finally, Brad Pitt is given a befitting role -

I absolutely agree re: The Departed and DiCaprio. I think his performance is completely overlooked, maybe because of the sheer volume of that A-list cast, but it does represent his best work, I think. I do think it is quite telling that Scorsese didn't cast Pitt, who produced the film. Maybe there were some other reasons, politics or whatnot, but you do almost expect Pitt to turn up, Oceans-style, alongside all these other Alphas.

You know, now that I think about it, Pitt was really a kind of refreshing oasis in the middle of that miserable film, Snatch. I won't even begin to go into the obviousness of Ritchie's style, except that there is no other director out there whose work is so clearly desperate (if he was deliberately *trying* to lampoon "hip", he'd be onto something - but no, he's just jostling for elbow room). I remember he played a gypsy or something, and he was there strictly for laughs, ala Floyd the Stoner, and it worked. Pitt had at least learned a great deal since 12 Monkeys on how subtlety can occasionally work.

The thing about Pitt, is that he has this innate tendency to sideways-glance, like Mike Myers. He's so self-conscious and paranoid when he's onscreen that "acting" takes really a back seat to his trying to *convince*. There's a huge difference. Look at that great scene in BAR in the car with Pitt and Malkovich. What Pitt, under the direction of the Coens, has learned is that he's NOT the Alpha in this scene - Malkovich OWNS every aspect of this - from the characters, the dialogue, AND the surrounding sort of voodoo of the fact that he's clearly the better all-around actor. Malkovich's presence is so effortless, and hilarious, because he doesn't bring any baggage to any scene - it's all about the characters and the dialogue. Pitt has at least learned "his place" in scenes like that - the Brad Pitt of "Sesevenen" wouldn't have been able to pull it off - he had too much to prove in those days, and not the acting chops to back up his ego.

I think Pitt's working with fine directors who decide to give him a break for whatever reason - Tarantino, the Coens, Soderbergh, etc., has helped him to develop into at least a *better* actor. There are some actors in films who long ago figured out their limitations and go ahead with what they're good at doing. Pitt became an A-lister on nothing more than his good looks, let's face it - there isn't any reason otherwise why this guy shouldn't be relegated to certain supporting roles ala Burn After Reading as a regular job. The sort of white-elephant comic hilarity of his role in this film is the fact that he's BRAD PITT playing a total dork. The Coens eagerly exploited that fact - they didn't *need* Pitt for the financial backing the way Tarantino might have for IB. They self-consciously took one of the biggest stars in the country and, maybe even a little cruelly, put him in a role that suits his acting chops. But, again, Pitt seems to "get it" on some level - he exhibits a humility and understanding that really does work here! If Hollywood was a just and ethical place, Pitt would have been relegated to roles like this long ago.

Please nest your IMDB page, and respond to the correct person -

"The Departed is also the only Scorsese film post-2000 I consider truly good"

You didn't care for GANGS OF NEW YORK?

I don't think he was miscast at all in THE AVIATOR, in fact I couldn't stand DiCaprio until I saw THE AVIATOR. For me, it was a brilliant performance, his best in my opinion and also what Leo himself said he considers to be his best performance too.

After THE AVIATOR I went back and watched GANGS OF NY and CATCH ME IF YOU CAN, two films I avoided because of the fact Leo was in them. He isn't very good in GONY, that Irish accent comes and goes. And when you put Leo next to DDL, it's like putting Clint Eastwood next to Marlon Brando in the 1960's or 1970's, you're not going to look good next to a DDL or a Brando unless you're ready for it and Leo wasn't yet. The Brando's, Nicholson's and DDL's will make you perform better most of the time but if you're not on your game you will be buried.

CATCH ME IF YOU CAN was a brilliant performance. Possible Oscar snub there. He took Tom Hanks to acting school.

SHUTTER ISLAND was a film I enjoyed a lot and I enjoyed Leo's performance as always. I don't see how he was miscast in that film either.

REVOLUTIONARY ROAD was an unbelievable performance and I don't think he missed the mark. His exchange with Michael Shannon at the dinner table was enough for me, "Not well my ass" LOL and his shock at the end when he realizes that Winslet self aborted their unborn child. Oscar snub #2 or 3 after not nominating him in at least the supporting category for THE DEPARTED and a possible snub for CMIYC.

His biggest miscasting in my opinion, is his work in J. Edgar. You just don't get the essence that Leo is playing a man 20-25 years older than he is now. And when he aged in THE AVIATOR I bought it, every minute of it. Like James Dean aging in GIANT. But in J. Edgar he just kind of plays Leo caked in bad make-up.

INCEPTION was INCEPTION, nothing great going on there. BODY OF LIES saw good performances by Leo and Crowe, but it was such a boring film, that you just wanted it to end. At least that's how I felt in the theater.

The biggest Oscar snub of all is DJANGO UNCHAINED. I could not believe they f'd him again. I'll never get over this snub.

THE WOLF OF WALL STREET promises great things. Can't wait!

As for PITT, 12 monkeys was directed by Terry Gilliam, not a director who leaves comedy at the front door. He wanted that Pitt character to be funny, out of his mind, comic relief. It was written that way. Anybody who wants to view the script, download it and try and picture delivering that dialogue and following the stage direction without a comedic tone.

Pitt was brilliant in SE7EN, I could watch it everyday. He's such a visual actor, which Tarantino remarked on. Not his looks but just what Pitt does physically on screen is as close to James Dean that we've gotten, though Dean was a much more talented dramatic actor.

Pitt's best performance is his portrayl of an everlasting character named Tyler Durden in FIGHT CLUB, today the Academy is allowing all kinds of performances in but back in 1999 this film was probably too commercial and certainly too cool for the Academy voters. But Pitt was at his best and certainly looked his best. It's the coolest performance possibly ever, at least since Dean in Rebel back in 1955 and Pitt does use a lot of comedy in it but most of it was his preparation for this role. He really invented a character. He didn't just show up, get in wardrobe, spike that hair up like a crazy man and walk to set. He put thought into Tyler Durden and when actors do that, it's always a performance that is great, for example, Ledger in The Dark Knight, Depp in Pirates, DDL in anything and plenty more.

I think Pitt uses comedy the same way he uses his physical ability to be always charismatic no matter what he is doing. It's just another tool that makes Pitt not just a pretty face, but a real great actor. MONEYBALL, JESSE JAMES, TREE OF LIFE, LEGENDS OF THE FALL, all different performances but all great and dramatic.

This is your life and it's ending one minute at a time. - Fight Club