Mashup Idea #2

I know that he was stung by criticisms of how much he cut out of the Lord of the Rings trilogy, but I still disagree with his idea to "make up for it" by including the Scouring of Walnut Grove in "Peter Jackson's Little House on the Prarie".

Last 5 posts by Clark


  1. says


    As long as Nellie gets what she's got coming to her, I'm OK with it.

    What other possible motivation would there be to scourge Walnut Grove?

  2. Chris says

    I felt a little taken back at what was cut from the LOTR movies, initially. In hindsight, especially with viewing the extended editions, I feel Peter Jackson should be vindicated for the movies he made.

    I don't think he should feel the need make any apologies or reparations to fans for that.

  3. Mark - Lord of the Albino Squirrels says

    I was more annoyed by the part where Laura's Uncle Bombadil saves our heroes from wheelbarrow-wrights on the road to Mankato.

  4. Trebuchet says

    Coming in late to the party, I was way less offended by what Jackson left out than by the stuff he felt it necessary to add to the second film.

  5. says

    What annoyed me was how they changed the character's personalities. The younger hobbits (in the book) were pretty responsible. In the movie, they are a pair of idiots.

    Since they were my favourite characters, yes, I was, and still am a bit annoyed at Peter Jackson.

    The other changes, i.e. things left out, Elves at Helms Deep, etc. were all liveable. At least they were unless you wanted a twenty hour trilogy….