First of all, thanks for writing.

I’ll correct the “mixed reviews” remark. I’ve checked a number of reviews by U.S. critics, and “Little Children” did indeed receive mostly positive reviews — even if some of those weren’t out-and-out raves.

Now, I don’t trust the Rotten Tomatoes’ Tomatometer — or whatever that’s called. With them, it’s either “fresh” or “rotten” — no “half-fresh,” or “too green,” or “overripe,” and so on. That sort of simplification — a movie is either all good or all bad — distorts the actual value critics place on a film.

As for the platform release, I understand quite well what that is. I’m also aware that a film that’s been in platform release for about 3 months is probably in box-office trouble.

Even after having received a number of top-ten mentions and assorted critical awards, and even though it’s playing in a mere 42 theaters in the U.S./Canada, “Little Children” has an unimpressive $3,263 per theater (as per the Rotten Tomatoes chart). That doesn’t sound very promising. (Compare that to “Volver,” with surprisingly few U.S. critical awards or honorable mentions, on week 8, with $5,511 per theater while playing in no less than 115 theaters. Not bad at all.)

When a movie opens wide, per theater grosses fall dramatically. For instance, when it went from five theaters to 32 — of course, without all the end-of-year award hoopla — “Little Children” lost more than half its per theater take.

Chances are that, unless it receives loads of Academy Award nominations, “Little Children” will remain stuck on platforms of differents sizes and shapes until it comes out on DVD.

You go on to write “… has failed to catch on with the U.S. moviegoing public.”

Little Children has never played on more than 35 screens. That is known in movie parlance as a platform release. The film has played in the same NY/LA houses for over 12 weeks, and its per screen averages are remarkable. I suggest you wait and see what happens with Little Children when it expands before you make such a wrong-headed remark.