There are pros and cons to the theatrical version, so I think your opinion has merit. The original script had vo, and that fits with the noir movie style they were trying to achieve. Unfortunately Harrison Ford was not into doing vo. But it is a more concise version.

The version with the VO? If so, that literally treats the audience like they're incapable of understanding blatant metaphor.

Contrast the theatrical cut: https://youtu.be/AJzIT6fQ3OU (VO at 4:13) with the director's cut: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoAzpa1x7jU

The theatrical version is punchier because it's beating you over the head. For a film that's so heavily into metaphor (I mean, Rutger Hauer's character releases a dove at the end, maybe he just likes birds, we will never know since the VO doesn't explain it) it's quite boring to just be outright told what you're supposed to think. And even if you like your scenes explained in the most anodyne manner possible, it's well known that Harrison Ford was phoning it in for the overall performance but particularly the VO, so it's not even a well-done VO in terms of literal recording.

Hardly a 'diehard fan', I like the aesthetic but it's an incredibly slow film, but I hate that VO with a passion.

With the hilariously bad harrison ford voice over? my god man.

Yeah, I'm not opening any movie topics on HN based on replies to this one :D