A Station Eight Fan Web Site


The Phoenix Gate

Search Ask Greg

Search type:

Displaying 1 record.

Bookmark Link

pupz writes...

Hi Greg!
If Superboy was made to be a replacement for Superman, why
would the scientists make him while knowing that he's only going to be half as powerful and therefore a poor replacement.
The fact Conner is half human means that his creators must of (logically) known that he'd
be a "inferior" version of Superman - So why bother?

The whole point of the cloning in the first place was to create a "Match" for Superman as Luthor put it, hence that psycho character called Match. When that failed, didn't settling for a downsized version defeat the purpose of the experiments in the first place?

In the comics, if was all justified by stating that the main goal of the scientists was just to unlock a dormant kryptonian ability (telekinesis) in Conner, but in your show that's not the case.

So what was their justification?

Thanks for answering our questions. :)

Greg responds...

This has been answered by the show itself. Clearly you saw the episode with Match, so I don't understand your confusion. They tried making a clone as powerful as Superman, but they couldn't control it. So they tried again. (The phrase "poor replacement" is your term, by the way, not one that I - or I think the Light - would subscribe to.) How does settling on a combined Superman/Luthor clone defeat any purpose, even knowing Project Kr wouldn't be as powerful as Project Match? I just don't follow your logic. You're assuming we live in a world of absolutes, and we don't. It's like saying, hey, I want a car that gets 100 miles to the gallon. And the engineers say, sorry, the best we can do is 85, and you say - well, then forget it, I don't want a car at all.

My response: enjoy your walk.

[Oh, and if the point of this post was really to get me to admit that we made a mistake by not including Conner's tactile telekinesis from the original comics, than (a) you're breaking one of our guidelines (specifically #13) and (b) you've failed, as WE LIKE OUR SHOW. (And personally, I don't much care for tactile telekinesis.)]

Response recorded on December 17, 2012