Unpopular opinion, but they're both overrated. DiCaprio just overacts and people interpret it as a sign of good acting (c.f.: "he cut his hand and kept acting!"; method acting is also given too much credit these days as well) I've read Murakami and it just felt soulless and bland, like he was just appealing to "lonely and lost" people, but not in any meaningful way. Just my personal opinion.
Lastly, if someone keeps getting passed up for an award, it just signifies that there are people who deserved the award more, not that they deserve the award by virtue of not receiving it. That's why I think it's silly that he won the Oscar for The Revenant, which was certainly not his best performance. You can make a case for someone deserving an award for cumulative achivement, but then there are even more worthy candidates.
>if someone keeps getting passed up for an award, it just signifies that there are people who deserved the award more
I would be less salty if another author received it over Murakami, but to make the jump to songwriter sets a precedent I don't particularly like. You can make a reasoned argument for authors who deserve it more than Murakami, but to switch genres sort of implies that either all the Nobel caliber authors have been exhausted, or that nobody cares about literature anymore, or that the Nobel committee made this pick to satiate the complaints over the lack of American laureates, and Bob Dylan was the best the US could offer. In any case I find it troubling.
Lastly, if someone keeps getting passed up for an award, it just signifies that there are people who deserved the award more, not that they deserve the award by virtue of not receiving it. That's why I think it's silly that he won the Oscar for The Revenant, which was certainly not his best performance. You can make a case for someone deserving an award for cumulative achivement, but then there are even more worthy candidates.