I saw it when it first came out in a small walk-in theatre. It was a Ridley Scott film and so one knew there was going to be smoke and blue lights, something that was a component of his trademark cinematography.

I never liked Philip K. Dick. He's highly overrated as a sci-fi author and was IMHO a drugged out psycho - not a prognosticator of the future.

To be quite honest from the first get-go with the interview of the replicant and his questioning, I didn't like the tone of the film. The entire "sadist" overtones were present from start to finish. Sure it was in line with the dark tone of Dick's work - but who needs it?

The "Hollyweird" crowd thinks it flopped because it had a "happy ending". Not at all. I disliked being put through a film where the peak of artistic expression is to see Rutger Hauer kill someone by squeezing his eyeballs into his head. It was sick and twisted and it seems clear Scott did casting looking for folks who had this "mentally unstable" air about them. Ford, Daryl Hannah, Olmos, Sean Young all have proven as time has passed that they are not exactly mentally "all there" so the casting was spot-on.

The folks who like Dick, Scott and all those who enjoy this and the director's cut get a high out of sadism, violence and perversion. They may not even realize why they like it. The human psyche buries these motivations deeply.

Most violent films, books and video games act as escape mechanisms and allow folks to vicariously enjoy death, murder, killing and sadism in a supposedly "safe" manner. Once one truly has evolved past these human "needs", one sees them in a different light and what was "enjoyable" or even simply "passable" becomes odious and unconscionable.

Don't tell that to Hollywood and the video game makers though - there's way too much money in feeding folks inner demons.