As a redoubled cynic, I will say neither is as important as attaching a name. A movie is only good if people see it. You can make the dumbest, most plainly-shot movie in the universe, but attach a star and people will probably flock to it.
I've made 2 features with good stories and good cinematography (not trying to be arrogant - others here will attest to this, I think). But are they good movies? No names = no distribution. No distribution = no audience. No audience = nobody gives a shit. Nobody gives a shit = not a good movie, bottom line.
Wow. Really? I understand that perspective if all you're trying to do is make money with it. But movies are an art form, and if you don't agree with that, then they're at least creative endeavors, and as such they're subject to the same rules regarding aesthetics that every other creative process is; beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
I understand that it's important to get people to watch what you've created; it's part of the reward of movie making (and many other art forms). But at some level I think you have to put value in the process and in the final product regardless of who watches it. You have to be able to be proud of what you've created, even if nobody else really cares for it. You have to do it for yourself first.
Bottom line: do you think your movies are good? If so, then I think you've succeeded at your art (but maybe not at your business ).