The central question to us from the beginning is why, in America now, does it seem as if characteristics like verbal acuity, power, great wealth, charm and charisma stand in for real qualities of character, like kindness and selflessness and empathy? Why are we as a culture — all of us — guilty of holding people who have that first batch of characteristics up as heroes? When you set a show up playing with these ideas, you’re going to end up getting into some strange waters. The fact that the world has also gotten into these strange waters, we think, has only made the show more resonant.

During the show’s early going, I was rooting for Chuck, because for all his faults he still represented the law. But I’m not sure where my sympathies lie anymore. Are you?

LEVIEN From the beginning, we wanted to play with the audience’s sympathies and rooting interest. When they got leaning one way, we’d do a switch-up and get them going back the other way. On Chuck’s side, he has the burden of being held to a higher standard, one that he’s set for himself and lives by and dines out on. And then [Axe], there are no expectations. When he does something particularly interesting or kind, it’s surprising and it wins people over, just as when Chuck does something bankrupt, people are extra disappointed.

KOPPELMAN We did notice that a bunch of people in prosecutorial positions were using those positions for career advancement. The expectation that we all grew up with about who was the good guy has been put into question. We felt like it was fair for the show to do that, too.

LEVIEN Axe and Chuck have a shared pool of qualities like ambition and pridefulness and undying belief in their own power. In a lot of ways they’re similar, and that confuses the rooting interest. To us, that’s the stuff that makes it interesting as we hit the fourth year and started looking beyond.