-complicated executions that provide the hero with an opportunity for escape, as satirized by repeated gags in the Austin Power series). This premise is the justification for Wally’s execution.

Transposing an idea into a drawing isn’t always easy. Very, very often, the drawing goes beyond the scriptwriter’s vision. But sometimes, the result isn’t as powerful as the image the scriptwriter had in mind. That doesn’t mean that the drawing wasn’t well done, but rather, that it’s lacking some spectacular effect. See, for instance, the first version of the explosion of the canon-buyers’ car in Bordeaux.

Let’s talk about villains again. We’re convinced that every good story is based on a conflict, regardless of its form. In an oversimplified schema, the conflict pits good guys against bad guys. But how do we, the audience, distinguish between the two? Much too often, to help the audience make that distinction, the bad guys are made to dress in dark clothes or they are shown smoking. But do the bad guys know their actions are bad? Actor Will Smith was vilified a few years ago for saying that Hitler wasn’t conscious of his actions being evil. We agree. We believe that villains are profoundly convinced that they are doing the right thing for their own well-being or that of those around them. We’ve already talked about how the grey areas in the heroes’ personality create ambiguity that makes the conflict truly interesting. This is superbly illustrated by the decline of Michael Corleone in “The Godfather: Part II.”

We’ve mentioned that we want to give our characters a complex personality. And you know what they say: the better the bad guy, the better the story. In our opinion, villain Oroshimaru gives Naruto a whole new dimension. His nearly metaphysical ambition to master all forms of combat is a welcome alternative to the usual ambition of world domination. “Goldfinger” (the movie) remains one of the best Bond films because the confrontation between hero and villain is not only physical but also psychological. In the ensemble film “Syriana,” Christopher Plummer’s Dean Whiting only makes a few appearances but each time, his presence electrifies the scene. The same goes for David Strathairn’s role (Bourne Ultimatum), which, thanks to the work co-director Noah Vosen, is imbued with the strength of conviction. This villain doesn’t wake up in the morning looking forward to eating babies. Just like the good guys, he just wants to see his businesses succeed. We’ll come back to this topic later.