“Blade Runner 2049” was supposed to be a hit. 

The film, one of the most anticipated of the year, seemed to have all the necessary ingredients: Two popular leading men and an original that has achieved cult status since its original 1982 release.  But it has not been the box office hit the industry hoped for, despite being showered with rave reviews. 

Studios blamed the dismal box office performance of a number of big-budget blockbuster films this summer on negative reviews from critics and Rotten Tomatoes. 

The film review aggregator, owned by Comcast Corp.-owned CMCSA, -0.70% Fandango, has been in the spotlight ever since.  Legendary director Martin Scorsese recently wrote a guest column in the Hollywood Reporter criticizing Rotten Tomatoes and its impact. 

But if well-reviewed films are also struggling commercially, can Rotten Tomatoes really be to blame? 

Read:Studios blame movie reviews as summer starts slowly at the box office

Also see:Hollywood is running out of hit ’80s movies to reboot

ComScore media analyst Paul Dergarabedian says a straight line can’t be drawn from bad reviews to poor box office results. 

“To have this myopic view is crazy,” he said. “ If that were true; if a bad review killed the film, then conversely a good review should boost box office revenue.  What I’ve learned is that there are a multitude of factors.” 

Ahead of its release, “Blade Runner 2049” was outselling the likes of “The Martian” and “Gravity.”  Both films opened above $50 million and went on to gross more than $200 million at the domestic box office. 

Blade Runner 2049: How a Dystopian Future Got Darker

“Blade Runner 2049” was adored by critics, earning an 89% Rotten Tomatoes rating.  To receive an overall good rating on the site, a film has to have at least a 60% rating.  It has been called a masterpiece, and the industry was banking on it being a hit.  The film, according to analysts at Box Office Pro, was expected to open with $54 million in receipts. 

Don’t miss:1982’s ‘Blade Runner’ inspired a generation of filmmakers

But the film has underperformed expectations, earning $32.5 million in its debut for distributor Warner Bros. US:TWX, on a production budget of $150 million.  So far it’s racked up a total $196.6 million, helped by its $119.7 million international draw. 

“Blade Runner 2049’s” $61.0 million in revenue through two weekends pales in comparison with “The Martian’s” $108.7 million draw and the $122.3 million “Gravity” pulled in in a similar time period. 

“There have been a string of movies with good Rotten Tomatoes scores where that hasn’t been helpful in terms box office,” Dergarabedian said. “ It’s much more complicated than that.  You have to consider the timing of the film, and the marketing, and how that marketing landed with audiences.” 

During the summer, films like “Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales,” “Baywatch” and “Snatched” were harshly received by critics, and had to rely on overseas ticket sales for success. 

Megan Colligan, head of marketing and distribution at Viacom Inc.-owned US:VIAB Paramount, told the Hollywood Reporter that “reviews really hurt” the studio’s film “Baywatch.” 

“It’s a brand that maybe relied on a positive critical reaction more than we recognized,” she said. 

Check out:Hollywood has never seen competition like Netflix

Read:MoviePass plans to make money by selling your data to Uber, eateries and Hollywood studios

“Baywatch” was slapped with a 19% rating on Rotten Tomatoes and brought in just $58.1 million domestically on a budget of $69 million. “ Dead Men Tell No Tales” had a Rotten Tomatoes rating of 29% and earned $172.6 million in the U.S. on a $230 million production budget, and “Snatched” made $45.9 million on a $42 million budget after being branded with a 36% rating. 

“We think critical opinion is very important, but what’s important to remember is our focus is on the fans,” Rotten Tomatoes Vice President Jeff Voris told MarketWatch. “ Fans and critics don’t always agree.  That’s why we make information available to fans so they can make up their minds.” 

The website works like a pyramid, Voris said, with the most important, or easily digested information at the top.  Rotten Tomatoes presents its fresh and rotten identifiers first, and from there users can dig into its Tomatometer rating, see blurbs from reviews, find the full reviews and even see what audiences thought of a film. 

In the Elevator With Jeffrey Katzenberg

“Mother!,”  also distributed by Paramount, has been an almost perfect example of how critics and moviegoers can disagree.  The Darren Aronofsky-directed (“Black Swan”) film received a rare F CinemaScore, which is based on a survey of film audiences, but overall positive reviews from critics compiled by Rotten Tomatoes.  It has a 68% rating on the website. 

Don’t miss:The scary thing Hollywood does when it runs out of reboots

Also read:The biggest threat to movie theaters might be around the corner

“Mother!”  had no problem generating word-of-mouth, and is viewed as one of the year’s most original films.  But the film has only pulled in a world-wide total of $43.0 million since opening in September. 

“American Made,” Universal Pictures’ Tom Cruise-led film based on CIA drug runner Barry Seal, is another film well received by critics that failed to garner box office success.  The movie garnered an 87% rating on Rotten Tomatoes and has grossed $46.5 million domestically.  The international box office draw has helped the $50 million film to $123.3 million in revenue. 

Last year, Warner Bros.’s DC comics flick “Suicide Squad” defied the odds in the opposite way.  The film was shredded by critics, yet opened with $133.7 million and went on to gross $325.1 domestically. 

“You can’t even blame sequelitis,” Dergarabedian said. “ Much more complicated factors go into this.  Maybe we’re overthinking it, but its seems like every time we make a rule, somehow it gets broken.”