Warner Bros. Discovery's streaming service Max becomes HBO Max — again
It's not Max, it's HBO Max.
Warner Bros. Discovery has decided its streaming service Max would once again benefit from being associated with the most prestigious brand name in TV history. The company announced Wednesday that the service will go back to being called HBO Max starting this summer.
In a statement, WBD said the change was a response to an audience desire for quality over quantity.
'No consumer today is saying they want more content, but most consumers are saying they want better content,' the company said.
The streaming service was initially called HBO Max when it was launched in 2020. HBO was stripped from the name in 2023. At the time WBD Chief Executive David Zaslav said the name change was aimed at broadening the audience.
But in an era when the consumer is swamped with choices and a high volume of TV series and movies, WBD gave up a distinctive brand name that has long been associated with high quality and culturally resonant programming, recent examples being new seasons of 'The White Lotus' and 'The Last of Us.'
Casey Bloys, chairman of HBO and Max Content, told the audience at the WBD upfront advertiser presentation in New York that the HBO brand tells consumers the service has 'programming worth paying for.'
Bloys pointed out that he still has a drawer full of stationery with the HBO Max name 'from the last time around.'
HBO's legacy as cable network was built on being a premium service that required an additional fee on a household cable bill. Such groundbreaking series as 'The Sopranos,' 'Game of Thrones' and 'Sex and the City' put the channel at the vanguard of creativity.
But as streaming overtook cable TV as the destination for scripted TV shows and movies, the HBO name was at risk of becoming a relic.
Media companies are deciding that their cable network names are the best option for their direct-to-consumer streaming services.
The Walt Disney Co. decided it was best to call ESPN's stand-alone streaming service by its familiar name. The new streaming service from CNN, which will launch this fall, will also simply be called CNN without a plus sign or any other designation that separates it from the core network.
___
© 2025 Los Angeles Times.
Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Atlantic
an hour ago
- Atlantic
Why Is Everyone on Television So Rich Now?
Watching Carrie Bradshaw—erstwhile sex columnist, intrepid singleton, striver—float down the majestic staircase of her new Gramercy townhouse on a recent episode of And Just Like That while wearing a transparent tulle gown, on an errand to mail a letter, is one of the most cognitively dissonant television experiences I've had recently. And Just Like That has never been a particularly imaginative show with regard to women in midlife, but there's still something fundamentally off about seeing one of the canonical female characters of our era transformed into a Gilded Age archetype, worrying about a garden renovation and choosing back-ordered fabric for a chaise. Carrie, suddenly, has many hats. She communicates with a lover via handwritten notes while she waits for his liberation from the home front in Virginia. What's happened to Carrie, truly, is money. Two decades after Sex and the City rolled to a televised close, acknowledging that its own cultural relevance was waning, its characters continue in zombified form on And Just Like That, pickled in a state of extreme privilege where nothing can touch them. The drama is lifeless, involving rehashed old storylines about beeping alarm systems and 'a woman's right to shoes' that serve mostly as a backdrop for clothes. Charlotte, in a questionable lace workout jacket, worries that her dog has been unfairly canceled. Miranda, in one of a series of patterned blouses, gets really into a Love Island –style reality show. (Remember Jules and Mimi?) Lisa wears feathers to a fundraiser for her husband's political campaign. Seema, in lingerie, nearly burns her apartment down when she falls asleep with a lit cigarette, but in the end, all she loses is an inch or so of hair. The point of the show is no longer what happens, because nothing does. The point is to set up a series of visual tableaus showcasing all the things money can buy, as though the show were an animated special issue of Vogue or Architectural Digest. What's stranger still is that a series that once celebrated women in the workplace has succumbed to financial ideals right out of Edith Wharton: The women who earned their money themselves (Miranda and Seema) somehow don't have enough of it (spoiler—they still seem to have a lot), while the ones who married money (Carrie, Charlotte, Lisa) breeze through life as an array of lunches, fundraisers, and glamping trips, with some creative work dotted into the mix for variety. The banal details of exorbitant wealth—well, it's all quite boring. Lately, most of television seems stuck in the same mode. Virtually everything I've watched recently has been some variation of rich people pottering around in 'aspirational' compounds. On Sirens and The Better Sister, glossy scenes of sleek couture and property porn upstage the intrigue of the plot. On Mountainhead, tech billionaires tussle in a Utah mountain retreat featuring 21,000 square feet of customized bowling alleys and basketball courts. On Your Friends & Neighbors, a disgraced hedge-fund manager sneers at the vacuous wealth of his gated community (where houses cost seven to eight figures), but also goes to criminal lengths to maintain his own living standards rather than lower them by even a smidge. And on With Love, Meghan, the humble cooking show has gotten a Montecito-money glow-up. 'I miss TV without rich people,' the writer Emily J. Smith noted last month on Substack, observing that even supposedly normie shows such as Tina Fey's marital comedy The Four Seasons and Erin Foster's unconventional rom-com Nobody Wants This seem to be playing out in worlds where money is just not an issue for anyone. This is a new development: As Smith points out, sitcoms including Roseanne and Married … With Children have historically featured families with recognizable financial constraints, and the more recent dramedies of the 2010s were riddled with economic anxiety. Reality television, it's worth noting, has been fixated on the lifestyles of the rich and bored virtually since its inception, but as its biggest stars have grown their own fortunes exponentially, the genre has mostly stopped documenting anything other than wealth, which it fetishizes via the gaudy enclaves and private jets of Selling Sunset and Bling Empire. Serialized shows, too, no longer seem interested in considering the stakes and subtleties of most people's lives. Television is preoccupied with literary adaptations about troubled rich white women, barbed satires about absurdly wealthy people on vacation, thrillers about billionaire enclaves at the end of the world. Even our contemporary workplace series (Severance, Shrinking) play out in fictional realms where people work not for the humble paychecks that sustain their lives, but to escape the grief that might otherwise consume them. What does it mean that our predominant fictional landscapes are all so undeniably 'elevated,' to use a word cribbed from the Duchess of Sussex? And Just Like That is evidence of how hard it is for shows that take wealth for granted to have narrative stakes, and how stultifying they become as a result. But we also lose something vital when we no longer see 99 percent of American lives reflected on the small screen. Money isn't just making TV boring. It's also reshaping our collective psyche—building a shared sense of wealth as the only marker of a significant life, and rich people as the only people worthy of our gaze. We're not supposed to be able to empathize with the characters on-screen, these strutting zoo animals in $1,200 shoes and $30,000-a-night villas. But we're not being encouraged to empathize with any other kinds of characters, either—to see the full humanity and complexity of so many average people whose lives feel ever more precarious in this moment, and ever more in need of our awareness. On an episode in the final season of Sex and the City, a socialite named Lexi Featherston cracks a floor-to-ceiling window, lights a cigarette, and declares that New York is over, O - V - E - R. 'When did everybody stop smoking?' she sneers. 'When did everybody pair off?' As the hostess glares at her, she continues: 'No one's fun anymore. Whatever happened to fun? God, I'm so bored I could die.' Famous last words: Lexi, of course, promptly trips on her stiletto, falls out the absurdly dangerous glass panel, and plummets to her death. Her arc—from exalted '80s It Girl to coked-up aging party girl—was supposed to represent finality, the termination of the city's relevance as a cultural nexus. 'It's the end of an era,' Carrie says at Lexi's funeral, where Stanford is elated to have scored VIP seats next to Hugh Jackman. 'The party's officially over,' Samantha agrees. After six seasons of transforming how a generation of women dated, dressed, even drank, Sex and the City seemed to be acknowledging that its own moment had come to an end. The characters were undeniably older, no longer seeking anthropological meaning in a SoHo nightclub at 3 a.m. But the city that the show documented—and popular culture more broadly—had shifted, too: toward less spontaneity, less rebellion, and infinitely higher incomes. The year that final season aired, 2004, is possibly when television's prurient obsession with rich people really kicked off, with the launch of shows including Desperate Housewives, Entourage, and, notably, The Apprentice. A year earlier, Fox had premiered a soapy drama called The O.C., which charted the rags–to–Range Rover adventures of a teen from Chino who ended up ensconced in the affluent coastal town of Newport Beach. Until then, it had never occurred to me that teenagers could wear Chanel or drive SUVs that cost six figures, although watching them rattle around in McMansions the size of the Met provided much of The O.C. 's visual thrill. In direct response to the show's success, MTV debuted the reality show Laguna Beach: The Real Orange County a year later, and in 2006, Bravo countered with its own voyeuristic peek into the lives of the rich and fabulous— The Real Housewives of Orange County. Documenting wealth enticingly on television is a difficult balancing act: You want to stoke enough envy that people are inspired to buy things (gratifying advertisers along the way), but not so much that you risk alienating the viewer. Reality TV pulled it off by starting small. The women on the first season of Real Housewives were well off, but not unimaginably so. They lived in high-end family homes, not sprawling temples of megawealth. Similarly, when Keeping Up With the Kardashians debuted in 2007, the family lived in a generous but chintzy bungalow, having not yet generated the billions of dollars that would later pay for their minimalist compounds in Calabasas and Hidden Hills. During the 2008 financial crisis, a critic for The New York Times wondered whether the tanking global economy might doom the prospects of shows such as The Real Housewives of Atlanta, which had just premiered, and turn them into 'a time capsule of the Bling Decade.' But the fragility of viewers' own finances, oddly, seemed to make them more eager to watch. Shows about money gratified both people's escapist impulses and the desire to critique those who didn't seem worthy of their blessings. As Jennifer O'Connell, a producer for The Real Housewives of New York City, put it to the Times a year later: 'Everyone likes to judge.' The toxic, unhappy, rich-people shows that have more recently proliferated on prestige TV—the Succession and White Lotus and Big Little Lies variation—cover their backs with cynicism. Money doesn't make you happy, they assert over and over, even though studies suggest otherwise. The documentation of extreme wealth on television with such clarifying bitterness, they imply, surely inoculates audiences from pernicious aspiration. Except it doesn't: The Four Seasons San Domenico Palace in Sicily was fully booked for a good six months following the second season of The White Lotus, despite the fictional bodies floating in the water. And a study conducted at the London School of Economics in 2018 found that a person's increased exposure to shows that regularly 'glamourize fame, luxury, and the accumulation of wealth' made them more inclined to support welfare cuts; it also noted other studies that found that the more people watched materialistic media, the more anxious and unhappy they were likely to be in their own lives. Watching shows about wealth does, however, seem to stimulate the desire to shop, which is maybe why this latest season of And Just Like That feels intended for an audience watching with a second screen in their hand—all the better to harvest the aspirational consumption the show's lifestyles might generate. Streaming services are already tapping into the reams of data they have on viewers by serving them customized ads related to the series they might be watching, and many are also experimenting with e-commerce. You could argue that And Just Like That is honoring the spirit of Sex and the City by putting fashion front and center. But the vacant dullness of the new season feels wholly of its time: This is television for the skin-deep influencer age, not the messy, pioneering drama it once was. More crucially, Carrie and company take up space that deprives us of more shows like The Pitt, one of a sparse handful of series documenting the workers trying to patch up the holes in an ever more unequal America. No one seems to have anticipated that the Max series would be such a success. As workers today are being squeezed 'for all their worth, no more chit-chatting at the water cooler, we've gotten to a point where reality for most people is quite unpleasant,' Smith writes on Substack. 'And executives are betting that we don't actually want to watch it.' The reality of the TV business also underscores why shows that sell us something—even if it's just the illusion of exceptional prosperity as a default—are easier to commission. But audiences will always be drawn to drama, and the stakes of defiantly deglamorized series such as The Bear and Slow Horses feel necessary in this moment, when the state of the future relies so much on the direction and quality of our attention.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Sarah Jessica Parker 'Shocked' By Unpopularity Of ‘AJLT's Che Diaz, Says She Loved Working With Sara Ramirez
With the arrival of season three of And Just Like That, the sequel to Sex and the City, viewers have noticed the absence of Sara Ramirez as Che Diaz, a non-binary stand up comedian who was previously the love interest of Miranda (Cynthia Nixon). The character proved polarising with fans, with some critics describing her as a caricature of queer culture and an example of how the show has clumsily tried to update itself for the reboot. More from Deadline Mickey Down & Konrad Kay Reveal The Tarantino-esque Series They Were Working On Before 'Industry' - SXSW London Jesse Armstrong's 'Mountainhead' Becomes Most-Watched HBO Original Film Since 'Bad Education' Warner Bros Discovery Hits Back At Russell Simmons' "Unfounded Allegations" In Ex-Mogul's $20M Suit Over 2020 Sexual Assault Documentary - Update Now, star and producer Sarah Jessica Parker has said she was 'shocked' to discover the character was so deeply disliked. Parker told The Guardian newspaper this weekend: 'A friend of mine brought it up to me, and it's like: 'What are you talking about?' And he said: 'Yeah, there's all this conversation.' 'I've been an actor for 50 years, and I've almost never paid attention to peripheral chatter. I loved working with them.' As for her own character Carrie, on her enduring romantic rollercoaster supported by the more constant consolations of her friends and her love of fashion, Parker said she was delighted by the use of the word 'antihero' to describe her. 'I prefer that to any other description of her, because it allows her to be as male as the men have been. I love The Sopranos so much, and I look at all the times [Tony] was unlawful, and we loved him. Carrie has an affair and everybody falls apart. 'An antihero, to me, is somebody that's not behaving in conventional ways, and she hasn't ever… A lot of people love her too, though!' Sex and the City ran for 94 episodes between 1998 and 2004. The third season of And Just Like That is currently airing on HBO Max. Best of Deadline 2025 TV Series Renewals: Photo Gallery 2025 TV Cancellations: Photo Gallery 'Stick' Soundtrack: All The Songs You'll Hear In The Apple TV+ Golf Series
Buzz Feed
2 hours ago
- Buzz Feed
Dakota Jokes "Madame Web" Flop Was 'Not Her Fault'
Dakota Johnson is reflecting on the negative reception her film Madame Web was met with last year. The Fifty Shades Of Grey star appeared alongside Sydney Sweeney and The Last Of Us' Isabela Merced in the Spider-Man spin-off, taking the lead as Cassandra Webb. Upon its release, Madame Web was near-unanimously slammed by critics, and was also a bomb at the box office. Asked about the project during a new interview with the LA Times, Dakota quipped: 'It wasn't my fault.' She explained: 'There's this thing that happens now where a lot of creative decisions are made by committee. Or made by people who don't have a creative bone in their body. And it's really hard to make art that way. Or to make something entertaining that way. 'And I think unfortunately, with Madame Web, it started out as something and turned into something else. And I was just sort of along for the ride at that point. But that happens. Bigger-budget movies fail all the time.' 'I don't have a Band-Aid over it,' she claimed. 'There's no part of me that's like, 'Oh, I'll never do that again' to anything. I've done even tiny movies that didn't do well. Who cares?' Shortly after the movie's release, Dakota admitted she was 'not surprised' to see Madame Web being picked apart in the way that it was. 'It was a real learning experience, and of course it's not nice to be a part of something that's ripped to shreds,' she said. 'But I can't say that I don't understand.' Dakota previously told Entertainment Weekly: '[Before Madame Web, I'd] never really done a movie where you are on a blue screen, and there's fake explosions going off, and someone's going, 'Explosion!' and you act like there's an explosion. That to me was absolutely psychotic. 'I was like, 'I don't know if this is going to be good at all! I hope that I did an okay job!'.'
