I think I have to go with [glow=red,2,300]Cusak[/glow] on this one.  He has been in sooo many great movies.

Tough one, Peter O'Toole's long and successful career vs Dicaprios somewhat shorter. Dicaprio gets my vote, much because he managed to come back from a few dark years and start being a real actor again.

 

And if it's namedropping time...Liam Neeson, Ian McKellen, John Rhys-Davis, Sam Neill, Jean Reno, Daniel Day-Lewis, just to toss out a few names who are better than at least half of what's been mentioned so far.

Liam Neeson is a good one....

 

Gar... which means I have to do two more rounds now.  Ok keep dropping names and I will include a few more to ensure we have the best people possible.

 

 

Vote Tally:

 

DiCaprio: 2

Cusak: 1

O'Toole:0

Cusak, the only thing DiCaprio has going for him, is being able to pretend to be able to draw women naked. (and enjoy doing it at the same time)

Ugh, can I write in Val Kilmer too?  lol...

 

I don't like Leonardo much and don't think he's all that talented except for maybe Gilbert Grape.  Cusak is okay.  I guess I'll go with Peter O'Toole... saw him in a play in London too.

I don't like DiCaprio or Cusak much so I'm going with Peter O'Toole.

*shakes fist*

 

DiCaprio: 2

Cusak: 2

O'Toole: 2

 

Three way tie! 

 

Kilmer is on the list now as well....

Cusak, mostly because of Grosse Pointe Blank. He's quirky in a way I really enjoy.

DiCaprio.  I never used to like him, but he's grown on me.  He's developing into a fine actor with some great work.  Romeo and Juliet, Aviator, Catch Me if you Can, Gangs of New York.   

Name dropping:

 

Brando

Bogart

Michael Caine

Gene Wilder

Richard Dreyfuss

John Malkovitch

Ben Kingsley

Tied again.  I think the next few votes will decide it.

 

DiCaprio: 3

Cusak: 3

O'Toole: 2

you know, IMDB spells it Cusack. and lets see... Cusak or DiCaprio, tough choice. i think i'll go with Cusak

Because of such classics as HiFi, and Grosse Point Blank, Cusak, Cusack, koosack, whatever.  ;D ;)

DiCaprio because the Departed was a good movie.

lets see, leo is probly my least favorite axtor of all time, i dont think i ever saw anything with cusack in it, and otool is pretty good so i got to go with peter

Who do you consider to be "this generation"? Not asking to be argumentative, just curious who you are grouping together. ^_^

 

Any 'actors' under 25.

 

Look at it this way, in 10 years, you'll start seeing actors you grew up with, dieing off. In 20, that number will be even less. in another 30 they shoudl all be dead by then, or long since retired. "de-nero, jackson, your favorite action heros of the 80's...." Hell chuck norris is in his 60's! Same with your ever so favorite Greesey actor. :P

 

What we'll be left with is basically a generation of actors who's film career can basially be caractorized by the movies like american pie, and the latest 'national lampoons'.

 

 

if you look at the actores who history will remember its guys like charlie chaplin, laural and hardy, bogart, brando, cooper, stewert, john whayn, george c scott, and thier like who will be remembered.  leo and keanu, aflack (ugggg. spits) toby mcguier will all be forgotten in 10 to 15 years.  as special efects get better and better the need to actualy act gets smaller and smaller.  case in point, one of the best suspence movies ever was afred hitchcoks Lifeboat.  the entier movie just about takes place in a small boat. the biggest spetial efect was the wave machines.  compare that to a movie like the haunting wich has absolutly no acting in it, no talent just pretty people, and lots and lots of spetial efects.  there is also a notible lack of story in todays movies.  if you feal like you are seeing the same story over and over agin, it because you are.  hollywierd knows that they are having truble comming up with good stories so they are just takeing old blockbusters and shooting them again, with more spetial efects and less acting.  look at star wars.  the original had moderet to decent acting, for its day decent spectial effects, and an awsome story line.  in comes the remake prequils.  no acting, heack halve the cast wherent even actors, they were cg.  no story, they substitued story with mind blowing spetial efects insted.

  holly wood needs to send allits actors to acting school, come up with some NEW plot lines, and stop reliying solly on special efects to make them money. 

 

  "a spetial efect has to have a story behind it, a spectial efect without a story is nothing"  -- george lucas  from starwars to jedi

dicaprio because I think he is a good actor. I really liked Departed desipite the bad language  :P

DiCaprio: 5

Cusack: 5

O'Toole: 3

 

Ok, the choice is now between Cusack and DiCaprio.....  next vote decides this matchup so we can move on.

 

 

Hey, I just signed up in the 'sign-up' board/list/whatever, so can I vote in this?  Sorry for being so late, but I don't think there's really any serious competition between DiCaprio, Cusack and O'Toole.  I gotta go with the Grim Eater, Peter O'Toole, who has more range and artistic craft than Cusack and DiCaprio combined.

 

:)

Banger feel free to jump into any of these conversations. 

 

Arg, I still need a vote for either Cusack or DiCaprio

Hmm, I am making a decision and Cusack is moving on to the next round....

 

Two more battles left...

 

Val Kilmer

 

vs.

 

Liam Neeson

 

 

and

 

Christen Bale

 

vs.

 

Daniel Day Lewis

 

Neeson and Day-Lewis.

 

Neeson for being great in general, and kilmer is way too up&down to get a nod.

 

Bale vs Day-Lewis was tougher, but Day-Lewis in In The Name Of the Father gives him the upper hand.

Neeson

 

Day-Lewis (although I was bored to sleep during Unbearable Lightness of Being).

Ohh boy, that's hard.  I like Kilmer a lot, but I like Neeson too...  I'll go with Kilmer though since I said him earlier.

 

I guess Day-Lewis though I don't know either very well.

Neeson for no real reason, Bale because of Batman Begins.