This weekend saw 'Harry Potter' take a 58% hit as it begins showing signs of slowing it's pace. Still, the movie has done what WB had hoped, opened huge and made a lot of money very fast. While the film will end up among the top ten domestic performers of all-time, it probably won't reach the top five. I then looked over the list of the top opening films in history and realized that out of all the movies that have opened to more than $50 million (19), only four of them had the legs to eventually pass the $300 million mark ("Jurassic Park", 'ID4', "The Phantom Menace", and eventually 'Harry Potter'). Films that have monster openings, for the most part, have very quick flame-outs. Of the top twenty highest grossing films in history (domestically), only seven of them had opening marks of more than $50 million. The questin then becomes, why is so much emphasis put on an opening weekend mark? "The Phantom Menace" failed to topple then opening weekend champ "The Lost World" and many saw this as a sign of doom, yet the film went on to have the best legs of any movie with more than a $50 million opening tally. "Planet of the Apes" opened with $68 million and saw dramatic percentage declines in the following weeks. That film didn't even make it to the $200 million mark. I think the main emphasis should be put on a movie's staying power, rather than it's opening suggesting it's overall success, the final tally should do that. "Titanic" earned only $28 million and it's opening, and look where that ended up. To this day the legs of that movie blows me away. What I'm saying is that too much emphasis is put on a movie's opening. Opening weekends are important, but I think more emphasis should be put on a film's legs, but that's just me.