@Phizzy: it is interesting to look at the people that praise it vs those that criticize it. Either they are JWs themselves (at least 2 of them), most of them are evangelicals and some others with a specific religious bent. Theological, historical and critical reviews (the majority) all reject the translation. It is ‘a’ translation mostly borrowed from extant English translations.
There is no evidence in my opinion that they actually re-translated from the original languages, which is why the translation feels so wooden (which is the most common critique), it pays no attention to the actual flow of the original language, especially the Hebrew scripture which was itself based on oral tradition and thus is poetic in nature. What I think happened is they took a few interlineair translations and tried to restructure that into an English text and then obviously layered on their own theology which is how you get that result, you lose the original meaning.
This pattern is even more obvious when you look at Kingdom Interlinear, they quite literally copied W&H, changed the words wherever they needed to and then released that as their own. It is also obvious that whenever their teachings have changed over the years, they have released updated Bibles with those changes embedded which wouldn’t happen if you had an accurate translation to begin with, or if the claim is that they honestly re-translate every so often, then more would change than just a few passages.