Digging into the Odd History of Blade Runner’s Title

Re:Digging into the Odd History of Blade Runner’s Title by themanmaran on Monday July 31, 2023 @02:52PM (#36947168)

Wild. Doc turned sci-fi author wrote a book [1]. Book re-written by someone else to be a movie [2]. Movie never published. Rights purchased and turned into a totally different movie [3].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bladerunner

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blade_Runner_(a_movie)

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blade_Runner

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Digging into the Odd History of Blade Runner’s Title by wumms on Monday July 31, 2023 @05:17PM (#36948970)

> Movie never published

"Blade Runner (a movie) was loosely adapted as the 1983 film Taking Tiger Mountain [0], after co-director Tom Huckabee purchased the rights to the novella from Burroughs for $100." [1]

[0] (movie is rated 4.7@imdb) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taking_Tiger_Mountain_(film)

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blade_Runner_(a_movie)#Adapt...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Digging into the Odd History of Blade Runner’s Title by usrusr on Monday July 31, 2023 @08:57PM (#36951002)

Filmed as a movie adaption of a Camus-inspired poem in Wales, Wales as a fallback location after failing to reach Tangier. Rearranged into a loose adaption of the novel "Blade Runner (a movie)" only in post production. That's amazingly true to the convoluted nature of that story's evolution!

The articles referenced on the Wikipedia page seem to be almost deliberately nonspecific about the timing of pulling in the Burroughs material: at some point between 1979 and 1983, so it could be well before or after Ridley Scott turned those two words into a household name. Might be the best way to play the cards given, ambiguous endings run in the family.

[ Parent | on HN ]