Mount Hood

The ad-pocalypse hits streaming

March 5, 2025

Written by: Jaylin Emond-Hardin | Entertainment Editor

“If I wanted to pay for commercials I couldn’t skip, I’d sign up for Hulu.” Who knew a throw-away line in a 2014 episode of “The Simpsons” would still be so prevalent today? I mean, the episode wasn’t even about commercials or advertisements — it was about Homer pirating movies and consequently being arrested by the FBI.

But, Homer did have a point. Why pay for streaming services when they have ads?

When companies like Netflix and Hulu first launched, they both offered an ad-free service as their basic plan, which now both have ads. Even Hulu’s so-called “ad-free” subscription — the most expensive of their plans at $18.99 — is adding ads to certain programming, alongside Disney+, which Hulu is now partnered with. 

There’s not really a definitive answer for why these services are including ads, but it doesn’t make sense in the first place. After all, when Netflix and Hulu first launched as apps, they offered ad-free services for a fraction of the cost of cable. So what’s changed?

The first is the very reason why Netflix, Hulu and Disney+ gained popularity: no ads for a fraction of the cost. As more and more users joined, the companies realized that they needed a solution to make up for the revenue they were losing. Even with every user paying the monthly fee, they still needed support from advertisers. Thus, they began to offer two services — ad-free and basic with ads. 

Eventually, these evolved into different subscription plans for each service, some being ad-free, some offering partnerships with live TV or other streaming services. Currently the most popular partnership is the Hulu bundle, offering no ads on Hulu, a Disney+ subscription with no ads and ESPN+ with ads.

The second reason for advertisements becoming more prevalent on streaming services goes hand in hand with the bundling of streaming services: the amount of content offered. As content becomes available through cross-platforming, like Hulu titles and ESPN+ live sporting events being available on Disney+, the cost of licensing increases. The only streaming services that seem to avoid the need for ads due to cross-platforming are HBO Max and Prime Video, though Prime still has ads on when watching titles from its library or other non-Max affiliated services. 

With all these ads, it seems that streaming services have become cable, but if streaming services have become the new cable, what’s the next step?

For starters, visit a local library. They have extensive collections of movies and shows on DVD, though a DVD or Blu-ray player is required. Thrift stores typically also have copies of movies and shows, and ownership of one’s favorite titles might bring peace of mind — especially with the way titles are traded between services. However, a major downside of this is that many newer movies and series are not available on DVD, especially with the popularity of streaming services and digital copies. 

Contact the author at howlentertainment@wou.edu

Jake Paul vs. Mike Tyson

Written by: Quincy Bentley | Sports Editor

The worlds of modern entertainment and traditional boxing collided on the night of Nov. 15, 2024. Social media star Jake Paul faced off against Mike Tyson, a boxing legend, in one of the most highly anticipated fights in recent history.
In most people’s minds, Tyson’s name goes hand and hand with the sport of boxing. Born in Brooklyn in 1966, Tyson had a troubled youth but found a purpose in boxing. Under the wing of legendary trainer Cus D’Amato, Tyson’s career began to skyrocket. By age 20, Tyson became the youngest heavyweight champion in history, capturing the WBC title in 1986.
Nicknamed “Iron Mike,” Tyson was feared for his brutal knockouts and excessive aggression. His career record includes 50 wins, 44 by knockout and only six losses. Despite his success, Tyson’s journey was followed by controversy, including legal troubles and public meltdowns that negatively affected his reputation. He retired from boxing in 2005 but made a surprising return in 2020 for an exhibition bout against Roy Jones Jr., which sparked a new interest in the once-retired fighter.
Unlike Tyson, Jake Paul’s rise to fame came from the entertainment industry. Born in Ohio in 1997, Paul gained notoriety as a Disney Channel star and then became a YouTuber before pivoting to boxing in 2018 as a way to expand his name and take on new challenges. His journey into the ring was initially perceived as a joke, but Paul quickly proved himself as a skilled, disciplined fighter. His journey began with a widely publicized fight against YouTuber Deji Olatunji, the brother of famous influencer KSI, which took place on the undercard of the KSI vs. Logan Paul fight. Paul ended up winning the match, which motivated him to pursue the sport even more. He eventually transitioned to professional boxing in 2020, defeating YouTuber AnEsonGib in his debut fight. Paul began taking part in intense training regimes, working with professional trainers and sparring with established fighters. He has since fought and defeated multiple opponents, including former MMA champions, solidifying his position as a controversial yet influential figure in the boxing world. Going into the fight vs Tyson, Paul held a professional record of 10-1.
The announcement of the Tyson-Paul fight in March 2024 sparked debates across the sports world. For fans of traditional boxing, a 58-year-old Tyson stepping into the ring against a 27-year-old social media star was unimaginable. On the other hand, Paul’s supporters praised the fight, egging on the other side.
Initially scheduled for July 20, the fight faced delays due to Tyson’s health issues. The fight was then rescheduled for Nov. 15 and was billed as a professional match. Adding to the hype, Netflix secured exclusive streaming rights, allowing them to broadcast the fight to their subscribers.
With a crowd of 75,000 in attendance and millions watching online, the stage was set for a showdown between past and present. The eight-round match featured two-minute rounds and heavier gloves — a safety measure given Tyson’s age and the nature of the exhibition.
From the opening bell, it became clear that time had taken its toll on Tyson. His once lightning-fast combinations were visibly slower, even though his boxing IQ and footwork stayed the same. Paul was able to capitalize on his youth, using his speed and stamina to control the pace of the fight.
While Tyson landed a few shots, Paul’s consistent jabs earned him the upper hand. The fight ended with a unanimous decision in Paul’s favor, with judges scoring the match 80-72, 79-73 and 79-73. Paul went on to celebrate the victory as the “most significant achievement of his career,” while Tyson thankfully acknowledged the outcome.
Days after the fight, Tyson let the world know that he had undergone serious health struggles leading up to the event, including significant weight loss and multiple blood transfusions. This gave context to his performance, showcasing the physical toll boxing takes on aging athletes.
Due to technical issues, Netflix received backlash from fans claiming that there were buffering and streaming glitches. Fans were outraged, and a $50 million class-action lawsuit was filed against Netflix, alleging breach of contract.
Despite its controversies, the fight was a commercial success. Paul’s victory solidified his spot as a legitimate fighter, with his team expressing interest in future matchups against legends like Canelo Álvarez and Anthony Joshua.
For Tyson, the fight marked another chapter in his career, one that emphasized resilience and courage. While some questioned his decision to fight at 58 years old, others admired his willingness to step back into the ring.

Contact the author at howlsports@mail.wou.edu

Why you should try “Grey’s Anatomy”

Written by: Hannah Field | Editor-in-Chief

Content warning: this article contains spoilers and discusses fictitious violence

Season 20 of “Grey’s Anatomy” was released to Netflix June 29, 2024, featuring ten episodes on top of its already prominent 430, spanning from 2005 to the present. Since premiering, “Grey’s Anatomy” has been nominated for 39 Emmys, won a Golden Globe Award for Best Drama Series and a People’s Choice Award for Favorite TV Drama, inspired two spin-off shows and hit an all-time audience record of 37.88 million viewers for episode 16 of season two.
The show has gone on so long that most of the main cast has moved on, their characters being killed or written off, with even protagonist Ellen Pompeo — Meredith Grey — stepping back in the latest seasons.

Most credit the success of “Grey’s Anatomy” to Shonda Rhimes, founder of the production company Shondaland and creator of “Grey’s Anatomy.” Rhimes has become well known for her tendency to kill off characters in the most tragic ways possible, with more than nine notable recurring character deaths overall. In 2015, Rhimes left “Grey’s Anatomy,” but the calamity persists in her absence.

Meredith Grey survived not just a plane crash, a shooting, a physical assault, a bomb, drowning and COVID-19, but also managed to scrape by after a miscarriage, the death of her husband, multiple deaths of her friends, losing her parents and even going to jail in season 16 for — easy guess — insurance fraud.

The show has always incorporated real-world issues, mixing them with fictitious characters and applying a level of relatability for viewers to connect to. Characters struggle with infertility, lack of insurance, love triangles, affairs, religion, relationships, family, cancer and more. “Grey’s Anatomy” takes those issues to an extreme level, allowing for an eventful watch in any episode, and often mixes humor in with how the characters interact and work together.

Most iconic are the original five interns of Seattle Grace Hospital, Meredith Grey, Cristina Yang, Alex Karev, Izzie Stephens and George O’Malley, starting strong in season one until, one by one, the team falls apart through loss, separation and other work opportunities. Most viewers refer to the first few seasons of “Grey’s Anatomy” as the best, having great rewatchability and incredible banter.

Although this might be the case for many viewers, the later seasons add more flexibility and characters and the budget increases over time, allowing for incredible set design, new actors and new plots — meaning more riveting turmoil for “Grey’s Anatomy’s” most loveable characters.

At the end of the day, “Grey’s Anatomy” is an ideal show to watch when coping with something difficult — why? Because Meredith Grey will always be having a worse day.

Contact the author at howleditorinchief@mail.wou.edu

Can’t sleep? Try these

Written by: Jaylin Emond-Hardin | Entertainment Editor

Struggling to enter rapid eye movement? Want a movie or show that has calming qualities? Then look no further than this list. Made up of different kinds of movies and shows, one will surely find a movie or show that will help them get some shut-eye.

“Ratatouille” — Streaming on Disney+

“Ratatouille” is the perfect movie for sleep. It follows Remy, a rat, as he traverses through the streets of Paris to end up helping Linguini at the restaurant Gusteau’s. The movie is washed in soft blues and yellows, making it gentle on tired eyes. The soundtrack and ambiance are also extremely soothing, and the sounds of cooking and the Parisian streets are sure to lull even the biggest insomniac to sleep.

“The Devil Wears Prada” — Streaming on Max

Following Andrea “Andy” Sachs as she works for Vogue and its notorious editor, Miranda Priestly, the movie delves into the socialite side of working for a fashion magazine. With subtle overlays of white, gray and black to contrast where Andy starts in her career and where she ends up, the movie has a soft, almost dreamlike feel. Artists like Madonna, U2 and Alanis Morissette feature on the soundtrack, adding to this dreamlike feel. 

“To All the Boys I’ve Loved Before” — Streaming on Netflix

A movie with brighter colors and bubblegum pop for the soundtrack, which makes it perfect for when the body is in its earliest stages of exhaustion. The plot is easy to follow and the romance between Lara Jean and Peter is to swoon for, and the movie is best for soothing viewers to sleep. 

“Emma” — Streaming on Prime Video

Whether the 1996 or 2020 version, the movie follows the same plot: set in 1815 in the English countryside, it follows Emma — played by Gwyneth Paltrow in the ‘96 version and Anya Taylor Joy in the 2020 version — who goes about setting up affluent couples together. The soundtrack has a gentle piano accompaniment and the English countryside setting gives the movie a cozy, cottagecore feel. It’s best for when one is exhausted but their brain is fighting the urge to sleep.

“Fantastic Mr. Fox” — Streaming on Disney+

Similar to “Ratatouille,” this movie follows Mr. Fox as he makes his last big score against three poultry farmers. The film’s color palette is flush with yellows, oranges and reds, making it a warm, cozy movie for cold winter nights. The Wes Anderson movie features a folk music-based soundtrack with banjos and fiddles and features artists like Burl Ives and the Rolling Stones. When the cold, sleepless nights settle in, “Fantastic Mr. Fox” is the perfect movie.

“Pride and Prejudice” — Streaming on Starz and Prime Video

Another movie based on one of Jane Austen’s novels, “Pride and Prejudice” gives the same vibes as “Emma.” Following the Bennet family as the five daughters search for suitable husbands, viewers will find themselves falling for Charles Bingley and Mr. Darcy as they woo the eldest two Bennet daughters, Jane and Elizabeth. Another movie best for when one is fighting the urge to sleep.

Contact the author at howlentertainment@wou.edu

H

Written by: Jaylin Emond-Hardin | Entertainment Editor

Charlie Brown — no scares, just heartfelt Halloween

“It’s the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown” streaming on Apple TV+

Based on Charles M. Schulz’s “Peanuts” comic strip, the Halloween classic follows Charlie Brown and the gang as they celebrate Halloween and Linus waits for the Great Pumpkin. “It’s the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown” is perfect if one is looking for a cozy fall movie.

“The Addams Family” streaming on Paramount+

The Addams family is the first family of all things dark and creepy, so what better movie to watch for Halloween? With a live severed hand, a butler of unknown origins and two deranged children, anyone who watches this film will feel the Halloween vibes.

Not So Scary — a few scares, but mostly funny

“Scary Movie” franchise streaming on Paramount+

This movie franchise was the introduction of horror movies into the parody genre that was started by British comedy group Monty Python in the 1970s. The films incorporate elements and tropes from different horror movies, blending them to create a parody that is raunchy, ridiculous and funny all at the same time. 

Jumpscares and Chills — The scare factor is higher, but mostly jumpscares

“Cabin in the Woods” streaming on Peacock

“Cabin in the Woods” is right up there on this list with the “Scary Movie” franchise of parody movies; however, this movie takes on more of the traditional horror genre aspects. 

“The Ritual” streaming on Netflix

A true monster movie, this movie makes the audience feel as if they are being watched and hunted by the creature alongside the main characters. Set in the Swedish wilderness, this movie pits distorted pagan beliefs against modern protagonists. 

Heartstopping Horror — the scares are what makes the plot

“The Conjuring Universe” streaming on Max

This nine-movie franchise follows cases that were worked on and researched by Ed and Lorraine Warren, with most of the movies being interconnected in the universe. The movies have a plethora of antagonists, from possessed dolls to demon nuns, sure to terrify viewers.

Leave the Lights on to Sleep — can’t escape the horror, leave the lights on

“Terrifier” franchise streaming on Peacock

Viewer discretion is advised with any of the four movies within the “Terrifier” franchise. “Terrifier 3” was released in theaters Oct. 11 and is currently #1 at the box office. The movies are unrated, and contain heavy amounts of violence and gore, alongside the traditional horror elements of the movie. 

Contact the author at howlentertainment@wou.edu

A new version of “The Talented Mr. Ripley” comes to Netflix

Written by: Claire Phillips | Entertainment Editor

Content warning: this article contains spoilers and mentions of murder.

Film fanatics may be familiar with the title “The Talented Mr. Ripley,” a thriller that stars Matt Damon, Gwyneth Paltrow and Jude Law in an unconventional love triangle. Netflix has taken on a noir remake of the story with the leading man played by Andrew Scott, who is well known for his roles in “Sherlock,” “Fleabag” and more recently, “All of Us Strangers.” The director’s choice to make the show in black and white was due to the original book cover by Patricia Highsmith. Set in the 1960s between New York and Italy, “Ripley” is a captivating story that is hard to look away from.

In addition to Scott, the new Netflix series also stars Dakota Fanning and Johnny Flynn. Each actor delivered a unique perspective to the remake of the classic story within their individual roles. The chemistry between the trio was undeniable.

Andrew Scott’s stoic performance as Tom Ripley gave the series its unsettling tone. In contrast to Matt Damon’s portrayal of the character, Scott plays Ripley as a calculated, apathetic man with little remorse for his actions. In the 1999 film, Ripley is more frantic after his murders and genuinely seems to be upset about his wrongdoings. Both interpretations are incredible portrayals of the multi-dimensional character, but the passiveness of Scott’s performance is almost terrifying to watch.

The most uncomfortable scene in the series was the practically silent 20-minute murder sequence of Greenleaf, as Ripley tediously and clumsily carries out his plan. The blood on Ripley’s fingers looks black, but the audience can see its unmistakable deep red color as they experience the brutal death of Dickie Greenleaf. Ripley goes on to steal Greenleaf’s identity for his wealth and status. 

Every few minutes there is a shot of religious art, whether it is Greek, Roman or Catholic, a statue or a painting on a church ceiling. Tom Ripley walks in the shadows of these works of art, and at some points, he silently ponders them. This could be interpreted as a higher power looking down at him as he continues to commit acts of sin, whether he chooses to acknowledge it or not. He views himself as the puppetmaster of everything around him, but truly knows he is on the verge of spiraling out of control. Characters such as Marge Sherwood, Dickie Greenleaf’s girlfriend, can see right through Ripley’s actions but have no way to prove his wrongdoings. Something is not quite right with him, which all the people he interacts with take notice of.

The juxtaposition of Tom Ripley’s character is what made the 1955 novel and the 1999 film unique. Though he is a con-man and murderer, the character is also described as a sensitive man. The 90s movie depicts Ripley as a queer man, in his odd relationship with Dickie Greenleaf, and even gives him a lover at the end of the movie. His acute awareness of the people around him is what makes him the enticing villain he is. 

With an all-star cast, unique filming style and an incredible setting, “Ripley” is a must-watch for any fans of the original film or audiences interested in the noir genre. The eight-episode show goes into more depth than the movie was able to, and it did not disappoint.

8/10.

Contact the author at howlentertainment@wou.edu

Live action: take two

Written by: Gretchen Sims | Editor-in-Chief

Content warning: this article contains spoilers.

When Netflix announced that they would be re-remaking “Avatar: The Last Airbender” as a live-action series, expectations were high. As a childhood favorite to many, another failed remake was all that was on fans’ worried minds. 

Starring Gordon Cormier as Aang, Kiawentiio as Katara, Ian Ousley as Sokka and Dallas Liu as Prince Zuko, the release of “Avatar: The Last Airbender” was, unfortunately, met with mixed feelings. 

When the show was set to hit production, Netflix announced that the original creators of the Nickelodeon cartoon, Michael Dante DiMartino and Bryan Konietzko, would work as executive producers on their live-action remake. This news excited fans who were, not long after, met with the disappointing news that DiMartino and Konietzko had departed from the show, citing creative differences — the two received writing credits for the first and sixth episodes. This disheartening turn of events raised questions regarding the show’s integrity to the original cartoon. 

First, I want to preface with the fact that this new remake was nowhere near as awful as the first attempt, which went as far as to mispronounce its character’s names. It was not as good as the original, I think anyone could have guessed that, but it wasn’t horrible. However, there were a few aspects of the remake that caused it to fall short of the cartoon. 

Growing up, Katara was always my favorite character. As a sister to annoying siblings, who often took on an authoritative position in their lives, I felt myself relating to her. In the Netflix remake, I didn’t get any of that. I felt like the energy and life Katara brought to the cartoon were lost in the live-action — it was as though she were flat and two-dimensional. 

Additionally — and there has been a lot of online discourse surrounding this — Sokka’s sexist character arch was cut from the adaptation. In the Nickelodeon series, Sokka starts the show with very sexist views that were instilled in him throughout his childhood, but he slowly loses them as he meets strong women throughout their quests. 

While there is an argument for cutting this arch, I think that writing Sokka’s initial sexism out of the show erased an important lesson the original writers wanted to portray. Talking about sexist themes is crucial to fighting gender biases — especially in children’s TV shows. 

The show’s creators stated that they wanted to make things darker to make the series not only for kids but “…people who are big fans of ‘Game of Thrones’” as well. 

This attempted direction fell more than short and left viewers with a weirdly “edgy” feel — in a “not at all edgy” sort of way.

The cartoon was supposed to be lighthearted to appeal to children, while also teaching valuable lessons to this younger audience. Because this was executed so well, the original “Avatar: The Last Airbender” show was a hit among all ages. Sadly, this new remake does not quite reach this mark — completely overlooking the essence of the original show. 

If one is debating whether it is still worth a watch, it is important to ask oneself why they fell in love with the original in the first place. Like I said in the beginning, it’s not horrible, it just leaves out some key components that can leave a returning viewer wanting more. 

6.5/10.

Contact the author at howleditorinchief@wou.edu