Well, it's obvious that the Bombadil episode is not seen (by the screenwriters, at least) as being essential to the story. I just wonder, if Tolkien were alive, how much he'd protest the elimination of this portion of the story if he had a say in the matter. I'm just as willing to sit still for a 3 hour and 20 minute movie as I am a 3 hour one, if it's done right. Maybe Tolkien would have seen the elimination of this character as destroying the integrity of the story somehow.
I admit to being a little mystified by the inclusion of Bombadil in the book, myself. He's obviously there for a reason, but I'm not quite sure what that reason is.
Same here. But I remember that he saves Frodo in the barrow downs? Gandalf does mention him at the end of TROTK.