Little House on the Prairie Reboot!

[Anonymous]

Michael Landon's hair was entirely not period appropriate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://people.com/little-house-on-the-prairie-reboot-introduces-brand-new-perspective-11995786

Man, six-year-old-me is SO excited for this! I loved watching the opening credits and seeing Carrie fall down running down the hill after her sisters. It'll be up July 9th on Netflix.

Igh.

Instead of sweet and innocent, it's going to be woke and degenerate.

Just look what Netflix did to Anne of Green Gables. The reboot Anne with an A is horrific, dark and twisted for what ahould be a beautiful innocent children's series.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hollywood leaning into trad-wife culture for a buck or two?

Pretty much, I must have been the only girl who hated watching little house on the prairie back in the 70s. Pa was a jerk.

Were you from a lesbian household? Give the standard for fathers in the 1970s, I can’t imagine anyone thinking Pa was a jerk by comparison. He always had that twinkle on his eyes and the cute nickname for his daughter! I loved my dad a lot but he came home from work and was basically like “is dinner ready? Turn off the goddam lights in that room. Do you know what the electricity costs?” Then spent all weekend trying to fix the dishwasher or replace the carburetor so our car would work. Everyone in the 70s was basically stressed out and in a bad mood. When we saw kids running down a flowery hill with pa laughing, and no one worried about the electrical bill or eating canned peas, that all looked pretty good.

Exactly this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He was just very selfish but as PP said that was most men those days. I am rereading the series to my daughter right now and all I can think is ugh poor Caroline, long suffering woman.

If you haven’t read a true biography, you have nooooo idea. Laura Ingalls Wilder and her daughter Rose Wilder Lane whitewashed Pa’s full legacy of failures

As they should have.

It's a beautiful historical fiction for children.

What is wrong with people where they despise beautiful and meaningful storytelling?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hollywood leaning into trad-wife culture for a buck or two?

Pretty much, I must have been the only girl who hated watching little house on the prairie back in the 70s. Pa was a jerk.

Weren't most dads jerks in those days? Pa wasn't a drunk, didn't cheat on Ma, didn't spend money recklessly, and tried. He may have been misguided, but he tried.

He’s much worse in the books. In the books you definitely get the impression he has massive adhd — he’s constantly uprooting them for some scheme he thinks will work but which never does. Rereading the books as an adult, I felt bad for ma (even thought she’s pretty racist). Interestingly, Laura basically almost never saw them as an adult and it doesn’t appear they even corresponded a lot. I know people will say that’s because of money and distance and etc but my very poor relatives in the 19th century and early 20th still were able to see family sometimes. Trains and mails back then were fairly affordable and much more functional than now.

This is actually how life worked for the pioneers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I HATED the Anne of Green Gables reboot and I'm sure the Little House one will also be an abomination. My prediction is that Laura will make friends with the Native Americans and the new storyline will involve her fighting social injustice on the prairie.

Yes, the original Pa is a drifter and kind of selfish, and Ma is racist, and Almanzo is also kind of selfish and not a good husband: the real Laura had a sad, hard life. But I think it is interesting and important to preserve all of those elements, to see the experience of someone from that era and what they believed to show where we started from. I'm not interested in Woke on the Prairie, which is what this will be, no doubt.

Yes!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hollywood leaning into trad-wife culture for a buck or two?

Pretty much, I must have been the only girl who hated watching little house on the prairie back in the 70s. Pa was a jerk.

Were you from a lesbian household? Give the standard for fathers in the 1970s, I can’t imagine anyone thinking Pa was a jerk by comparison. He always had that twinkle on his eyes and the cute nickname for his daughter! I loved my dad a lot but he came home from work and was basically like “is dinner ready? Turn off the goddam lights in that room. Do you know what the electricity costs?” Then spent all weekend trying to fix the dishwasher or replace the carburetor so our car would work. Everyone in the 70s was basically stressed out and in a bad mood. When we saw kids running down a flowery hill with pa laughing, and no one worried about the electrical bill or eating canned peas, that all looked pretty good.

Nope, my dad fought in WW2, I was a late baby. Sure my dad was stressed out, but he was incredibly stable, especially for the 70s, and didn't up root us to move to the frontier or anything.

I think Michael Landon always gave me the creeps, and I wasn't sure why.

Like I said, I was the only girl I knew who didn't like the show, and I also didn't like the books. Even in elementary school they didn't seem "real" to me. It was a fantasy frontier. The only thing I liked at the time were the prairie dresses.

As an adult I've read more about the author and now understand why I didn't trust that show and her books.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The book is good reading but it doesn't make for a good TV show. There are passages about Laura not being allowed to make noise on Sunday, about making butter, digging wells, mending fences, crops.

“On Sundays Mary and Laura must not run or shout or be noisy in their play...They might look quietly at their paper dolls, but they must not make anything new for them. They were not allowed to sew on doll clothes, not even with pins.
“They must sit quietly and listen while Ma read Bible stories to them.. But there was nothing else they could do.”

The whole community of Little House and the guest actors is the reason for the shows success along with Michael Landon who had so much charisma.

A limited series isn't going to be that interesting.

That wasn't Laura banned from making noise on Sunday.

That was a story about her grandfather, that Pa told her to sooth her after she got in trouble for being a stinker. It was a contrast between how far things had changed and modernized from her grandpa's youth (late 1700s or very early 1800s) to her era.

Some people seem to believe all life started circa 2000, and judgment of the past should be distributed accordingly, with zero historical perspective.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I HATED the Anne of Green Gables reboot and I'm sure the Little House one will also be an abomination. My prediction is that Laura will make friends with the Native Americans and the new storyline will involve her fighting social injustice on the prairie.

Yes, the original Pa is a drifter and kind of selfish, and Ma is racist, and Almanzo is also kind of selfish and not a good husband: the real Laura had a sad, hard life. But I think it is interesting and important to preserve all of those elements, to see the experience of someone from that era and what they believed to show where we started from. I'm not interested in Woke on the Prairie, which is what this will be, no doubt.

I loved the original books. One of the main reasons was because it was about one real girl and her very strong POV. She had a lot of adventures and experiences even while admitting her looks and behavior weren't perfect. Without reference to the show characters (which diverged from the books), it's still clear that Laura felt that Mary was the better-behaved sister.

As an adult, I came to learn that African-American parents didn't approve of the books and I looked up info about the racist elements of the books. Mainly there's a minstrel show that Pa participates in, the family is afraid of Native Americans, and there are points of conflict about Native American taking stuff from them. As a kid, I understood the Ingalls' family's fears and I didn't really absorb negative messages about races from this. After all, white people also steal from each other and have conflicts over land. I did learn as an adult that Pa was an illegal squatter on treaty territory...and that is less honestly covered in the books. However, history also teaches that white settlers moved into lands settled by Native Americans and took possession of them. What's more in focus in the books is just the daily life of a colonist/farming child. They are not supposed to be didactic sociological treatises.

Overall my dominant impression is of a story of one woman's life from toddler age to birth of her own children. The anecdotes I remember best are about old-fashioned objects and processes. Like pouring maple syrup on snow to make a taffy. Or having a doll made out of a corn cob. And the story of how Almanzo met her and singled her out for courting. That's the first romantic storyline I ever read. She plays up his bravery and solicitude at various points. I don't think she found him selfish.

So...Will I watch this new show? Probably not. Because I agree it looks woke. And Laura's family were not. I don't like when things are modernized to gloss over original stories or new characters are invented for plot purposes. These were real people and you can still visit many of their home sites. Most of the books were historically true (Laura did fictionalize some things...including omitting a baby brother who died). It seems wrong to make a new show with fake content. That pretty much is why I didn't like the 1970s show...it had a lot of fake content, episode plots, and characters. And those were usually the cringiest storylines.

The Little House books also highlighted Dr. Tan, an African American doctor who was one of the first doctors in the western territories, who saved the lives of the Ingalls family, native Americans and many other settlers in those isolated lands.

It repeated terrible things that happened in the relationships between settlers and native Americans, including one of the most beautiful and sympathetic retellings of the Trail of Tears ever written.

It accurately reflected the relationships, prejudices, words, fears and contradictions from the times between settlers, native people, different races (the stories are set post civil war so this was their real life, not some history book) and different nationalities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I loved the books as a child and owned all of them.

I could never get into the TV show.

Looking back, there were definitely elements of its time, but a fascinating examination in how white settlers lived the frontier life despite their views then of gender and race.

Every racial group had these types of views about one another, even native people between tribes.

The white settlers were extraordinary in so many ways, but they were not unusual for their time, including their views on race.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can't take this show. It is always:

- one of the kids is deathly ill
- a terrible storm is coming or
- a really bad guy is holding them up

The real books do have a fair number of storm-related issues. Some of the homestead were in tornado country. And they were a farm family. So they had to worry about crop damage. Also getting snowed in.

The long winter is a real event. There are photos, and retellings in many other publications, from novels to history books to first source newspapers. So were the grasshopper plagues. And the tornados.

When you are living in a one room shanty made of willow branches, with no electricity, communication, ineffective transportation, limited ammo, and unstable food source or accessible water, weather is going to be a huge part of your life story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is anybody in Hollywood capable of an original idea?

But Then they would have to advertise and seek out a new audience. With this they already have a few nostalgic 50-60 year olds setting their calendars to tune in. And Netflix bought in knowing their demographic.

[Anonymous]

Netflix ruined Anne of Green Gables, are set to ruin Little House on the Prairie, and are in production to ruin the Narnia series (making Aslan voiced as a female)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Netflix ruined Anne of Green Gables, are set to ruin Little House on the Prairie, and are in production to ruin the Narnia series (making Aslan voiced as a female)

No-one can take our real books from us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Netflix ruined Anne of Green Gables, are set to ruin Little House on the Prairie, and are in production to ruin the Narnia series (making Aslan voiced as a female)

No-one can take our real books from us.

The editors of the Netflix Narnia gave an interview where he stated they didn't read the books or follow the source material, because they wanted to reinvent Narnia.

The producer gave an interview where she bragged that it will be totally different from the stories that people love, a "rock n roll" reimagining of the treasured stories.

The orginal director and producers selected for the project when the estate green lighted the netflix contract, left over creative difference differences because they wanted to stay true to the storytelling of CS Lewis, and Netflix wanted to wokify the stories.

Both the Little House and Narnia remakes are looking to be insulting disasters, in the vein of the Anne of Green Gables destruction.

Netflix should not be allowed to touch classic stories