QUOTE
I was going for a "woe is me" gesture rather than a thinking one. If it was thinking, you'd have a point. It still probably could be longer or the whole move made simpler. But we're under timing pressures both within the shot and in the production generally. Duly noted.
Sorry Ken. I should be more careful when responding.
Going from memory I misrecalled the gesture as 'thinking' and failed to properly edit my response.
The gesture reads as a manufactured 'woe is me' gesture so you've got that going on.
My point was that there isn't time for a change in gesture and that makes that pose seem rushed... even without this particular gesture Googly may be in jeopardy of gesticulating too much. On the positive side, Googly seems to be enjoying himself and purposefully hamming it up, so its okay if he overdoes it.
The underlying point... which I believe you've noted... is that it takes time for the audience to read a pose and then move on.
As Googly is popping around all over the place this makes the reading of each of his poses a little harder.
From an purely editorial perspective if the gesture doesn't flow as necessary it will be easy enough to lengthen the gesture to a moving hold or simply drop those frames out. I've experimented a little with adding Ease to rendered frames and in a pinch it can do wonders to resolve such minor issues in timing. I suspect that if editing the image sequence I'd follow the Editor's rule and when in doubt just cut it out. There just doesn't seem to be enough frames for the motivation behind the gesture to play out.