They DID. They DID marry them off. Jim admitted it, the 30th anniversary (and other personal appearances) confirmed it--there were pictures and magazine articles and pictures of Kermit's fuzzy slippers beneath Piggy's bed. I know today that people don't pay much attention to whose, um, slippers are where, but back then it was different. Piggy didn't want "a relationship" with Kermie--i.e., a hook-up. She wanted Kermit to love her and want to spend the rest of his life with her, and Kermit gave every indication that that's where this relationship was heading.
Didn't you see, though? It was all a dream. Piggy woke up to find Patrick Duffy in her shower, and he said it never happened!
I explained this somewhere else. I don't blame the new puppeters, I blame the direction. Someone is telling someone else to play up the Kermit Piggy caustic relationship, and it feels like the public only remembers a Flanderized version of the two, complete with Hi Yaahs! This has been going on for a while now.
I'd almost agree if not for references to comic book characters and Sherlock Holmes. Comic book characters have been open to adaption for some time. The difference between 1960's Batman and Frank Miller's Dark Night Returns are as different as day and night. Different comics employ different writers, and different writers employ different visions. Not even getting into the television/cartoon/or movie adaptions. Would you imagine the 60's Adam West Batman vengefully mourning over the loss of his parents he can't get over? No.. the 60's Batman took the lighter, wackier side of super heroes. And, other than the comics, Batman was wacky in cartoon form for years (see Super Friends) until Tim Burton's darker movies came out. Then we got the Darkest main stream Batman (until the Dark Knight movies) Batman TAS. I defy someone who grew up watching TAS to watch the Filmation 1960's cartoon where the Riddler talks like he has a stroke, and he fights the Pie Man. And let's not forget the clown prince of crime. In the comics, he WAS quite vicious. On the other hand, before Mark Hammil and the perfect balance of crazy and murderous, Caesar Romero and Larry Storch gave us some clowny clowns. And don't get me started on Ninja Turtles. Everyone remembers the Cowabunga when not a cow was bunga-ed in the dark 1984 comics.You know how when an old favorite character or story is remade (Superman, Batman, Sherlock Holmes, Star Trek--ugh) and the new creative people feel compelled to make them oh different (unAmerican, anal-retentive, an ignorant *** and, well, I can't say what I want to say about the new ST). You can "re-create" history all day--but only in Hollywood.
As for Sherlock... what people don't know about the character and only remember the caricature from the movies. Do they remember his apartment was a total mess, how disorganized he was, or how he actually was a drug additct? Nope, that's not some edgy adult reimagined Sherlock... that's the original Sir Arthur Conan Doyle work. But we only remember Baisl Rathbone-ish caricatures saying "Elementary, My Dear Watson!" which joins "Play it again, Sam" and "Can you say _______? I knew you could" as famous quotes they never actually said (at least in Sherlock's case, he never said them in the books... I'm surprised how much detail they took into the Muppet Sherlock Holmes comics).
As for Star Trek.. I love the movie for one simple reason. It ticked the heck off of old school trekkies that didn't like the bulk of the actual movies with the original cast, yet everyone else in the world loved it. I say they stopped focusing on trying to make a good Star Trek movie and focused on making a good action movie. And trust me, that's a field of trash right there. To see something with dialogue is amazing.