Originally Posted by Robstar
I am not faulting Leo for his work with such prominent directors. Who wouldn't want to work with half of the directors he has been involved with for the past 2 decades? As I said, it is nothing against Leo as an actor as I feel he has an excellent range, but if you stick a 23 year old with the best in the business and let him only participate in project with the best in the business, he is going to be considered the best in the business by association. Leo has shown skill when he is involved with such highly acclaimed names, but I would be quicker to give credit to someone like Pitt (who I think Leo is a better actor than) because he can step away from the elite names and make films not pre-determined to be "extra special" into such based on his performance alone (examples being Moneyball* Seven**, or Legends of the Fall**).
* - Recently accomplished this without the use of an established director
** - Accomplished early in his career that having the "It" director isn't needed to deliver excellent performances.