Why did they remove it? (Page 2 of 2)

In regards to the non-Fleming novels, it would be interesting if they did something similar to Nobody Lives Forever. They could have Blofeld in custody for the entire film, but he's put a price on Bond's head and Bond has to run the gauntlet for the entire film. It would depend on the writers, or course. A non-stop chase would probably get boring. They could have a separate story going on in which SPECTRE will commit an atrocity if Blofeld is not released, thereby blackmailing the British government into setting him free. Madeline could get killed in the crossfire, instead of being deliberately assassinated by Blofeld. Or she could survive, it doesn't matter. Bond would have reason enough to go after him in another film.

Trouble with this story would be that the new-age SPECTRE they invented is nowhere near as disciplined and powerful as the classic organisation from the last century. Its members fight each other in full view of the others, which surely creates fear and discontent, its headquarters is hidden well, but once found it can be blown to heaven with a few potshots (no need for ninjas here!), and its top leader is easily captured. Their only real success was remaining undercover for so long, but once discovered they are crushed and destroyed with a minimum of effort. They would never be able to commit an atrocity or blackmail a government - poor buggers don't even have a mastermind and a headquarters anymore! I think we should forget about SPECTRE and move on to new villains.

Whatever they decide about Bond 25, I think it would be--if not absurd--very difficult to leave Blofeld where he is.

Yes, I agree that it would be interesting to have him locked up for a film or two.

However, Daniel Craig will not be around much longer. 

And since this Blofeld is tied to Bond's past it's much more difficult to stick a new Bond actor into this established story.  All this Oberhauser/Skyfall business is too specific to the Daniel Craig James Bond. 

We can accept a change in Bonds when Bond being a widower is the only official backstory--the Moore, Dalton, and Brosnan Bonds all addressed that tragedy.  But everything else about cinematic Bond's past was up for grabs.

Now Bond has a rich and detailed history.  How can they jettison that history when it (meaning Blofeld) is staring Bond--the new Bond--right in the face?

So, yes, they may have written themselves into a corner...unless they can get Craig back and get to work very quickly on his last one or two films.  But this is the risk EON takes now that they've eschewed stand-alone adventures.

Dalton definitely. Brosnan... I got the feeling his version never lost a wife.

It's directly addressed with Dalton in LTK when Felix tells Della: "He was married once, but it was a long time ago."

And there's a nice moment in TWINE when Electra asks Brosnan's Bond if he's ever lost anyone. It's a crackerjack bit of acting on Brozzer's part, where he doesn't actually answer the question, but  we can see it on his face. Brilliantly underplayed 

Planning to watch both films again soon, will be waiting for the scenes you guys have mentioned with interest. Thanks!

I really like this plot.

Its a bit like the BBC Sherlock episode The Great Game which was really tense and ended on a cliffhanger of monumentous proportions.

Please apply to be on the Bond 25 writing team!

Thanks