https://collider.com/dune-review-timothee-chalamet-zendaya
All I can say to the Collider article is that all of the complaints made about the film are equally applicable to the book.
It's a plot-driven story, mostly about grand machinations between powerful people. Whenever we learn how different people feel about something, it's through internal monologue where they just state their thoughts outright. Whenever two characters interact, we find out what they think and feel about each other through their words.
Many scenes in Villenueve's Dune are taken right out of the book - including the scene where Paul questions his fitness to lead House Atreides, and Leto tells him that all he ever has to be is his son.
Meanwhile, Leto is pretty cold otherwise, walking into a trap because he's intellectualized his ability to survive it.
I cannot think of one character in the book that is really defined by the word "passion".
And so... This is the film.
Lynch's version has the same problem, but the filmmaking is godawful.
Overall, this is quite good. I'm impressed and pretty happy with the choices Villenueve made.
Though even for a 2.5 hour "Part 1", some stuff gets cut out that I wish hadn't been. The Atreides need a bit more time on Arrakis building relationships with the Fremen and the political intrigue could have used a bit more time to develop. Some stuff could have used a little more setup as well. But this is a very difficult movie to get right, so I don't think it's fair to judge some of it too harshly.
That said, this is a beautifully shot, generally excellent adaptation, and I'm very much looking forward to Part 2.