Catching up...again

Three things:

The Trouble with Trilogies:
Just about everyone has read The Hunger Games trilogy.  The main complaint people seemed to have about it was that, while the first book was fantastic and creative, and the second and third books were poorer versions of the same story.  The hero ends up in some version of the games and overcomes near-impossible odds.  I have found myself stuck in the same cycle while reading Scott Westerfeld's "Uglies" trilogy.  I enjoyed the creativity of the first book, "Uglies."  It was a fascinating premise, with the idea that, after the destruction of our civilization (we are Rusties), people developed a system where everyone becomes equally beautiful at the age of 16.  The point is that biologically, people are drawn to beautiful people, which gives pretty people an edge in being hired, being elected, and in overall success.  But something (of course) is wrong with the Pretties, and a group of Uglies are out to solve the problem.  There are actually 4 books, but only three involve the main characters: "Uglies," "Pretties," and "Specials."  Like I said, "Uglies" is fascinating.  The hero goes on a journey out into the wild, meets some new, interesting people, finds herself, and returns to her home with the intent to help improve the world.  And "Pretties" is about the same girl, escaping into the wild, meeting a new group of people, finding out more things to change in her world, and returns to save civilization again.  And "Specials" is about the same girl, finding her true self again, heading out into the wild again, and ending up with yet another group of people who have an agenda, realizes she needs to save the world, and heads back to her home town to make big changes.  It's a little familiar.  I stuck with the books, and now I'm reading the fourth book of the "trilogy."  It's already looking like the new hero is going to head out to the wild and meet some new people. It seems that the purpose of trilogies these days is just that the author wants three times the moola.  Authors, please take a note from J.R.R. Tolkien.  A trilogy could be different parts of the same story told in three parts.  Just a thought.

He's not just good at the crane kick
Can I tell you how excited I am that Ralph Macchio is on Dancing With the Stars?  So excited.  And he was fantastic last night.  Super light on his feet.  And I was stunned when he admitted his age to be 49.  What?  The man looks like he's 25.  And honorable mention goes to Kirstie Alley, who was also super fantastic.  I think I'll be watching this season.

Guilty Pleasure
Okay mom.  You can stop reading now.  Has anyone else watched the first 6 seasons of Desperate Housewives?  I have spent a lot of the last month watching it on Netflix streaming.  Let me tell you what I love about the show.  1.  Four neighbor friends that have different personalities, yet manage to love and support each other through all their trials.  It's heart-warming.  2.  Lynette, a mother of four, is not a perfect mom.  She yells at her kids sometimes, she gets mad at her husband sometimes, and she loves her family more than anything in the whole world.  Plus, she's hilarious.  3.  It's totally over the top, and I love over the top.  ("Lost", anyone?)  For example, a tornado heading right down the center of Wisteria Lane.  Also, the usual soapy stories (babies switched at birth, mysterious murderous neighbors, affairs with gardeners), which, you have to admit, can be kind of exciting.  I'm just saying, it's a fun show.  4.  Despite its soapy tendencies, there are also a lot of situations found in the show that are very relatable:  a friend with cancer whose friends gather around her, a miscarriage, a husband and wife who struggle to make ends meet and end up bickering over it, and motherhood in general.  I have really enjoyed the show.  I'm now stuck waiting for Season 7 to come out on DVD and streaming.  I hear Vanessa Williams has joined the Lane.  Should be fascinating.

That's what's on my mind, peeps.