Edward Norton vs. Leonardo DiCaprio

Samuel Scott54 said:I mean, Daniel Day-Lewis hasn't really been making movies lately—maybe four or five in the last decade? I don't know what people see in him. To me, Leonardo DiCaprio and Edward Norton have much better filmographies.

No way am I reading all that.

Norton is solid in most of his films, and I don't mind 25h, but talking this much nonsense about Daniel Day-Lewis? Neither Norton nor Leonardo DiCaprio even come close to him. He’s on a completely different level—the absolute peak of acting. What else does he even need to film in his life?

Amy Brooks17 said:plus with this Robert De Niro 🙏 🙏, it might be my most memorable example of brilliant acting.
That’s just my subjective take, obviously.

Daaaa, also an incredible performance, if you ask me.

By the way, when I compared him to Daniel Day-Lewis, I wasn't saying he was better or worse—I was just saying that based on his style and overall vibe, he fits into a different tier of actors. Unlike Leonardo DiCaprio, who feels more like he belongs in the same category as someone like Brad Pitt.

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.

Pure talent. Just look at those roles in My Left Foot, Lincoln, and There Will Be Blood. They are all incredibly powerful and distinct, yet they carry that same overwhelming intensity. That is just his level. He doesn't need a massive filmography; one or two masterpieces are enough. You don't just stumble into that kind of range by accident. It isn't a lucky punch. You either reach the summit or you don't. Daniel Day-Lewis is operating at the level of the true greats. Absolute peak.

It’s the same story with directors. A steady output matters for your overall reputation, but it has nothing to do with whether you are actually a genius. You don't just accidentally make a masterpiece. You don't just "accidentally" direct Rosemary's Baby, Psycho, or Ace in the Hole. Whether someone decides to die or retire and never touch a camera again tells us nothing about their actual quality.

Top-tier acting, directing, and everything in between—it doesn't happen by chance. Uwe Boll isn't going to accidentally turn out a Ben Hur.

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

I could honestly say that Daniel Day-Lewis is one of the greatest actors to ever do it. I don't have to die before I can make a claim like that. Unfortunately, I haven't actually sat through many of his movies.
To be fair, I saw him in that film based on the novel by Milan Kundera, and I watched Gangs of New York when I was just a kid; all I really remember from that one is his character, because he absolutely terrified me. I think Leonardo DiCaprio might have been in that movie too, but I don't recall and I really can't be bothered to look it up on IMDb right now.

Random question: who would have played a better Joker—Daniel Day-Lewis or Edward Norton? 😁

Noah Roberts46 said:Top-tier acting—just watch There Will Be Blood, In the Name of the Father, My Left Foot, The Last of the Mohicans, Gangs of New York, or Age of Innocence. All stellar movies with incredible performances. It’s debatable who has better films; those listed are all great/solid, but we're talking about movies... are we debating the acting or the films themselves?

For me, Edward Norton and Christian Bale are my favorite younger actors, but they aren't in the same league as Daniel Day-Lewis. Not yet, anyway.

I'm also wondering what they're even talking about. 🤷 Don't mix up massive blockbusters with actual cinema. To me, There Will Be Blood is better than any movie starring Leonardo DiCaprio. The Last of the Mohicans was better directed than anything Leo has done. Daniel Day-Lewis is in a league of his own—he's at the absolute peak of the elite. Then you have actors like Edward Norton and the rest. After that, you get solid actors like Leonardo DiCaprio, who only stays relevant because of those blockbusters where you don't actually need to show any emotional range. Give me some real drama. Even in Revolutionary Road, Kate Winslet completely outclassed him.

electricridge6 said:Just because acting is at its peak right now doesn't make it true. He’s great, sure, but he isn't on the level of Robert De Niro or Al Pacino yet.

He reached that level a long time ago. Daniel Day-Lewis belongs in the same category as Jack Nicholson, Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, Robert De Niro, and Laurence Olivier—who was his mentor and taught him a lot. That’s the elite tier. Period. It’s just that, much like Olivier, he might be the least "interesting" of that group. No scandals, no wild lifestyle. Nothing.

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.

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.

You don't need to categorize him. His caliber as part of the acting elite is self-evident. Honestly, comparing him to Leonardo DiCaprio is just embarrassing—it's like trying to put Quentin Tarantino and Ingmar Bergman on the same level. It's laughable. You can pick Kubrick or Alfred Hitchcock if you want, but everyone does that. I see lists of top directors where Tarantino is listed first, and while I have nothing against him and his films are fine, it’s still ridiculous. Sometimes you even see Akira Kurosawa left off those lists entirely. It makes you shudder at how arbitrary these rankings are. And mentioning Leonardo DiCaprio in the same breath as Daniel Day-Lewis? Pure nonsense.

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.

You aren't looking at actual quality; you're just chasing a brand. The talent is identical, and that’s the level Daniel Day-Lewis operates on. Just look at his filmography again and tell me his caliber isn't exceptional. It's about quality, not some superficial brand name or sheer volume. Polanski represents true craftsmanship regardless of how many films he makes or what label is attached. Who is actually better? The quality is undeniable. You only need to see two of his films to realize he's in a league of his own.

Look at Al Pacino or Robert De Niro; they built a brand and a level of stardom that Daniel Day-Lewis just doesn't possess. That has nothing to do with talent. His performances are a perfect 10/10 every single time. Can you actually do better? Maybe, but we haven't seen it from anyone else yet.

I don't really care about how many movies someone makes. I never have, and honestly, I don't think quantity is the same thing as quality. It’s just not my style, you know? I’ll probably end up watching all his films eventually, and then maybe I'll have a final verdict for you. But right now? Neither him nor Edward Norton even come close to Robert De Niro and that whole legendary crew.

Once again, you're bringing up him and Edward Norton. Honestly, why even bother arguing? It’s a lost cause. Every single role is a perfect 10/10. How could anyone do better?

electricridge6 said:Well, nobody here seems to be comparing him to Leonardo DiCaprio. It’s pretty obvious that Daniel Day-Lewis operates on a different level, though even then, you can't quite slot Daniel Day-Lewis into that tiny circle of all-time legends. Honestly, I think comparing him to someone like Robert De Niro is a bit of a stretch.

Why wouldn't we put him in that same league? Are you actually suggesting Al Pacino is so much better than Daniel Day-Lewis that they shouldn't even be mentioned in the same breath? I have serious doubts about whether Al Pacino is even superior to Daniel Day-Lewis; if you ask me, Daniel Day-Lewis has already surpassed him, despite being about fifteen years younger and having a less "iconic" filmography with fewer roles under his belt. Please, spare me the attempt to rank him alongside Jack Nicholson, Robert De Niro, or Al Pacino—it’s frankly laughable..

Dana Walker2 said:Why wouldn't you put him in the same league as the legends? Are you seriously trying to tell me Al Pacino is so much better than Daniel Day-Lewis that they aren't even close? Honestly, I have huge doubts about whether Pacino is even better than Daniel Day-Lewis—in my book, he’s already surpassed him, even if he’s about 15 years younger and hasn't played as many "iconic" roles. Please, don't try to group Pacino with Jack Nicholson, Robert De Niro, and Marlon Brando... that's just laughable to me..

That's exactly why he doesn't hit their level. Whether he's made a few movies or a ton, Daniel Day-Lewis just isn't in that same tier. And wait, why aren't Nicholson, Robert De Niro, and Marlon Brando all in the same rank? If they aren't, what makes Daniel Day-Lewis part of that group? You guys are really overhyping the idea that Daniel Day-Lewis is the greatest of all time.

Joseph Edwards4 said:It’s always you or Edward Norton, haha. Of course he belongs there, arguing about this is just a waste of breath. Every single one of his roles is a perfect 10/10. You can't do better than that.

I don't count subjective opinions as anything relevant ☕

electricridge6 said:I don't consider subjective opinions to be relevant here. ☕

Then what kind are we talking about?