I haven't seen it yet, but the Guardian review gave it a three out of five, and described it as 'thoughtful' and cooler in tone (in the sense of chillier, rather than fashionable) than the Ang Lee/Emma T 1995 one, but did also say there were some weird casting decisions, especially Colonel Brandon.
Though I wonder whether some of this isn't just because we've got so used to how the Ang Lee version got around some of the 'less appealing to a modern audience blooded on the BBC Pride and Prejudice/ the Amanda Root/Ciaran Hinds Persuasion' things by good casting and essentially a re-orienting of the Dashwood girls' suitors.
Like the very careful casting of broody, sexy Alan Rickman as Colonel Brandon, who, in the novel, is depicted as a respectable, thoroughly honourable but stolid father-figure with flannel waistcoats and a touch of rheumatism, and who is presented very much as a consolation prize rather than a romantic match for a sadder-but-wiser post-Willoughby Marianne.
Also the casting of Hugh Grant doing his likeable bumbling, self-deprecating thing and play-fighting with tomboyish Margaret transformed the role of Edward Ferrars, who in the novel is another dullard -- nice, but shy, quiet and not good-looking.
And of course making Margaret much younger, and an enterprising tomboy is also appealing, and gives both Brandon and Edward Ferrars someone to play against.
Whereas in the novel Margaret is 13, and like Marianne in her romantic temperament, but without Marianne's brains.
Maybe interesting to have the beautiful mid-40s Caitriona Balfe as Mrs Dashwood, though? Gemma Jones was 53, but playing 'older' -- probably because she had to, because her 'daughter' Emma Thompson was 36 playing a character who was 19 in the novel.