> Information taken from Brandon
> Gray'shttp://www.boxofficemojo.com/weekend/chart/

> 2 1 Ratatouille
> 13 11 Shrek the Third
> 14 12 Surf's Up
> 33 29 Meet the Robinsons
> 38 36 Paprika
>
> "Ratatouille" had a decent 38%% dip in its second weekend.

> It's been even more impressive during the weekdays, where
> it's held up well against "Transformers".

>Actually, given their animated origins, I'd like to humbly request you
>include "Transformers" on these lists (yes I'll admit a little bias on
>my part--I liked the movie). If there's a specific reason not to
>include it, I understand.

> Fish Eye no Miko cox.net> wrote:
>

>>Actually, given their animated origins, I'd like to humbly
>>request you include "Transformers" on these lists (yes
>>I'll admit a little bias on my part--I liked the movie). If
>>there's a specific reason not to include it, I understand.

>
> I decided not to include live action movies with CGI characters
> in them. Otherwise I'd be listing practically every movie made
> nowadays. Of course, that's just my personal bias.

>Oooh... no, when I say "animated origins", I mean since TF is based on
>a cartoon, I thought perhaps that might make it count.

> In article <1184284762.715267.80420@g12g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
> Fish Eye no Miko cox.net> wrote:

>>Actually, given their animated origins, I'd like to humbly request you
>>include "Transformers" on these lists (yes I'll admit a little bias on
>>my part--I liked the movie). If there's a specific reason not to
>>include it, I understand.

>
> I decided not to include live action movies with CGI characters in
> them.
> Otherwise I'd be listing practically every movie made nowadays. Of
> course,
> that's just my personal bias.
>

> Information taken from Brandon Gray's
> http://www.boxofficemojo.com/weekend/chart/
>
> 2 1 Ratatouille $29,014,293 -38.3%% 3,940 $7,364 $109,531,598
> 13 11 Shrek the Third $1,537,841 -42.5%% 1,421 -645 $1,082 $316,740,255
> 14 12 Surf's Up $991,175 -59.5%% 1,458 -1,045 $679 $56,042,318
> 33 29 Meet the Robinsons $51,675 -46.3%% 71 -22 $727 $96,697,389
> 38 36 Paprika $40,519 -8.1%% 33 +2 $1,227 $642,641
>
> "Ratatouille" had a decent 38%% dip in its second weekend. It's been even
> more impressive during the weekdays, where it's held up well against
> "Transformers". Hopefully it'll do the same against "Harry Potter". (The
> Wednesday numbers look encouraging actually.)
>
> - Juan F. Lara
>

> Juan F. Lara wrote:
>

>> Information taken from Brandon Gray's
>> http://www.boxofficemojo.com/weekend/chart/
>>
>> 2 1 Ratatouille $29,014,293 -38.3%% 3,940 $7,364
>> $109,531,598
>> 13 11 Shrek the Third $1,537,841 -42.5%% 1,421 -645 $1,082
>> $316,740,255
>> 14 12 Surf's Up $991,175 -59.5%% 1,458 -1,045 $679
>> $56,042,318
>> 33 29 Meet the Robinsons $51,675 -46.3%% 71 -22 $727
>> $96,697,389
>> 38 36 Paprika $40,519 -8.1%% 33 +2 $1,227
>> $642,641
>>
>> "Ratatouille" had a decent 38%% dip in its second weekend. It's
>> been even
>> more impressive during the weekdays, where it's held up well against ...

>
> lj...@ces.clemson.edu (Juan F. Lara) wrote:
>

>> Fish Eye no Miko cox.net> wrote:
>>

>>>Actually, given their animated origins, I'd like to humbly
>>>request you include "Transformers" on these lists (yes
>>>I'll admit a little bias on my part--I liked the movie). If
>>>there's a specific reason not to include it, I understand.

>>
>> I decided not to include live action movies with CGI characters
>> in them. Otherwise I'd be listing practically every movie made
>> nowadays. Of course, that's just my personal bias.

>
> Oooh... no, when I say "animated origins", I mean since TF is based on
> a cartoon, I thought perhaps that might make it count.

>

>>Nice "prediction" for a second week, there, but remember the Pixar
>>Summer Secret:

>>We've still got August ahead of us. Au. Freakin'. GUST. -_-
>>
>>So, what new studio movie are *you* planning to go see in the middle of
>>the six-week wasteland when the temperature reaches ninety-eleven,
>>"Underdog"?

>
> Harry Potter, Transformers, Hairspray, The Simpsons