MovieChat Forums > Fearless (1993) Discussion > Dr. Pearlman

Dr. Pearlman

posted 21 years ago by net5519
7 replies | jump to latest

I am a huge fan of John Turturro. I am sure that most of you know this by now. I found his work in this film a little mundane. Nobody get the wrong impression, I still love the mans' works. I just found his part a little dull around the edges. Normally John Turturro puts more heart into his work. The screenplay must have called for a solemn man. Dr. Pearlman seemed very much out in left field. May have been from the devistation of his patients, per say. I just thought that John Turturro would have been more apt to play the role up a bit. I am not the director by any means. I just found his performance a little unlike that of himself. Does that sound outlandish, or what??

If we could all allow our MonkeyBone to take effect, we would be better off!!!!

[–] timberwolf1-1 21 years ago

I think that this performance was near-brilliant understatement. Turturro played most of it using only his eyes and facial expressions...no easy feat for an actor.

[–] net5519 21 years ago

Not an easy feat by any means. I see your point. I would like to clear the air around this post if I may. I would never undermind John Turturro. He is the greatest actor that I have ever witnessed. I am simply stating that he normally adds more passion to his roles. In this film I suppose that he was cast as a psyciatrist, therefore he must listen. I believe that was the reason behind his lack of dialouge and so forth. Please don't get me wrong about my previous post. I found his part compelling and well played. I just get accustomed to John being more active in his roles. Mostly outspoken at times. Good day.

If we could all allow our MonkeyBone to take effect, we would be better off!!!!

[–] pbl1 18 years ago

Way too understated for Turturro. As much as I like the actor, it may have been mis-casting. Or, maybe its just that the character, no matter what actor played him, simply wasn't fleshed out enough (or was too passive).

[–] Texrat 18 years ago

I agree with those who say Turturro's subdued performance is meant to be a reflection of Max's (Bridges' character) dour perspective on him. Makes sense.

[–] ijonesiii 18 years ago

As a fellow fan of Turturro, I have to concur that he has done better work, which is so sad to say since most of the acting in this film is just spectacular.

[–] net5519 18 years ago

See, I was correct in the notion that he was underplaying. I am sorry that I haven't responded to your posts lately, by the way. Just a busy, busy lady. Well, thanks for all of the feedback. Thank you all for loving John, too. He is just such a wonderful actor. I will post more soon.

[–] sfviewer123 11 years ago

I thought Turturro's character was quite excellent, I think one thing that makes this film so special is that the director didn't sensationalize the plot and/or characters in an exploitative way at all like most movies do (that would have been something that would have happened if Turturro had acted in a more over the top way IMO).