I'm Glad To See You Active, I've Been Worried About You. 💖🫂

Trigger Warning: Pet Loss

My dog of ten years had to undergo emergency euthanasia today....because it was an emergency, I didn't have the $300 for a private cremation so I don't even get to keep a piece of my friend. I have so many feelings and so much to say. But now that I'm typing, I have no idea anymore. I think maybe what I want now is for people to magically understand everything I'm thinking so that I don't have to try and put it into words. I might share more about my baby's story later. Idk. For now, enjoy these pictures of my best boy.

I don't want to go to sleep. I want to keep thinking about Ewan McGregor 😔 why god why?

Beautifully done. Wow.

.Trainspotting (1996) + T2 Trainspotting (2017).

[Song: How to Disappear Completely - Radiohead]

13. Ewan McGregor Movie Review: Velvet Goldmine (1998)

Happy Pride Month!❤️🌈❤️We've made it to 1998 and can take a breather because Ewan only made two movies this year. How appropriate that on the first week of Pride Month the first review is the LGBTQ film "Velvet Goldmine"! I swear I didn't plan this. Maxwell Demon must have arranged it in the stars 😏. Also, I came across three different runtimes for this movie. The version I watched had a runtime of 1 hour and 58 minutes so the Screentime Percentage is based off of that.

Fun Fact: Toni Collette co-stars in this movie. She was in "Emma" with Ewan!

Genre: Musical/Drama

Rating: R

Director: Todd Haynes

Starring: Christian Bale, Jonathan Rhys Meyers, Ewan McGregor, Toni Collette

Synopsis: If you're someone who doesn't like musicals because of the "unrealistic" factor then you'll be happy to know that's not the case here. The movie is a musical because the characters are singers/musicians and they perform throughout the movie. The film is about British glam rocker Brian Slade who fakes his own death and disappears from the public in the 70s. Ten years later, Arthur Stuart, a journalist, is given the task to unearth what really happened to the rockstar and where he is now. His search brings him in contact with former stars who knew Slade and causes him to reflect on his own tumultuous past.

Ewan Review: Ewan plays the character Curt Wild. Curt Wild is a gay American man who's the lead singer and guitarist of his band The Rats. Brian Slade is greatly inspired by Curt and convinces him to collaborate on some projects. Eventually, what starts as a professional relationship blossoms into something more. Ewan speaks with an American English accent for this role which sounds a little funny at times. He has long blond hair for some of the movie which I like. He has two male love interests and a kiss scene. There's also one sex scene and one implied sex scene. He pretty much never wears a shirt and in one scene even strips nude while performing! And yes, that means you get to see his penis. Speaking of performing, he sings thrice and two of those times are full performances. Fun fact: he sang all of his vocals live instead of lip syncing to a pre-recorded track while filming! As far as acting, I think he did well with the limited amount of screentime he had.

Screentime Percentage (numbers are rounded to the nearest whole number): Ewan is on screen for a grand total of 20/118 minutes making his SP 17%.

To Ewan or not to Ewan: Is the movie worth watching for Ewan content alone? Yes, even though he doesn't have much screen time, he makes the most of it. Is the movie worth watching in general? Yes, it's a great LGBTQ movie! Plus, the soundtrack is infectious.

Where to Watch: "Velvet Goldmine" is available for rent on YouTube, Google Play Movies and TV, Fandango at Home, and Amazon Prime Video. It's also currently uploaded for free on YouTube through the account SELVA BEATS. Just search "Velvet Goldmine 1998 filme raro leg". Heads up: the movie has Portuguese subtitles that can't be turned off. Lastly, you can pirate the movie on soap2day.

Closing Thoughts: This movie makes me go Wild (pun-intended😉) with each watch. The music, costumes, performances, acting, EVERYTHING makes my heart pound. When I watched it for the first time I said the same thing Arthur did in the movie, "That's me! That's me!" It's been 26 years since it was released and in 2024 I was able to say, "That's me." I felt hope. I felt less alone. And I know I'm not the only one who saw themselves and felt the same. "Velvet Goldmine" is a beautiful movie in every way and well worth a watch.

Two job-hunting resources that changed my life:

This cover letter post on askamanger.com. A job interview guide written by Alison Green, who runs askamanager.

Trope selection tag game

Thanks @underacalicosky for tagging me! This'll be so much fun! 💖💖💖💖 I'm going to use obikin for my responses (to no one's surprise).

💖 enemies to lovers or friends to lovers - I love both of these so much. I think I'm going to have to go with friends to lovers, but I love them bickering so that's gotta be part of the friendship too. There's just something about everyone else around them knowing that they're in love with each other (though I also really love that in an enemies to lovers fic).

💖 coffee shop au or flower shop au - I love a coffee shop au! I love Obi-Wan going to a coffee shop for his tea fix just because there's the cute guy (Anakin, obvs) who always takes his order and draws little doodles on his cup. Or an Obi-Wan who, again, doesn't really like the taste of coffee but he loves the smell so he's actually really good at managing the coffee shop he owns that Anakin basically lives in. I will say, though, that Calico had a really good argument for a flower shop au in their post. So in that spirit, imagine a flower shop au where Anakin hates flowers (so me, that's why coffee shop will win every time for me) but applies for a job at the flower shop he passes on his way to campus when he sees the help wanted sign, all because he's had a crush on the hot owner (Obi-Wan) since it opened. A few months into Obi-Wan finds out that Anakin hates flowers and asks why he applied in the first place. Anakin's brain shorts out and tells him the truth. They date (and fuck) about it.

💖 hurt/comfort or there was only one bed - Only one bed by a landslide. I'm in a place in life where, if I had to choose, there would be little to no hurt in anything I read.

💖 found family or partners in crime - I love these both so much, but I'm going to have to go with found family. I'm obsessed with Obi-Wan and Anakin being Ahsoka’s dads, and found family just means so much to me in general.

💖 canon compliant or canon divergent - Has to be canon divergent because obikin deserves a happy ending. There can be compliant stuff there, but I need that happy ending.

💖 fluff or angst with a happy ending - I'm going to have to go with fluff. I can get through angst with a happy ending, but depending on how much angst and if it's all posted or if I have to wait and stew on it until an update it's actually really hard for me. I probably sound like such a weenie. Lol.

💖 1st person POV or 3rd person POV - 3rd person for sure.

💖 soulmates or forbidden love - I love a good soulmates/soulmark fic! So soulmates.

💖 roommates or fake dating - Calico cheated so I'm going to, too. Roommates who are fake dating is also my answer. 🤣

💖 slow burn or meet-cute - I'm all about that meet-cute!

💖 love triangle or polyamorous relationship - If I had to pick one I'd go with a poly relationship, but neither are really my thing.

💖 royalty au or magic au - I love a royalty au!

💖 high school/college au or neighbours au - I'm going to cheat again and say a neighbors au where Anakin's in college, or they're both in high school, or Anakin's in high school and Obi-Wan's in college, or something.

💖 mutual pining or idiots to lovers - I honestly kind of think they're the same thing. But I'll go with idiots to lovers.

I have no idea who's already played, but my no pressure tags are: @loycspotting @starpains @unspuncreature @kingdomvel @kenobisrightboot

EVERYONE STOP SCROLLING AND READ THIS NOW!

Bestie, this is everything I could've ever wanted. You mind! You're beautiful mind! I don't know what to say. This was food for my soul. You've inspired me to study film analysis. This breakdown blew me away! 🤯 I'm just rambling cuz I'm genuinely floored. Wow!

Queer Text/Subtext in Shallow Grave (1994)

CW: BLOOD, STABBING, MURDER, NON-SEXUAL NUDITY, DRUG USE

I guess I wrote a rough essay... about the queer subtext in Shallow Grave... Here... have the rough draft if you'd like...

Overt references to queerness:

When we look at contemporary movies, we often have a knee-jerk reaction to dismiss any “funny” references to queerness or sexuality to be taken as jokes and nothing further than that.  Unfortunately, this has become all too common, and does a disservice to the films we watch. So I will be taking every moment of referenced or implied queerness as serious, even if it is delivered in a humorous way. Especially because this movie is not meant to be a comedy (despite some humorous moments).

Furthermore, references to queerness in movies should be taken seriously because they establish not only the existence of queerness (in universe, as one might say), but can also demonstrate the character’s attitudes towards queerness.  Its important to notice that at no point in this movie are any references to queerness played for a laugh – they might be humorous, but we are not meant to laugh at the character for being queer, which indicates that queerness is taken seriously within the universe of the movie (or at least between the characters).

The first overt reference to queerness is when Juliet asks an interviewee if he is having an affair with a man or a woman and the man is not given screen time to answer. This same man bursts into tears after Alex, a man, says, “When did anyone last say to you these exact words, ‘you are the sunshine of my life’?” (this is a reference to the Stevie Wonder song of the same name). While it is technically (according to the script) said by Alex to a different interviewee, the arrangement of the shots does not indicate that, as it cuts directly from Alex asking the question to the man crying. This could imply a number of things.

The second overt reference to queerness comes at the charity ball, where a Scotsman says, “ladies and gentlemen, and those of you who are neither or both,” which is then met with a drumroll. Alex immediately responds, offended, “where did they dig him up?” implying that Alex finds the joke to be outdated and, perhaps, distasteful.

The third overt reference is when Alex dresses in drag. He also appears in the same scene, on the tape recording wearing some rather flamboyant costumes.  The fact that Alex is in drag is not addressed by any of the other characters, nor by Alex, indicates that this is either a usual occurrence, or, for some reason, entirely unremarkable to the characters.  Specifically, it is interesting that David does not comment on it, as he walks into the scene unsuspecting.

The fourth, and final, overt reference to queerness is when, upon being told of Juliet and David’s relationship, Alex says to Juliet, “I’d do exactly the same thing except I don’t think I’m his type.” If the line is interpreted sarcastically (which I think most viewers will) then we can assume that he is jealous of David for being with Juliet. If it is interpreted as earnest, then we can assume that he is jealous of Juliet for being with David. It also could be an ambiguous combination of both.

Queer Subtext:

Now let us dig into the subtext, which I actually find to be much juicier....

The Squash Scene and the Car

Directly after the interviews have concluded, we are given a scene which helps frame the relationship between the three characters as one built on dynamics of domination and submission and gives us a baseline to understand each of the character’s roles within this dynamic. This scene takes place on the Squash court.

There is a deviation here between the script and the film, as several lines have been cut, but I will include them as they add some context to the scene.

In the above text, Alex indicates that he sees this game of squash as a struggle for dominance. In this case, the game between Alex and David is won by Alex, who then, despite having called David a “bad loser,” demonstrates that he is a sore winner when he gloats over David by saying, “defeat, defeat, defeat – sporting, personal, financial, professional, sexual, and everything.”

David is clearly annoyed by this and storms off. This scene sets up the ongoing power dynamic between Alex and David in which Alex is the dominant one in the relationship. It also is the first time that we see David being emasculated by Alex, which will continue occurring for the first half of the movie.

Immediately after David leaves the court, Juliet takes his place to play a match against Alex.  In this scene she is wearing a rather masculine outfit which is similar to that of the two male characters. She also sports short hair throughout the movie, but this is the scene in which she appears the most “boyish.”  When she enters the court to play, Alex begins to make the same statement (“Did you know squash is-”) that he made (in the script) earlier, to David. Thus he is using this exercise as a way to exert dominance, not only over David, his male sexual rival, but also over Juliet, thus implying that she is on equal footing – therefore also a sexual rival. However, Juliet cuts him off and tells him, “Alex, just serve.”

The action of cutting off Alex denies him domination in that moment, thus establishing that the two of them are on much more equal footing, or possibly that Juliet is in fact the dominant one between the two of them.  This scene serves to establish that typical gendered dynamics are somewhat blurred between these three individuals, and that David, instead of Juliet, takes on the most feminine/passive role in the group.

The next scene once again highlights the complicated gender and power dynamics within the group.  Juliet drives the car (masculine) while Alex and David bicker with one another from the back seat and passenger seat, respectively.

In this scene, addressing Alex’s win, David says, “Victory is the same as defeat – it’s giving into destructive competitive urges,” which distances him from competition, and could be interpreted as him rejecting the masculine urge to dominate.  Alex, in return, emasculates him by belittling his reliance on a “discussion group,” (implied to be therapy). During this scene, Alex and David are looking at one another, however, the rear-view mirror blocks both of their eyes. This symbolizes their unwillingness to see “eye-to-eye and perhaps a certain level of repression between the two of them.  Also in this scene, Juliet physically dominates Alex by elbowing him in the chest, and attempts to emasculate him verbally by implying that a woman that he is interested in hates him. She does this specifically in response to Alex’s emasculation of David, thus establishing that while Alex might be dominant over David, she is dominant over him.  During this exchange, however, in her attempt to protect David from Alex, David is further emasculated because he relies on someone else to defend him.

Discovering the Body / Three Friends, Three Bodies

When the trio discovers Hugo’s body we see some more of this interesting dynamic.

David stands by shocked while Alex ransacks the room searching for paraphernalia, while Juliet (the doctor among them) attends to the body.

Hugo’s nude corpse in this scene represents male vulnerability. He is prone and exposed on the bed, having overdosed on heroin, and can do nothing while his privacy is violated (by the dominant, Alex).  The injection of drugs into the body, in this case, could also be said to symbolize emasculation - the breaking of the body barrier through penetration of a syringe (phallus). This exemplifies a significant cultural fear at the time – death of the male body via penetration, which had become a major concern due to the HIV/AIDS epidemic. (If I was writing this essay for real, this is where I would insert articles that demonstrate horror’s preoccupation with AIDS and gay stuff during the 80s and 90s, but this is just for fun)

David, of course, is enamored by this display of the fragility of the male body. I would suggest that he identifies with Hugo’s vulnerability in death, and that the treatment of Hugo’s body by Alex and Juliet mirrors the way that they treat David. While Alex takes advantage of Hugo’s vulnerability in death by violating his privacy (thus dominating it), Juliet emasculates Hugo’s corpse by tending to it.  In one shot, we also see Juliet’s fingers dangerously close to penetrating Hugo’s mouth.

We can also expand upon this by recognizing that the two male characters that are pursuing Hugo and the trio in search of the money, are parallels to Juliet and David.  The two men are able to dominate Juliet and Alex through violence, only then to be killed by David. Thus, the three bodies that the trio end up burying are parallels to the trio themselves.

David Overcomes Emasculation, Alex Becomes Emasculated.

Alex’s emasculation of David continues throughout the first half of the movie, culminating in David being forced to dismember Hugo’s body (the very body that he identifies with).  When this occurs, he becomes the violator/aggressor/dominator.

This occurrence proceeds the change in the group dynamic. Around the midpoint of the movie (during the charity ball) we see David transition into a dominant role in the trio, while Alex becomes submissive.

This is demonstrated first by Juliet dominating Alex while they dance. Alex falls to the floor, drunk, and Juliet takes that moment to step on Alex’s mouth, forcing him to lick the bottom of her shoe.  He then willingly kisses her ankle, meeting her eye contact submissively. It is made clear through his facial expressions and laughter, that he finds joy in this act, thus embracing the emasculation (whereas David had always responded poorly, rejecting it).

Alex then attempts to re-exert control over David by forcing him to toast when he doesn’t want to. David eventually concedes after Alex yells at him, demanding that he toast to “love and happiness forever.”  (Alex also humiliates and emasculates Cameron in this scene).

David finally exerts control when Brian McKenly (a man keen on pursuing Juliet) interrupts their conversation. David responds by standing on level with Brian and stating, “If you want to talk to my girlfriend, you talk to me first. If you want to dance with her, you apply in writing three weeks in advance or you end up inside of a fucking bin bag. You didn’t apply – so you don’t dance!”

While David shrinks a bit afterwards, admitting that he found the interaction stressful, both Juliet and Alex embrace him, in high spirits (one might say… aroused…). Alex exclaims, “He [David] was really good – fucking bin bag – I really liked that. You really explored your maleness to the full there! You were magnificent.” This statement indicates that Alex, who has rarely had an encouraging word for David over the course of the movie, is invigorated upon seeing that David has stepped into a dominant role, exerting his masculinity onto others. Immediately following this, Alex is assaulted in the bathroom by Cameron (who he had emasculated twice prior) and two other men, who beat him quite badly, thus emasculating Alex.

The following day, Alex’s emasculation is made complete when he dresses in drag and spends the day in debauchery with Juliet. The framing of his and Juliet’s bodies during this scene is also worth noting, as they are often visually indistinguishable from one another – with Alex being noticeably more feminine than Juliet in several shots due to his makeup, jewelry, dress, and rather delicate shoulders.

(Notably, during the entirety of the ball scene and much of the drag/video scene, Alex is often pictured smoking a cigar instead of his usual cigarette, which could be said to stand in for a phallus.)

From this point on, David is almost always dominant over Alex. (One notable exception is one moment where Alex leans in close to David during dinner and orders, “now swallow,” while making very intense eye contact. David regains control by reminding Alex that David was the one who dismembered Hugo’s body.)

After this point it is clear that David is undergoing some extreme psychological stress, and has become paranoid and aggressive.  His shift in demeanor is most clearly symbolized by this shot, where he calls out of work so that he can begin making plans to protect the cash.

The Wickerman

During one scene, an injured Alex lays on the couch and watches the final scene of The Wickerman (1973). 

The Wickerman tells the tale of a conservative Christian police officer who goes to a Scottish isle to investigate the disappearance of a girl, only to discover that the locals are practicing a form of paganism that involves human sacrifice. The police officer discovers that he is in fact the sacrifice.  It is implied that he is the sacrifice because he is a virgin and a heterosexual, and he is unwilling to have sex with Christopher Lee’s character.  Christopher Lee was most well known at the time for playing the lead in Dracula (1958) – another movie with extremely well documented queer subtext. The audience of The Wickerman would have been aware of this.

During this scene, the drumbeats of the pagan ritual, where the police officer is being marched to his execution/sacrifice, synchronizes with David’s steps overhead, a sound that the characters and the audience come to associate with surveillance and dread.

Honestly this scene has me a bit stumped. Who does Alex identify with in this situation? The heterosexual victim? – is the ending subverted because his submission culminates in… the penetration of Alex's body… thus making him queer? Idk it's been a long day.

Surveillance

During the second half of the movie, David moves into the Attic and rarely comes down when his housemates are home.  He is protecting the money, both from his housemates and from the men who eventually come looking for it. While Alex and Juliet are brutalized by the men, David is the one who has set a trap for them, and is able to kill them. He also leads the trio to dispose of the bodies, and drives the van (whereas Alex had driven the van the first time they disposed of the bodies, when he had been the dominant one in the relationship).

During his time in the attic, David drills holes in the ceiling so that he can spy on his housemates. He is literally in a dominant position over them, looking down on them while they go about their daily tasks. In one scene, he spies on Alex and Juliet while they are sleeping. In this scene, he is shown first to be watching Alex. David is also in a state of undress that we have not seen before, implying a certain sensuality to the observation. We do not get to see Alex in a state of undress, but the scene finishes with Alex putting his shoes on, the camera looking down from above, implying David’s Point of view, and that he had watched the whole time. After Alex leaves, David moves to watch Juliet, in a scene that is much longer and more explicitly inappropriate and sexualized, especially because we come to understand that David’s temporary attic bed is located directly over her bed. However, before she begins undressing, he looks away and holds his head in his hands.

This scene simultaneously offers us a leveling effect between the two objects of David’s gaze (Alex and Juliet), while simultaneously prioritizing the heterosexual coupling. However, the implication that there is shame associated with the heterosexual gaze, complicates the situation.

Penetration with the Drill (Phallus)

When Alex goes into the attic to look for the money (and finds it in the water tank), he climbs back down the ladder only to be confronted by David, who is holding a drill (phallus) as a weapon.  Alex’s hands are wet from the water, and he frantically wipes them on the seat of his pants, behind his back, visually placing his hands as a barrier to his anus. The Drill makes contact with Alex's head and breaks the skin in an act of penetration (the body barrier is broken). This is the first scene in which David directly engages in domination (and penetration) of Alex.

David’s Glasses and Alex’s Photo

Lenses, mirrors, and portals/doorways are deeply significant visual aids in this movie, but I want to highlight the one that stood out to me the most. When Juliet and David have (implied) sex, at which point they solidify their status as a couple, David removes his glasses, and places them on Juliet’s bedside table.  Underneath the glasses is a photo of Alex in costume, a cigar in his mouth, framed through the lens of the glasses.  The photo was taken on the day in which we see Alex at his most feminine, at a point where he had been thoroughly emasculated (beaten in a bathroom by a man that he had emasculated multiple times). The framing of the photo, through the lens of David’s glasses implies that this is how David sees Alex – costumed, emasculated, and with a phallus in his mouth.

This photo is also shown once more in the film; David holds the photo of Alex as he lies in his attic bed, and he pins it above his head so he can look at it. The scene cuts to Alex, also in bed, who then gets up. It once again cuts back to David, who also gets up, and we see that Juliet lies asleep next to him. This follows a pattern of shots that we’ve seen before in the film (see the Surveillance section), where we see David watching Alex in what could be interpreted as a sexual or romantic way, before the camera reveals Juliet and lingers significantly. The implication is that whatever there is between David and Alex always gives way to the relationship between David and Juliet.

Returning to the glasses - the final time that we see them is during the climax of the movie. The three characters are struggling against one another, and David’s head is forced into the refrigerator so that Alex can try and smash him with the door.  He manages to throw Alex off, but not before his glasses are caught on the shelf of the refrigerator, thus knocking them off his face.  Having David’s glasses be knocked off would not typically be significant in a fight scene such as this, however the camera goes out of its way to linger on this shot, indicating that the symbolism here is important.  The other time that we have seen David remove his glasses has been before he has (implied) sex with Juliet. In this case, the removal of the glasses occurs just before David pins Alex in his final act of domination, which then culminates in the ultimate symbolic act of sexual penetration – David stabbing Alex with a knife (phallus).

NOTE: David is also pictured without glasses at the beginning of the film, where he is lying on his back, and halfway through the film, after he has dismembered Hugo in a symbolic act of violence against his own vulnerability.  In the first scene we hear his monologue; “I’m not ashamed, I’ve known love, I’ve known rejection. I’m not afraid to declare my feelings. Take trust for instance, or friendship. These are the important things in life. These are the things that matter, that help you on your way. If you can’t trust your friends well, then what then? What then? This could have been any city, but all the same.” It is unclear until the end, but it seems that the first time that we see David, right at the beginning, we are actually seeing him postmortem in the morgue. Meaning that the monologue is a lament on his life... (You're not ashamed of what, David? Being a bit gay, perhaps?)

Penetration with the Knife (Phallus)

At the climax of the movie, after David’s glasses have been removed, we arrive at David’s final act of domination over Alex.  David pins Alex to the floor by sitting on his stomach, with Alex’s legs pinned underneath his knees in a position that could be interpreted as sexual.  He then holds Alex by the throat, and stabs him in the shoulder, slicing clean through and penetrating the floor.  The act of stabbing (penetrating) a victim with a knife (phallus) is one often noted in analysis of horror films, as having sexual implications (again – I’d find some article about it here if I was a serious writer lol).

Before David can stab Alex again with a second knife, David is stabbed with a knife through the throat from behind by Juliet.  Thus Juliet, who has been a dominant character throughout the movie, is symbolically penetrating David with a phallus. Furthermore, the location of the stabbing in the throat and from behind, implies that David has now suffered, once again, an emasculation, just as he had just preformed on Alex.

David collapses and dies, just as Hugo did, from emasculation through the body barrier being broken from penetration. Thus, David’s identification with Hugo’s corpse and the vulnerability that it represented, is complete in this moment.

Juliet then kneels over Alex, taking up the same position that David had just occupied, and places her hand on the knife in Alex’s shoulder, pressing on it, thus taking David’s place as the one to dominate Alex.  She then removes her shoe, and in an act that mirrors the scene from the charity ball in which she dominated Alex by having him lick her shoe/foot, she uses her shoe to hit the knife three times, driving it deeper into his shoulder, further penetrating him.  Thus, in her final interaction with both David, and Alex, she has penetrated them.

As she puts her shoe back on, we can see inside of the refrigerator, where we once again see David’s glasses, recalling once again that this scene is coded as sexual in nature through the movie's visual language.

As the movie closes, we discover that Alex is alive (probably), and that he has hidden the money underneath the floorboard. In the ultimate irony of the movie, the character that spent the second half of the movie being coded as the submissive (homosexual receiving) partner, has come out on top, despite the other two character’s attempt to dominate (and kill) him.

Uhhh the credits roll, and they're all shown as they were in the first scene of the movie, smiling, laughing, and the love song "Happy Heart" plays...

3. Ewan McGregor Movie Review: Doggin' Around (1994)

This is Ewan's third and last movie of 1994. Three movies in one year is impressive for a burgeoning actor and that's not including the television series and short film he was in that year as well. Unfortunately, his last project of 1994 didn't end on a high note for me.

Movie Review: Doggin' Around is a television movie starring Elliot Gould and Geraldine James. The movie is about Joe Warren, an American jazz pianist, reluctantly performing a tour short notice in England's less than desirable venues after the main act suddenly dies. He is put in the care of ex-jazz singer, Sarah Williams, who has sworn to never sing on stage again. Though they don't get along at first, the duo slowly open up to each other as they work through problems from their past. On paper, the movie sounds fine, but the truth of the matter is this movie is so boring and the acting is god awful! First of all, Joe Warren is an insufferable character. I kept saying to myself "No one talks like that!" The delivery of every single line out of the actor's mouth sounds stilted and manufactured. He sounded like he wanted you to know he was acting which just takes you out of the movie because of how unnatural it is. For a character whose charm is supposed to come from his witty and sarcastic humor, there was not a single joke that landed for me. There was only one joke that got a positive reaction from me. Mind you, I didn't laugh. I just thought "that wasn't a bad joke." The movie is slow. Even though we follow Joe Warren on tour, the sets all look the same so it feels like we stay in one place the entire movie. Also, the visuals are grey and dull. The one good thing I will say about this film is that because it's about a jazz musician we get to hear a lot of jazz in the score and the selections are enjoyable.

Ewan Review: Ewan plays a minor role as the character Tom Clayton, a double bass player who still has a lot to learn about show business. He accompanies Joe Warren on tour as his bassist and is eager to make a name for himself even if it means stepping on Joe's toes. Ewan doesn't have a lot of lines in this role though it is fun to watch him energetically pretend to play a bass. He also has long silky hair which was becoming his staple hair style during this era. His performance was good though short.

Screentime Percentage (All numbers are rounded to the nearest whole number): Ewan is on screen for a grand total of 10/89 minutes making his SP 11%.

To Ewan or not to Ewan: Is this movie worth watching for Ewan content alone? No. Is it worth watching in general? No.

Where to Watch: Doggin' Around is currently uploaded for free on YouTube through the account "Ewan McGregor Vault". Just search "Doggin' Around 1994, with Ewan McGregor". Be warned that the quality isn't great. There are a couple moments where the sound cuts in and out as well as one moment where the visuals briefly cut out.

Conclusion: This is my first really negative review so I want to remind everyone that this is just my opinion. This movie is a skip for me but others have given it some very positive reviews. Don't be afraid to give it a watch and come to your own conclusion. If you do, I'd love to hear your opinion! But if what you're looking for is Ewan content, then I'd suggest you look elsewhere.

refseek.com

www.worldcat.org/

link.springer.com

http://bioline.org.br/

repec.org

science.gov

pdfdrive.com

Thoughts: Attack of the Clones

I've been watching Star Wars Attack of the Clones and got to the scene where Anakin and Padmé are in the meadow. Anakin asks her about her childhood crush or something and she says "Are you gonna use your Jedi mind trick on me?" For whatever reason, her asking that made me wonder if Force-play is a thing in the Star Wars universe and if Padmé was into it. Like, do you think Anakin ever DID try to mind trick her in the bedroom per her request? Do you think that being such a powerful and commanding figure for practically all her life would make her interested in submission? To be able to just turn her mind off and allow someone else, someone she trusts above all others, to control her body? Make decisions for her? It's a thought I found interesting.