Posts by electricridge6

So, nobody here has actually compared him to Leonardo DiCaprio? It’s pretty obvious that Daniel Day-Lewis operates on a completely different level, though you can't exactly slot DDL into that tiny group of all-time legends either. Honestly, I think comparing him to someone like Robert De Niro is a bit of a stretch.

Matthew Johnson30 said:Troll question: who would pull off a better Joker—Daniel Day-Lewis or Edward Norton? 😁

Man, that's a tough one. Honestly, I feel like you can only really decide if you see them both playing the part at the same time. But if I absolutely had to pick blindly? I'd go with Daniel Day-Lewis.

bluenomad2 said:He reached that level a long time ago. Daniel Day-Lewis is in that same league as Jack Nicholson, Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, Robert De Niro, and Laurence Olivier—who was actually his mentor and taught him so much. We're talking pure elite here. Period. The thing is, just like Olivier, he might be the least "exciting" of that high-end group. No scandals, no crazy tabloid life, nothing like that.

I don't know, I just can't see it. Guys like Jack Nicholson, Robert De Niro, Al Pacino, and Marlon Brando are the absolute peak, and Daniel Day-Lewis is just getting close. I just can't put him in the same breath as those legends.

I don't see it that way, but fair enough.

Joseph Edwards4 said:Look, Edward Norton is solid in his movies—I'd say 25h is just as good—but talking nonsense about Daniel Day-Lewis? Come on. Neither Norton nor Leonardo DiCaprio even come close. He’s on a whole different level. He's the absolute peak of acting; he doesn't need to film anything else in his life.

So, if we're calling him the peak of acting, I have to disagree. I mean, he's incredible and all, but he still hasn't reached that legendary status held by Robert De Niro or Al Pacino.

Steven Newman50 said:Look, that’s not really the point. Sure, there are movies where he absolutely kills it, but he isn't legendary in every single one. Honestly, there are plenty of films where he just shows up because he's there, and they're nothing special. He’s always professional and hits his marks, but he doesn't exactly stand out in every role. I mean, most people here can probably name five or six roles where he was actually great, right? But compared to everything else he’s put out? That’s barely even a quarter of his work.

I’m not even talking about the big, flashy roles. I mean those performances where an actor completely steals the scene from everyone else, even if they aren't the household names you'd expect. Take Kingdom of Heaven, for example—Edward Norton actually didn't want people giving him all the credit for that character. And honestly? As much as I respect Daniel Day-Lewis, he kind of goes overboard sometimes. Edward Norton, on the other hand, seems to be searching for that perfect, subtle balance in his acting. Don't you think?

Gerald Gomez43 said:
plus with this Robert De Niro 🙏performance 🙏, it might actually be my all-time favorite display of top-tier acting
just my two cents, obviously

I honestly love it when actors get to sink their teeth into such intense characters. 🙏

Edward Norton was incredible in The Score, even if the movie itself was total garbage.

Amy Brooks17 said:
The more you watch, the more

That’s the one scene that just left everyone speechless. And when Richard Gere says "you are really good," he was actually talking about his acting performance. 😛

Steven Newman50 said:Seriously? I wouldn't say that (I actually didn't know that). He doesn't fully inhabit his characters to the point where he becomes them. Don't get me wrong, he’s got presence and he's creative, but he tends to pack all that intensity into one spot instead of just owning every single scene.

Just watch Kingdom of Heaven. He pops up maybe three or four times and absolutely kills it.

🥱

Steven Newman50 said:He doesn't film constantly because he's incredibly picky about his roles. He’ll spend two whole years prepping for a single part, and once he starts, he basically lives as that character. It becomes his entire reality. He doesn't even snap out of it until filming is over, often needing to see a therapist just to shake off the character's habits. Everything he does is about making that performance absolutely unforgettable.

Plus, during his breaks, he totally retreats into solitude. He stays busy with hobbies like grilling and woodworking.

Hmm... sounds a bit like Edward Norton, except he doesn't need the therapy sessions.

Samuel Murphy8 said:Why is it that these lists always leave out guys like Paul Newman, Dustin Hoffman, Sandy Stewart, Jack Lemmon, or Tim Burton? They’ve probably done way more for cinema on their own.
I’d go as far as to say Edward Norton is one of the best young actors out there, right up there with Phoenix and Bale. Honestly, I just find Leonardo DiCaprio's acting to be totally hollow and unconvincing.

Man, I could barely make sense of what you wrote. Your typing looks like straight-up hieroglyphics. 😁

For me, watching Norton in Kingdom of Heaven was absolutely fascinating. To me, that’s the best portrayal of a king I’ve ever seen, and trust me, I’ve watched plenty of movies about royalty.

vivideagle7 said:Edward Norton is amazing and honestly way better than Leonardo DiCaprio, but he's still not quite on that Daniel Day-Lewis level, which is basically the gold standard.

Fair point, but hey, Norton's younger, right? He’s definitely got plenty of time left to prove everyone wrong.

silentpanther7 said:It’s gotta be Edward Norton for me—definitely my favorite. I don't really see him in the same league as Leo since he leans toward those big blockbusters more often, but to me, he belongs right up there with Daniel Day-Lewis. Both of them are just absolute masters when it comes to disappearing into a role.

I'm with you, it's a toss-up between him and Daniel Day-Lewis. I just wanted to run this poll to see if people actually think Leonardo DiCaprio is better than Edward Norton.
Since Edward Norton is my top pick, I end up watching his stuff way more than anything Daniel Day-Lewis does. So, whenever I finish one of his movies, I find myself checking out polls like this comparing him to Edward Norton.😁

Lawrence Edwards58 said:Those comparisons don't really hold water. Why pick those two specifically? Wouldn't it be way harder to choose between someone like Edward Norton and Christian Bale?

Leo is a solid actor, sure, but he (just like Julia Roberts) always ends up playing himself. When I think of Norton, I think of his specific characters. When I think of Leo's characters—even though he's got plenty—they all kind of blur together.

It's because Bale and Norton aren't quite in the same league as DiCaprio and Norton.

Edit: And let's be real, everyone just hypes up DiCaprio like he's some kind of god. I get it, he's great, but "the greatest ever"? Not really.

Daniel Booth37 said:Brad Pitt.

Wish I could make that happen for you, but it's just not an option.😛

Paul Anderson7 said:Both actors are top-tier. Honestly, Norton is one of my absolute favorites. I don't really care about the Academy Awards or all that hype; I just want to see Norton in another killer movie. It's tough to even compare guys like them—they're both incredible and aren't really competing with each other.
If someone could somehow pack Norton, DiCaprio, Tom Hardy, and Michael Shannon into a single movie, that would be legendary.

Norton is working on a film based on the book Motherless Brooklyn. I'm not sure what the status of the project is or when it'll drop, but I'm definitely hyped for it since it's about a detective with Tourette syndrome. I have zero doubt he'll nail this one too.

Steven Newman50 said:Leonardo DiCaprio basically lands a hit almost every time he's on screen. I honestly think he’s just getting way more selective about his roles these days.

It's not that Leonardo DiCaprio isn't picky—he totally is—but I feel like he overacts in pretty much everything he does. He just doesn't feel real to me. And as for Edward Norton? I've heard he's a nightmare to work with, always making huge demands on set and stuff.

Matthew Johnson30 said:You either have talent, or you don't. Period.
Alan Rickman basically custom-built Hans Gruber to fit his own vibe—that smooth, high-class international thief in expensive suits.
That was his first big film role, yet he managed to play one of the greatest movie villains ever. His specific type of antagonist has been copy-pasted into hundreds of other American action flicks since. Pretty impressive for a guy who actually hates weapons.

As for DiCaprio, he's spent 12 years playing neurotic characters on the fringes of society, thinking he's showing off his genius acting chops. In reality, he’s just proving how much crap he's willing to swallow just to get industry recognition.
His "private life" is so incredibly public that the only thing we don't know is whether he uses three-ply or luxury four-ply toilet paper.
The guy practically screams for validation, even though he doesn't have much to offer.

I have to admit, it's true, no matter how many people think DiCaprio is a great actor. On the flip side, Norton is really picky about his roles.

Steven Newman50 said:Honestly, I think comparing actors this way is kind of pointless. It would make sense if we were talking about two different actors playing the exact same role in different versions of a play or drama. Like, you could compare Brand and Heston playing Mark Antony in Julius Caesar, or Laurence Olivier and Kenneth Branagh as Hamlet (and hey, if you really want to, throw Mel Gibson into the mix 😛).

I get they have totally different styles, but I don't see why we can't compare them.

Steven Newman50 said:And by the way, Norton has three Oscar nominations. That third one was last year for his supporting role in Birdman.

I totally forgot about that third Oscar nomination 😵

Steven Newman50 said:Maybe the link between the two of them is how they both offer a lot of nuance from role to role without huge character shifts. Norton might be more subtle, and since he isn't constantly all over the tabloids, it’s easier to just get lost in his performances. And regarding what you mentioned—him suggesting the stuttering for the character? That's nothing new in movies. It’s actually great when an actor takes initiative to add something the director or writer didn't even plan. To me, it's just a sign of creative talent.

As for the stuttering, I think it's fascinating because it was his first big role. I doubt anyone would have even noticed if it had been his tenth film.

So, Leonardo DiCaprio finally snagged his first Oscar for The Revenant. I haven't actually sat down to watch it yet, but honestly, I’ve never doubted the level of talent DiCaprio brings to the screen. He’s been killing it for years.
Personally, my absolute favorite of his is What's Eating Gilbert Grape, where he plays that brother alongside Johnny Depp.

As for Edward Norton, from what I know, he's only picked up two Oscar nominations—Primal Fear, which was actually his debut, and American History X (Norton's). For me, Primal Fear is easily his best work. He was just incredible in it, totally convincing everyone that he was just an innocent altar boy 😁 🙏>🙏

Who do you guys think comes out on top between these two? Who's the more believable actor in your eyes and why?

For me, Edward Norton takes the win, and there are plenty of reasons. First off, he just nails those heavy, demanding roles. Plus, his ability to pull off different accents and improvise is next level. I'm not sure if you guys knew this, but for the role of Aaron Stampler, he actually suggested adding the stutter, even though it wasn't in the script or the book.