GRRM confirms: TWOW not done yet

[Guest Thorrand]

You just say stuff with no proof except what 2 or 3 vague quotes by producers who don't even know for sure how long it's gonna be, who even said as much. They don't want to be greedy and say 7 but we'd like to do 7 or 8. You know they want it to be longer, and frankly who doesn't

Vague, of uncertain, indefinite, or unclear character or meaning. The quotes posted were anything but vague. The only way they could be interpreted as unclear is if you try to make it so. They sounded pretty certain. I haven't read the TV guide interview so I can't speak for that. If they are indeed uncertain of how many seasons at the midpoint, it doesn't bode well for the show as it is easy to go off the rails into subplots etc. While good for books (debatable), it doesn't necessarily bode well for a tv show intended to keep audiences attention. The best thing for them to do is pick a number and go forwards with that as the goal. Dragging it out to drag it out won't do the show many favors with the budget it has.

Feast for Crows and Dance with Dragons were filler books written to attempt to fill the five year gap and to me it shows. They can't possibly go that many directions with the show hence why people feel certain plot lines will be cut altogether.

[Ran]

There is, again, the Vanity Fair piece from January-February where they say 7 or 7 seasons, and the red carpet piece from a week ago where it's now "at least 70" are what D&D are saying.

Everything squarely placing D&D at 7 seasons and that's it is from last year, and since then the tune has changed, possibly in reaction to the increasing tentpole nature of the show as it keeps hitting the zeitgeist, possibly just to be polite to George.

[Newstar]

The showrunners are clever (picking up on R+L stuff) but not raging with theories (they weren't surprised at the future IT holder = they find it amazing, but unlike fans, didn't consider the option of independence); so I would say Jon - we've figured it out, and expect to see narrative boons on wider scale with this particular story arc and then - bam, dead for good. Dany, the great conqueror, dead as well.

My first thought was Tyrion! - it works on both levels,brings about horror stricken shouts from the readers and watchers alike; same as Arya, though I find the prospect sad. But exciting. :D

Tyrion would certainly zap out the life in the show, given his frontrunner position.

Oh yeah, bring back the neatness of shocking deaths and small number of POVs. Neat. Neatsy :lol:

Heh. It's hard to wonder whom they think would be a death which could not be predicted, since I've read so many fan theories that pretty much everyone's death has been predicted. It's hard to get in the headspace of D&D, who are fans but who haven't spent years hanging out on Westeros.org and similar forums reading endless fan theories about character and spinning their own.

I'd be surprised if GRRM would kill off his "big three"--Tyrion, Dany, and Jon--and Arya. Three of them, maybe, but all four? I've always thought Dany was marked for death, ADWD suggested to me that Tyrion seems destined to die as well, and I'm not feeling so great about Arya after her TWOW sample chapter, so I hesitate to say that Jon is going to die, too. If anyone of the four makes it, it seems like it would be him. On the other hand, Jon, Dany and Tyrion's arcs have a kind of symmetry to them as the "big three," so it seems a bit off to me that he would kill two and spare one. I guess we'll see.

To go back to the quote:

You know [Thrones author] George R.R. Martin's master plan. Is there a character on this show whose loss would really zap a lot of the life from the series?

Benioff: There are some characters who will die that I wont think people will predict. And as George has said, were killing off more characters than in the books and will continue to do so.

Weiss: There are several characters whose loss will do that. But it doesnt mean they wont die.

Benioff's comment definitely made me think of Tyrion and Arya or one of the other Starks. I don't think a non-book reader would predict Jon or Dany's death, even if a lot of book readers would see it coming a mile away. Who else would be on the average fan's mental "safe" short list? Davos, maybe? Jaime? A seemingly disproportionate number of the younger generation characters (Pod, Gendry, etc. etc.)?

Hmm...Weiss' comment could be taken two ways: 1) there are several characters whose loss would zap a lot of the life from the series who will die, or that 2) the fact that there's a character whose loss would really zap a lot of life from the series won't magically immunize the character. The second reading is a bit more coy, merely raising the possibility that the more charismatic characters could die and aren't safe by virtue of being charismatic, while the first reading suggests that there are a lot of "crowd-pleaser" characters who will bite it. I guess I'm a bit bloodthirsty, because I like the first reading and the idea that a lot of the "crowd-pleasing," more charismatic characters will bite it, but I could see it being read either way.

Everything squarely placing D&D at 7 seasons and that's it is from last year

The EW article stating baldly "seven seasons is the plan" and has always been the plan and with the soundbite from the HBO exec saying that seven seasons would be "greedy" is from March 11th, 2014, so that's not actually the case. I know you're reading that article as saying seven "or eight," but a close reading of the words from the showrunners and from Lombardo state clearly that seven seasons, not eight, is the goal, the plan, the aim and the objective, and that even seven seasons would be greedy and ambitious. You're reading the article as ambiguous, but it's really not; it's the clearest communication we have from the showrunners, buttressed by a quote from an HBO exec suggesting that even seven seasons would be a "nice, long run" and "greedy," as to the number of seasons planned. Or what Thorrand said.

[Ran]

No, it was published on March 11. The actual interviews are older than that, dating from when Hibberd was visiting the set in Croatia in September (and you're also ignoring the note from Hibberd in that same interview where he prefaces Lombardo's remarks with "Or eight", suggesting that he took something rather different from his conversation with Lombardo than you seem to be taking).

Whereas the Vanity Fair interview was from January or February, despite also being published in March.

HBO embargos stuff, and EW and other media outlets are doing interviews well before the show airs that they save for nearer to the actual air date. I've got interviews from February that won't see the light of day until May or possibly even June.

[PatrickStormborn]

That's a different issue altogether. There doesn't need to be a prophecy of an event for that event to come about; the prophecy simply serves as foreshadowing. Whereas, if they don't include Aegon, to use one example, then obviously he isn't that terribly important to the greater story.

Aegon is not going to be cut from the story. He's Varys' endgame and evidently set up to be the main adversery of Daenerys. Cutting him does NOT improve the story.

And on a related note, why do so many people think Quentyn will be cut? He just needs to show up in Meereen, get rejected and free the dragons. It's a short arc, and it's not like there's a lot going on in Meereen anyway.

[HairGrowsBack]

Aegon is not going to be cut from the story. He's Varys' endgame and evidently set up to be the main adversery of Daenerys. Cutting him does NOT improve the story.

And on a related note, why do so many people think Quentyn will be cut? He just needs to show up in Meereen, get rejected and free the dragons. It's a short arc, and it's not like there's a lot going on in Meereen anyway.

Also we don't know yet what impact his death will have on the story : most likely it will set Dorne to support Aegon instead of Dany (which os widely speculated), and there could be more to it.

[Lord Varys]

Yeah, if there is a Dornish plot in season 5 ending in Doran's revelation that Quentyn has been sent to Dany, it would be very smart to just introduce him when he arrives in Meereen. They don't need to depict his journey. But his short stay in Meereen makes for an interesting story, and Dany should really have a shy, clumsy Westerosi suitor in addition to Hizdahr and Daario.

From what has been revealed about season 4 on this board, it's very unlikely - I'd daresay, all but confirmed - that the Aegon plot line will not be cut. Cutting it would drastically change the story of the TV series, that much is evident from ADwD. Aegon will play a huge role in the remaining books.

[Newstar]

No, it was published on March 11. The actual interviews are older than that, dating from when Hibberd was visiting the set in Croatia in September (and you're also ignoring the note from Hibberd in that same interview where he prefaces Lombardo's remarks with "Or eight", suggesting that he took something rather different from his conversation with Lombardo than you seem to be taking).

Because the copy ("or eight?") had nothing to do with the actual substance of the quote. Lombardo's "or eight" was in reference to the longest the shows have run, and he made it clear that even seven would be "greedy." You seem to be reading it as a wink to the reader or a sly nudge that eight seasons are a possibility, but that's not what's being said at all, and it aligns neatly with D&D talking about the symmetry, etc. etc. of seven seasons, talking it up and selling it as the plan.

Whereas the Vanity Fair interview was from January or February, despite also being published in March.

And for every quote you could give where the eight number is floated as a vague possibility, I could give you two where it's not even mentioned and seven seasons is described in definite terms, such as the very recent chat with the showrunners with James Hibberd, published today but conducted very recently, where they describe "season seven" as "the end" in a casual, offhand manner (suggesting to me that the "eight" number is a pleasing fiction rather than something bearing any relation to reality, much like GRRM's great vision of 10 seasons and a few movies).

Of course, D&D could come out and say seven seasons--the EW article from March 11th, 2014 seems as firm on that as they're likely to get--and fans would still swear up and down that it will be 10 seasons and a movie. The denial runs strong.

Aegon is not going to be cut from the story. He's Varys' endgame and evidently set up to be the main adversery of Daenerys. Cutting him does NOT improve the story.

Agreed. For there to be a Dance of the Dragons 2.0--which GRRM has said there will be--you need, well, more than one dragon, and Jon's busy at the moment, so Aegon's presence is pretty much required.

And on a related note, why do so many people think Quentyn will be cut? He just needs to show up in Meereen, get rejected and free the dragons.

Well, that, and piss off Dorne with his death sufficiently so that they throw in their lot with Aegon, as HairGrowsBack said...I assume.

But really, these two objectives could be accomplished without Quentyn. Someone else could free the dragons (they could even break free on their own), and Dorne could throw in with Aegon for some other reason. Quentyn's not needed at all.

Also, Quentyn doesn't give good TV. Not only is he himself kind of pointless, save for serving two plot ends (Dorne and dragons), but his arc is pretty dreary and boring as well. He's not an important character. He doesn't accomplish anything (except freeing the dragons). He's dull as dirt. He's not witty or intelligent. He's not charismatic, badass, or cool, like Oberyn. He's not even particularly good-looking (although they could pretty him up for TV). He's decidedly mediocre in a series where the vast majority of the main characters are exceptional in one or multiple respects: beauty, intelligence, competence, charisma, swordfighting, magical powers, etc. etc. When he brings so little to the table in terms of plot and character, why would the average TV viewer care about him or want time taken away from their favourites to focus on him? I certainly don't, and a lot of book readers didn't, either.

With all that said, I'd be curious to see how the writers dealt with Quentyn if they introduced him. I recall Dany's treatment of him being somewhat of a sticking point when ADWD came out, so I have to wonder if the writers would gloss over that.

Dany should really have a shy, clumsy Westerosi suitor in addition to Hizdahr and Daario.

Why should she? Who cares? Dany's love life and/or marriage prospects are the least interesting thing about her.

[Treekid]

I'am fairly confident the book will soon be released (a one-year timespan is soon for me) so between the end of 2014 and summer 2015

GRRM seems confident enough to even mention his progress which makes me think a comparison between TWoW and the first books of the serie is possible. He took roughly 9 years to write the first 3 books and inventing Westeros (maybe even less than that)

So I'm going to assume he can write TWoW in 3 years (as he said it himself) and have it published in a few months time.

Then he'll write ADoS in 3 years (2018), realise he isn't remotely close to the ending he had planned so he will write an eighth book he'll call TCoAotD (pretty long title I know).

[Ran]

I know of only two where Dan just say 7 and don't mention 8 (one of which has the interviewer take from the interview with the exec that 8 isn't out of the question).

I know of at least four where 80 is explicitly mentioned or implicitly allowed by them.

The March 11 EW interview is from September 2013, again. Vanity Fair is from January-February 2014 -- 4-5 months after. NY red carpet premiere was, what, a week and change ago? Chill out already. Maybe in September D&D had settled on 7. Since then, they're back to allowing that it could be 8. Maybe in three months, they'll be back to 7, or maybe they'll say they're now thinking 8, or maybe they'll say it's 7 or 8. Who knows? What I am sure of is that at this time D&D aren't absolutely certain either way. Something's moved them from the sure on 7 to not so sure -- possibly a result of wrapping this season and starting to outline season 5 and seeing that they could indeed go 8? Again, who knows.

[J. Stargaryen]

I know of only two where Dan just say 7 and don't mention 8 (one of which has the interviewer take from the interview with the exec that 8 isn't out of the question).

I know of at least four where 80 is explicitly mentioned or implicitly allowed by them.

The March 11 EW interview is from September 2013, again. Vanity Fair is from January-February 2014 -- 4-5 months after. NY red carpet premiere was, what, a week and change ago? Chill out already. Maybe in September D&D had settled on 7. Since then, they're back to allowing that it could be 8. Maybe in three months, they'll be back to 7, or maybe they'll say they're now thinking 8, or maybe they'll say it's 7 or 8. Who knows? What I am sure of is that at this time D&D aren't absolutely certain either way. Something's moved them from the sure on 7 to not so sure -- possibly a result of wrapping this season and starting to outline season 5 and seeing that they could indeed go 8? Again, who knows.

Do you think it's possible that D&D are eager to be done with GoT? At least relative to HBO and GRRM. Once it is wrapped they will be able to call the shots and name the price for their next project. Maybe they have their own stories (books, scripts) they want to tell. They've already been at work on this project since, what, '07?

[Ran]

It's a massive project. They may be increasingly overwhelmed by how much has gone into it, and may indeed be starting to feel like they would like to see the light at the end of the tunnel, and for whatever paydays may come from that (though that said, I don't think either of them is planning to continue on as showrunners after GoT; just a feeling).

So yeah, maybe they settled on 7 because they'd like it to end then for personal reasons, and not necessarily because they thought at that time that it's the only way to do the show. Or maybe they were talking 7 because at the time HBO was signaling they weren't planning to fund it at that level. Or maybe at the time they had spitballed some ideas for how to go forward, and their ideas seemed to be pointing them at 7 seasons. Between September and the red carpet, something changed, somewhere; a break from filming let them recharge, HBO was looking at interest levels and their future schedule and realized that they had to hitch their star on GoT even harder than they had thought, actually breaking down season 5 made them realize they had plenty of material they deemed good enough to squeeze into the show that it could go 8.

[Newstar]

It's a massive project. They may be increasingly overwhelmed by how much has gone into it, and may indeed be starting to feel like they would like to see the light at the end of the tunnel, and for whatever paydays may come from that (though that said, I don't think either of them is planning to continue on as showrunners after GoT; just a feeling).

So yeah, maybe they settled on 7 because they'd like it to end then for personal reasons, and not necessarily because they thought at that time that it's the only way to do the show. Or maybe they were talking 7 because at the time HBO was signaling they weren't planning to fund it at that level. Or maybe at the time they had spitballed some ideas for how to go forward, and their ideas seemed to be pointing them at 7 seasons. Between September and the red carpet, something changed, somewhere; a break from filming let them recharge, HBO was looking at interest levels and their future schedule and realized that they had to hitch their star on GoT even harder than they had thought, actually breaking down season 5 made them realize they had plenty of material they deemed good enough to squeeze into the show that it could go 8.

Again, this is contradicted by the very recent spoiler-free chat posted at EW.com just today where they say season seven is "the end" in reference to Dany's dragons in a casual, offhand manner which doesn't leave any room for interpretation or second-guessing and which says volumes to me. I really don't think anything's changed since they came out with the seven seasons number. The eight seasons possibility seems more like a sop to GRRM and the fans than anything else.

It's a massive project. They may be increasingly overwhelmed by how much has gone into it, and may indeed be starting to feel like they would like to see the light at the end of the tunnel, and for whatever paydays may come from that (though that said, I don't think either of them is planning to continue on as showrunners after GoT; just a feeling).

Heh. It will be interesting to see how many of the principals involved in GOT--writers, crew, cast, etc.--end up so burned out by GOT that they either stop working altogether in their fields or do very little afterwards. Jack Gleeson's already sworn off acting post-GOT, due in no small part to his distaste for his newfound celebrity as Joffrey. (His epic rant on celebrity culture is required viewing, BTW.) Gemma Jackson, the production designer for Seasons 1-3, is no longer working on GOT and has no other projects lined up on her IMDB profile. The showrunners are by their own admission spending 51 weeks a year on this project and have been doing so for years, something I doubt they're going to be eager to revisit after GOT. How many more "victims" will GOT claim?

[Werthead]

I'm just not seeing much evidence for a season eight. I keep seeing seven everywhere, and an exec saying the longest running HBO shows last 7-8 seasons...

HBO are hedging their bets in case they get to 2016/17 and discover they haven't got any other big hit shows to pick up the slack when GoT finishes. In fact, I wonder if the overwhelmingly rapturous response to True Detective has buoyed HBO up and given them some confidence that they can move on after GoT finishes.

Pretty much everything now is pointing to seven. It's not quite set in stone yet, but will have to be during the writing of Season 5.

The show is the most successive show since the sopranos if I'm not mistaken which got 8 seasons I think they'll match it personally

The Sopranos only lasted for six seasons, although the last season was longer and split in half to make two. The Sopranos budget was also easily less than half that of GoT per season at the start, and at the end was still lower (GoT's per-episode budget was $6.9 million in Season 2, likely $7 million in Season 3 and probably closer to $7.5 million this year). Screenrant is using out-of-date information from when the show started, since HBO have not officially confirmed a budget since Season 1. We know it's gotten bigger from other comments (Season 2 being 15% higher than Season 1, for example).

less campy fare starring A-list celebrities (Kevin Spacey

I liked House of Cards, but I think it would take an extraordinary effort of will not to admit that Spacey's performance (sublime at its best) did not descend into pure camp on a fairly regular basis.

I just did some more math to support my argument that 7 seasons isn't enough by doing page counts of books (us hard covers) and figuring out roughly page per episode per book.

That won't work. AFFC/ADWD will likely have much larger plots and character arcs simply missing from them than previous books/seasons, and in other cases will be fairly concise in getting points across. Think of ACoK/Season 2, which have a really surprisingly few scenes of direct adaptation compared to 1 or 3 (or, from the look of it so far, 4), only even more ruthless.

since seven seasons was "always the plan."

This at least needs to be taken with a grain of salt the size of Casterly Rock. They originally spoke of 80-90 episodes, or 8-9 seasons, up until the start of Season 2. That then got cut down to a fairly firm 80 episodes. Then the producers started talking 7 seasons, after HBO had been musing 7 for months. The occasional talk of 8 suggests that the producers would prefer 8 (and maybe even 9) but they are still compromising with HBO.

HBO clearly want 7. It keeps costs down, it prevents contract renegotiations (their worst nightmare is agreeing to 8 and the contract renegotiations make the final season completely unaffordable so it gets cancelled), it keeps things concise for the complete series box set that they know will sell millions, it minimises the child aging factor and it minimises the risk of the show jumping the shark or getting tired and worn out. The show is monstrously successful though, so they might keep eight on the table as a reserve, not-at-all-very-likely option. But I think Weiss and Benioff would have to do some serious persuasion to make HBO stump out for an eighth season. The costs could easily carry them past $100 million for the season.

One of the worst things in all of this is that, due to De Havilland's Law, they can't even really start contract renegotiations until Season 7 is upon them, by which time they will have already needed to have made the decision. That's why the situation has exploded now rather than another year or two down the line. If HBO say eight, they risk not being able to fulfil it. If they say seven, they know they can deliver it.

Do you think it's possible that D&D are eager to be done with GoT? At least relative to HBO and GRRM. Once it is wrapped they will be able to call the shots and name the price for their next project. Maybe they have their own stories (books, scripts) they want to tell. They've already been at work on this project since, what, '07?

The initial meeting with GRRM was in January 2006, from the look of it, and they pitched the project to HBO and Showtime in March. So over eight years now. At least eleven when it's done. That's pretty insane by TV standards.

[Guest Thorrand]

I know of only two where Dan just say 7 and don't mention 8 (one of which has the interviewer take from the interview with the exec that 8 isn't out of the question).

I know of at least four where 80 is explicitly mentioned or implicitly allowed by them.

The March 11 EW interview is from September 2013, again. Vanity Fair is from January-February 2014 -- 4-5 months after. NY red carpet premiere was, what, a week and change ago? Chill out already. Maybe in September D&D had settled on 7. Since then, they're back to allowing that it could be 8. Maybe in three months, they'll be back to 7, or maybe they'll say they're now thinking 8, or maybe they'll say it's 7 or 8. Who knows? What I am sure of is that at this time D&D aren't absolutely certain either way. Something's moved them from the sure on 7 to not so sure -- possibly a result of wrapping this season and starting to outline season 5 and seeing that they could indeed go 8? Again, who knows.

http://screenrant.com/game-of-thrones-final-season-3-8/ published a year ago, wanting eight seasons.

http://insidetv.ew.com/2014/03/11/game-of-thrones-7-seasons/ March 11, solid 7 seasons (despite what you're saying, I don't see anywhere that the interviewed took (8) away from the interview or sat on the interview for 6 months.

http://insidetv.ew.com/2013/06/09/game-of-thrones-future/2/ Reported that a producer quoted 7 months but it wasn't firm. ^ sounds firm.

"It doesn’t just keep on going because it can,” Weiss explains. “I think the desire to milk more out of it is what would eventually kill it, if we gave in to that."

I can understand you holding out hope because your friend is being backed into a corner, but he sold the rights to HBO. It would be unfair to D+D to have them sacrifice their artistic vision for the series because GRRM is a slow writer. That's his perogative and I'm not rushing him at all, but you guys can't expect a popular series to slow down just so they don't catch up to the books. This has been coming for quite some time now, he had opportunity to stay ahead but he isn't going to unfortunately. Don't blame the showrunners for that. It's mostly due to feast/dance having very little plot momentum. Maybe cutting out some of the travel and fitting the Mereen and Winterfell battles into dance would have given more time. (No offense but didn't you assist in editing it?)

[beastiecube]

I never in my wildest dreams thought TWOW was close to being released. Overall good news though since it sounds like he's having an easier time getting his ideas from his brain to the paper than he has previously. I've always figured maybe Q4 2015. Maybe.

[Ran]

James Hibberd has told me the interview series he was posting up was from months ago. The Dinklage interview from the same series of interviews is specifically dated to September and in Croatia, so that's when all the EW interviews date from. The man's got his Twitter background to a photo of him on set, messing around with a Lannister sword, for that matter. This isn't stuff from this year.

I have no clue how Hibberd writing, "Seven sounds okay to HBO, as well. Or perhaps eight," means that eight isn't a possibility based on his interview with Lombardo. He doesn't pull that out of thin air, and I can only assume that the nuances of body language and intonation -- or perhaps quotes not yet published -- give him the impression that HBO's stance is not firm as to seven seasons. And it's worth noting that if Lombardo was planning to start talking to them about the 5th and future seasons after filming wrapped, that the results of these talks are now why they're talking 70-80 hours to Vanity Fair in Jan/Feb, and 70+ hours at the NYC premiere.

I think Werthead's got the wrong end of the stick of it, though: I think D&D were the ones feeling firm on 7 around September, and it's HBO's execs who have become more open to 8. Whether that's a relief to them or not, I can't say. Maybe as we come to the end of the season and we get some fresh interviews, someone will put it to them again and get them on record as to what the outlook looks like.

[Guest Thorrand]

You saying the interviewer put that line in there based on a type of vibe he was getting is complete conjecture. I take the words as they were written. It's not some type of double meaning. They said 7 had a synergy, even after their meeting with Martin. I'll listen to the showrunners at their work until they say differently, I'm a practical guy and if you have to grasp at straws (perceived body language, a wink) it is not that strong of an argument.

Not even sure I'd trust the execs at this point either, their main concern is dollars while D&D is to the story. If the story ends at seven then it ends there. We're going around in circles, let's agree to disagree. I'm not trying to crush anyone's hopes, I just still don't see it going beyond seven seasons from what they've said. I also do believe they've given martin respect (and also a reasonable sized check).

[Werthead]

Based on the interview as presented, Hibberd's comment about, "Maybe eight," seems to be a response to Lombardo saying, "Seven or eight," is the longest they have gone on their previous shows. However, as Lombardo then qualified that to mean seven, I think Hibberd was either getting the wrong end of the stick or decided to make it sound a bit more hopeful for readers.

Also Ran, did you ask Hibberd if this specific interview was part of the same set as the September ones, or are you assuming? Lombardo I don't think was there, for one, and Lombardo also mentions sitting down in the near future to discuss the future of the series. Why do that in September 2013, mid-filming and where there will be no need? That makes far more sense now, in Spring 2014, when they're going to be making firmer plans for Season 5, the renewal notice, Season 4's opening ratings, Dan and Dave's recent contract extensions etc.

What strikes me as unconvincing is that HBO cannot possibly promise eight seasons right now, because they do not know how expensive it will get. Maybe Emilia Clarke goes off and becomes a huge star in the new Terminator movie and her agent demands $1 million an episode in Season 8 or no show? Dinklage is arguably getting to the point where he could demand that now. Or they might both agree to stay with a much more modest price rise to finish the show and thank the project that made them stars. HBO won't know either way until they get round a table with everyone, which likely won't be until Season 7 at the latest (when it's too late). OTOH, HBO know they can 100% promise and deliver Season 7 right now (at least from a contractual standpoint).

I do agree that D&D's contracts do indicate that HBO hasn't made the final decision: if they had, they would have probably asked for three-year contracts for both of them rather than two, as renewing for two and then one more will be more expensive (but not as expensive as two-and-two). That does suggest that Season 8 has not been completely ruled out at this time.

[Ran]

The specific interview in which D&D entertain only seven is from September. You're right, Lombardo may be a more recent follow-up added to it. I continue to err on the side of Hibberd, who doubtless had more conversation with Lombardo than the bare quotes we see, has a good sense of Lombardo's intentions.

I absolutely am not arguing that 8 is being promised. I'm saying the notion is being entertained, but ultimately things like negotiations with actors and the level of popularity of the show and how likely S5 will build on that popularity will be the ultimate decides.