Does Dan have any evidence to back up the claim that the original plates were used to reprint this title? Of course, nowadays it's a cult title, but in the early 80s it wasn't a huge hit to begin with so the demand for the poster wouldn't have been there as it is today. Would Continental Litho (or other printers) have held the plates for a title for several years? Are they not destroyed or recycled?
I believe Dan's comments were lost to either the MPT graveyard or the early days of NSFGE, but they might still be in the archives somewhere.
Blade Runner, while not a box office success originally, became a cult hit almost immediately, particularly upon the initial home video release. It was common for Warner Bros. to use one-sheets for the video releases that were identical to standard theatrical one-sheets throughout the '80s and into the very early '90s (Full Metal Jacket and Gremlins 2 are two that I remember).
So there's no way that someone could have held back a stack or two of one sheets that got printed and were never folded since they were never going to be shipped? Is it not possible that they slightly over printed thinking demand on the movie was going to be bigger than it was? Then it didn't to as well as expected at the box office so they cut the request for posters and put a different movie poster up for display?
Sure, it's possible and even likely that 'legitimate' rolled BR poster exist through various means, but the ability to separate between legit and reprint simply doesn't and, likely, will never exist, therefore you'll never really know. The simple unending availability of rolled posters for this title since it's initial release leads me to believe that far more copies (and far more rolled examples) exist for this title than for others in this period.
Also, when compared to comparable titles of the period, the drastic difference between one-sheet availability (very common) and the availability of non-minty inserts, 30x40s or 40x60s (always been very difficult to come by) is striking.
Much of this reasoning is based on simple observation, but my overall feeling (which I had even before Dan made his statement) is that something had to be off with these posters.
