Because feuding on social media is free, I'd wager. "We spent $150 million making this movie and bitched about it on Instagram" sounds a lot cheaper than "we spent $300 million making and marketing this movie."

Hey, get a load of this guy!

So what you're saying is that his acting is so potent that in the cut segment he got all of the ladies in the area pregnant?

Boo! Do Horsefellow!

Since you asked, I personally thought the trailer made it look really unappealing. Ghostbusters was fun, but I don't hold it in high enough esteem to be offended that they went back to the well (I used up all that rage on the Star Wars prequels) or to feel fan obligation to go see a new movie even if it looks bad.

I knew these stylish and roomy shorts were good for something. As for the other, that's why I've been watching stuff on demand more often. Early-20s me got high in enough movie theater parking lots.

What, seriously? They'll have my movie-going flask when they pry it from my cold, dead hands.

If its legitimate rape, classic Simpsons has a way of shutting that down.

Woman getting hit by football. Genius!

I found the whole Fry/Lars thing really contrived, but I haven't watched it since it came out, so I may be underselling it.

Scholars theorize it might be called a "Blevins-topia." Time will tell.

"Intense Fiona Apple Flashbacks" are not a thing, Internet.

The ole frog in a kettle. A kettle of diversity, in this case.

That Blevins sure is a Wentz. And the circle is complete.

I remember reading that as a kid too. The Joker doesn't play.

They looked like they were having fun, I should probably drink out of skulls more often.

I thought I heard something about an explosion.

Is still wanders that Denny's, in a futile search for ill-advised tail.

How about in a Shark Tank.

Pensive Job, Internet.