“They’re Hiding the Truth!” Lionsgate’s Shady Embargo on Ballerina Blocks Negative Reviews, Fueling Outrage Over John Wick Spin-Off—Discover Why This Is Trending Now!

As Lionsgate prepares to release Ballerina, the highly anticipated John Wick spin-off starring Ana de Armas, on June 6, 2025, a firestorm has erupted over the studio’s unusual review embargo. “They’re hiding the truth!” a frustrated critic reportedly fumed, echoing sentiments across social media that Lionsgate is stifling negative feedback by allowing positive reviews of Ballerina weeks in advance while barring negative ones until hours before the film’s premiere. Posts on X have slammed the move as “shady” and “desperate,” accusing the studio of manipulating perceptions of a film already facing skepticism due to its departure from the John Wick franchise’s core team. With the $90 million action flick poised to expand the John Wick universe, the embargo controversy has raised questions about the film’s quality, Lionsgate’s motives, and the future of transparent film criticism. Let’s unpack the allegations, the context, and the stakes for this blockbuster gamble.

The Embargo Controversy: What’s Happening?

Lionsgate’s review embargo for Ballerina has sparked outrage for its selective timing. Typically, studios impose embargoes that lift uniformly for all reviews—positive or negative—a few days before a film’s release, ensuring critics have time to publish while building buzz. For Ballerina, however, Lionsgate reportedly permitted positive reviews to be posted as early as May 2025, following test screenings, while requiring negative reviews to be held until June 5, 2025, mere hours before the film’s theatrical debut. Posts on X describe this as a “gag order” on critics, with some users arguing it’s an attempt to inflate early hype and mislead audiences about the film’s quality.

The controversy gained traction after industry insiders and critics voiced concerns online. One X user noted, “If Ballerina was as good as John Wick, they wouldn’t need to silence the bad reviews.” The sentiment suggests Lionsgate lacks confidence in the film, directed by Len Wiseman (Underworld), whose track record includes critically panned action flicks like Live Free or Die Hard (2007, 82% Rotten Tomatoes but divisive among fans). Unlike the John Wick series, helmed by Chad Stahelski, Ballerina is Wiseman’s vision, with Stahelski only producing, fueling doubts about its ability to match the franchise’s kinetic style. The embargo’s structure—encouraging early praise while delaying criticism—has led to accusations of studio overreach, with critics arguing it undermines their credibility and audiences’ trust.

Ballerina: The Film and Its Stakes

Ballerina stars Ana de Armas as Rooney, a vengeful assassin introduced in John Wick: Chapter 3 – Parabellum (2019), trained by the Ruska Roma to hunt her family’s killers. Set during the events of Chapter 3, the film features John Wick staples like Keanu Reeves (reprising Wick), Ian McShane, and Lance Reddick, alongside new faces Norman Reedus and Gabriel Byrne. With a $90 million budget—modest compared to John Wick: Chapter 4’s $100 million—the film aims to expand the franchise’s universe ahead of John Wick 5 and other spin-offs. Lionsgate projects a $35–50 million domestic opening, targeting a global gross of $150–200 million, in line with John Wick: Chapter 2 (2017, $171 million).

The John Wick series is a box office powerhouse, grossing $1.03 billion across four films, with Chapter 4 (2023) earning $440 million. Its success lies in Stahelski’s choreography, gritty world-building, and Reeves’ iconic performance. Ballerina, however, faces hurdles: Wiseman’s less acclaimed style, the absence of Stahelski’s directorial touch, and a female-led spin-off in a franchise driven by Wick’s mystique. Early reactions, permitted under the embargo, praise de Armas’ “fierce” performance and the film’s “brutal” action, but posts on X question whether these are cherry-picked to mask flaws. The embargo’s timing suggests Lionsgate is banking on de Armas’ star power—bolstered by Knives Out (2019) and No Time to Die (2021)—to drive ticket sales before negative buzz spreads.

Why the Embargo Matters

Review embargoes are standard in Hollywood, designed to balance studio marketing with critical independence. However, selectively delaying negative reviews is rare and controversial. Posts on X draw parallels to Disney’s 2018 embargo for Solo: A Star Wars Story, which limited early reviews amid fears of backlash, resulting in a $393 million gross against a $275 million budget—a relative flop. Lionsgate’s approach risks alienating critics, who rely on timely reviews to influence audiences, and fans, who may feel deceived if Ballerina underdelivers. One X user warned, “This smells like damage control for a John Wick knockoff.”

The embargo also reflects broader industry trends. Studios, facing a post-COVID theatrical slump, are increasingly controlling narratives to protect investments. Disney’s The Marvels (2023, $206 million, losing $237 million) and Warner Bros.’ The Flash (2023, $271 million) suffered from negative buzz, prompting tighter PR strategies. Lionsgate, a mid-tier studio with hits like The Hunger Games, can ill afford a Ballerina flop, especially after Borderlands (2024) grossed $33 million against a $115 million budget. The studio’s $1.03 billion domestic box office in 2024, driven by Saw X and The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare, underscores its reliance on franchises like John Wick. Suppressing negative reviews may be a desperate bid to safeguard Ballerina’s opening weekend, projected to compete with The Monkey and One of Them Days in early June 2025.

The Fallout: Critics and Fans Push Back

Critics have condemned Lionsgate’s embargo as an attack on transparency. Film criticism, already strained by shrinking media budgets, depends on trust between reviewers and audiences. By prioritizing positive buzz, Lionsgate risks accusations of “buying” praise, especially if Ballerina’s quality falters. Posts on X highlight critics’ frustration, with one user stating, “Lionsgate’s treating reviewers like PR puppets.” Some have vowed to defy the embargo by posting negative reactions early, though this risks legal or professional repercussions. The backlash echoes 2017’s Justice League, where Warner Bros.’ embargo tactics failed to salvage a $657 million gross against a $300 million budget.

Fans, particularly John Wick devotees, are equally vocal. The franchise’s 87–94% Rotten Tomatoes scores reflect its critical and audience acclaim, driven by authenticity and craftsmanship. Posts on X express concern that Ballerina’s embargo signals a dilution of that quality, with users questioning Wiseman’s ability to replicate Stahelski’s vision. The film’s June release, typically a strong slot, faces competition from Mission: Impossible – The Final Reckoning (May 23) and Pixar’s Elio (June 13), which could siphon audiences if Ballerina’s early reviews—delayed or not—disappoint. A projected $150 million global gross would cover costs but fall short of John Wick’s benchmarks, potentially stalling spin-off plans.

Lionsgate’s Gamble: Will It Pay Off?

Lionsgate’s strategy hinges on Ballerina’s opening weekend, where positive word-of-mouth and de Armas’ draw could offset delayed criticism. The studio’s $90 million budget, lower than Chapter 4’s, suggests a calculated risk, with a break-even point around $200–250 million including marketing. Early screenings, which yielded the permitted positive reactions, indicate potential strengths: de Armas’ action chops, a 105-minute runtime tighter than Chapter 4’s 169 minutes, and ties to the John Wick mythos. However, if negative reviews, unleashed on June 5, highlight weak storytelling or derivative action, Ballerina could falter, mirroring Solo’s trajectory.

The controversy may paradoxically boost Ballerina’s visibility. Posts on X show mixed sentiment: some fans are intrigued by the drama, planning to see the film to “judge for themselves,” while others vow to skip it, citing distrust in Lionsgate. The studio’s silence on the embargo—neither confirming nor denying the selective policy—has fueled speculation, with no official statement as of June 3, 2025. Lionsgate’s broader 2025 slate, including Highlander and Now You See Me 3, depends on Ballerina reinforcing its action credentials, making the embargo a high-stakes gamble.

The Bigger Picture: Trust in Hollywood

The Ballerina embargo controversy transcends one film, spotlighting tensions between studios, critics, and audiences in a fragile theatrical market. Hollywood’s reliance on franchises—John Wick, Marvel, Star Wars—demands consistent quality, but heavy-handed PR tactics risk eroding goodwill. Posts on X frame the embargo as part of a broader “trust crisis,” with studios prioritizing short-term gains over long-term loyalty. As Ballerina hits theaters, its success or failure will test whether Lionsgate’s control pays off or backfires, setting a precedent for future releases.

For now, the John Wick universe hangs in the balance. Can Ballerina deliver the action-packed thrills fans crave, or will Lionsgate’s embargo signal a misstep in a beloved franchise? Discover why this story is trending now!