johnb - I appreciate all the context about Anderson's background - very interesting and helpful.
I highlighted your last paragraph because I think you make an interesting comparison.
I watched Anderson discuss "Grand Budapest" on Charlie Rose, and Rose asked if he will always want to write his own films. Anderson answered that he is interested in writing his own films as long as he is inspired to write them. BUT, as someone who loves to make films, if the day comes when he "runs out of ideas", he'd be happy to make something that someone else wrote.
Its a bit of a cliche, but many artists do their best original work when they are on the young side. In the case of many of the directors in the list above, I think that there were all lot of stories they wanted to tell based on their formative experiences. Spike Lee did tons of "written, driector and produced" joints based in and around Brooklyn before "Malcolm X", and in later years has gone to the "one for you, one for me" formula of big Hollywood script or adaptation ("Oldboy") written by others and then one of his own personal movies ("Red Hook Summer"). Both Lee and Scorsese are also big into doing documentaries. Allen did tons of NYC-based stuff, aside from his comedies in other genres and time periods, until he branched out in his current European phase). I think that's what the critics are waiting for from Anderson - does he need to show other sides to be considered truly great? Personally, I could care less if he ever moves on from his current style. Tarantino, for example, only makes a film when he really feels it - so we don't get that many! I hope Anderson follows the Allen formula (not in his personal life!) of continually cranking them out. Obviously, it isn't a simple matter to get these things financed, especially these days.