If you are reading this then you may have seen an assortment of good and bad reviews. I truly am confused by the negative reviews. It's narrative structure is initially difficult to follow. It's the first film adaptation to attempt to tell a story like an open world video game would, through side quests within a greater arc. This is different than a typical narrative structure and if you lack the patience to put multiple converging pathways together, this isn't for you. The Witcher demands your attention in order to understand it, but that's what makes it rewarding. It makes you think. It also gives you a nice assortment of legitimate bad moments and nice healthy dose of justified nudity to satisfy your monkey mind as well. Henry Cavill wields a sword like a legitimate bad man, he not only looks the part, but he moves like a martial artist. The action sequences are thoughtfully executed and not the grandiose over-the-top smokey nonsense like the last season of GOT. Cavill also really did his best to nail Geralt's mannerisms and the show thoughtfully recreates the iconic scenes from the games. My only gripe is that sometimes I find that it occasionally becomes a bit like a campy made for TV version of itself: it can occasionally come off corny which doesn't cohere with it's complex narrative structure. By the way, The Witcher predates GOT, so calling it a knock off doesn't really make sense. No one considered GOT a knock off of LOTR, it's just another fantasy story. Don't listen to the reviews that are generated by people who haven't actually watched the show; Jesus Christ when a film critic can't be bothered to sit on them and watch a TV show before formulating an opinion, we really have entered a new era of entitled laziness.