Nolan

[Tom Lowe]

... grabs the crown from Cameron as king of Hollywood. He's more versatile than Cameron. I'm not saying he's the best... I am saying, he's the king of the hill right now. I measure that by ability to make any film you want, and being loved for the work you are doing.

[Krishan Bansal]

Nolan really has redefined action-drama's. He has a way of making things have depth and seem gritty. He orchestrates epic blockbuster movies without making them feel cheesy.

[Peter Chang]

I love Nolan's work, particularly The Following, Memento, and The Prestige. But how is Nolan more versatile than the man who brought us Terminator, Aliens, Abyss, T2, True Lies, Titanic, three ocean documentaries (Bismarck, Ghosts of the Abyss, Aliens of the Deep) and counting (Mariana Trench one is coming soon), Avatar... not to mention Rambo First Blood Part II, Strange Days, Dark Angel, and... Piranha 2? He also just made a record dive to the Mariana Trench in a sub he helped design and filmed the entire expedition.

[Tom Lowe]

More versatility of emotion?

[Peter Chang]

More versatility of emotion?

That's subjective criteria, but I find Nolan's work a bit cold emotionally. That's not necessarily a criticism either (see Kubrick). He aims for the intellect, and I would say he's more versatile in that department, playing with structure and form. Cameron is more conventional there, but he's attained greater breadth in subject and format (documentaries, TV, even theme park rides) so far.
Has Nolan's work ever made audiences cry? Maybe a little with The Dark Knight Rises. Titanic likely still reigns supreme as the modern granddaddy of tearjerkers. Terminator, Aliens, Abyss, and T2 were all very emotional.

[Tom Lowe]

This is not to take away from Mr. Cameron's amazing contributions to film!!! Just giving current ranks, as I suspect the public will.

[Vincent Thomas]

Why this obsession to always want to compare, order and choose a winner?
In the current case, being totally subjective it makes even less sense

v*
__________________________________________________ ________

Vincent Thomas
Artist for Film / Photograph & Creative Director
http://www.stranger-than-paradise.book.fr/
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0859628/

[Sergio Perez]

That's subjective criteria, but I find Nolan's work a bit cold emotionally. That's not necessarily a criticism either (see Kubrick). He aims for the intellect, and I would say he's more versatile in that department, playing with structure and form. Cameron is more conventional there, but he's attained greater breadth in subject and format (documentaries, TV, even theme paAk rides) so far.
Has Nolan's work ever made audiences cry? Maybe a little with The Dark Knight Rises. Titanic likely still reigns supreme as the modern granddaddy of tearjerkers. Terminator, Aliens, Abyss, and T2 were all very emotional.

Couldn't have said it better. Nolan the more "intellectual" on his approach, Cameron more "emotional". Both masters and "auteurs", in a class of their own in the Hollywood blockbuster scene.

[Brad Webb]

I'm sorry Tom, but you are wrong. James Cameron still wears the crown. Nolan is great, and is a Hollywood Prince. Nolan is without a doubt in line to don the crown. But last time I checked the last two features James Cameron directed have become the top grossing movies of all time. TDKR might not even beat The Avengers at the box office this year.

People still love what James Cameron is doing, it's just been a few years since his last movie. I loved TDKR, but there's a lot of people that didn't. Same with Avatar.

[Jeremy Torrie]

I love how Nolan is pushing the intellectual envelope with Hollywood blockbusters, but Cameron made me cry twice (Avatar and Titanic)...no, I'm not a pussy, but you have to give props to a guy who can elicit that kind of emotion out of his audiences.