The Crown to end with Season 5 as Imelda Staunton takes over Queen Elizabeth II role

Deadline

The Neflix Royal family drama was originally envisioned as a six-season, 60-episode series, with three actress playing the Queen for two seasons each. But The Crown creator Peter Morgan says he's changed his mind, so Staunton will only get to play Queen Elizabeth II for one season: Season 5. “At the outset I had imagined The Crown running for six seasons but now that we have begun work on the stories for season five it has become clear to me that this is the perfect time and place to stop," he said. "I’m grateful to Netflix and Sony for supporting me in this decision.” Back in November 2016, shortly after The Crown's launch, Netflix chief content officer Ted Sarandos said: "It's a crazy idea to come in with a 60-hour pitch. The idea is to do this over six decades, in six seasons presumably, and make the whole show over eight to 10 years." Cindy Holland, Netflix vice president of original content, said of the ending after five seasons. "The first three seasons of The Crown defined an era, and I know the upcoming fourth season will build further on that success. It’s a stunning example of award-winning entertainment, created in the UK and loved by millions of fans around the world. I fully support Peter Morgan’s creative decision and am excited to see how he, Imelda Staunton and the cast and crew of Season 5, bring this landmark series to a fitting and spectacular end.” Staunton, who takes over from Claire Foy and Olivia Colman, said: “I have loved watching The Crown from the very start. As an actor it was a joy to see how both Claire Foy and Olivia Colman brought something special and unique to Peter Morgan’s scripts. I am genuinely honoured to be joining such an exceptional creative team and to be taking The Crown to its conclusion.” Morgan told EW in December 2018 he wasn't interested in depicting the Meghan Markle era of the Royal family. “I feel uncomfortable writing about events within a certain time period. I think there’s a certain amount of time within which, if you write about it, what you do instantly becomes journalistic," he said. "Because it’s too close to the moment. If you wait a certain amount of time, if you allow fifteen or twenty years, basically a generation, between you and (the events) then you can write about it somewhat freely as drama. Let’s wait twenty years and see what there is to say about Meghan Markle. I don’t know what there is to say about Meghan Markle at the moment. I wouldn’t know and I wouldn’t presume. She’ll only become interesting once we’ve had twenty years to digest who she is and what her impact has been. If I were to write about Meghan Markle I would automatically be writing journalistically. I’ve got nothing to say about Meghan Markle.”