Now that the Oscars are over for another year, I thought it would be interesting to hear whether you would rather be associated (by starring or directing) with the highest grossing film of the year or the "Best" Picture of the year? Or on a more general level, would you rather make films of the blockbuster variety or films that garner tons of aclaim? Naturally, these two don't have to be mutually exclusive of one another, but given the choice of making one or the other, which would you pick?

neither. not trying to be difficult, but ive found that watching my films with an audience to be all the reward I need to continue making more.

if I had to choose, it would be the acclaim garnered from an Oscar. also it should be noted that as the director its unlikely I would see a dime of the $$$ a blockbuster would generate.

Basically, yeah.

Blockbuster......Comedy isnt recognized by the academy and those are big money makers.

I would rather have alot of money then being a person who won an academy award and cant follow up with another oscar winning performance(ala Tommy Lee Jones, Halle Berry, Cuba Gooding)

Blockbuster for sure,i can't stomach just watching the vast majority of the oscar-type movies so i can't fathom actually being involved in the making of one.

I'd rather make the "Best Picture", highly acclaimed type.

I'd like a Blockbuster that is critically acclained and wins an Oscar.

Blockbuster easily for me.

Exactly, it is all about the ca$h.

Blockbuster vs. Oscar - a world of deadly sins would be mine for the taking in either case...........hmm, I suppose the scale tilts in that I'd be able to derive a greater sense of "immortality" from an Oscar win; I'll take the statue.

Both -- I'll make the next Titanic!

I'd rather make Oscar calibur films, but if I had to choose only one I'd go with the $$$ I'd make from a blockbuster.

Of course the obvious choice is both, and do something like the Return of the King that makes a fortune and wins the oscar.

Plus, being a big action star gets all the ladies!

Silence of the Lambs, Gladiator, Forrest Gump, Titanic, Return of the King, Braveheart, Schindler's List, Unforgiven, Dances With Wolves, Rain Man, Platoon, Rocky, The Godfather I & II, The French Connection....

It's possible to be BOTH a box office sucess and a Best Picture winner. I'd rather have the Oscar than the money...the money goes away, but you'll can never take the Oscar away...people will still be mentioning your film 20 years from now.

I would rather be associated with the blockbuster-type films. Both because those are what I enjoy personally and because of the money.

I'm in the neither/both category too. It would be great to be involved in a really great film that a lot of other people enjoyed, but in the end, I would rather be attached to a movie that I believed in instead of one that I knew was an easy cashout.

Don't care... if it's my personal film, I just want people to see it and like it.

If it's my sell out movie, I'd want a blockbuster.

Neither.

I'd rather be known for quality films - which most Blockbusters and Oscar films are not.

If I were making films, I'd likely make films that I'd want to watch. Those would be more likely to be closer to the blockbuster variety than of the Oscar variety. And I think I'd rather have it that way. I'd rather have something people see and enjoy than something critics/the Academy loves but far fewer people go see.