For me the camera is the star and the performances are part of what helps carry it, and as I said the acting aside from ridiculous cameos is convincing. My problem is how the long takes are utilized, the way there's rarely a real sense of progression through time and space and how the open bright setting mostly has everything looking completely flat and empty. The long-takes served almost no purpose here aside from maybe 2 or 3 scenes.
Also for me it's absolutely worth pointing out that the movie is not in fact one-long take, even ostensibly because there's a blatant cut to black in the middle and that contrasts with your second point about how the movie condenses 12 hours into 2 without noticing, to me it was glaringly obvious when it just jumped hours in time.
As for the direction, it really really let me down, Sam Mendes is just not a great visual storyteller and the fact that shots are seamlessly stitched together does not mean this movie did what it set out to imo.
On point 2, I was talking about aspects like the truck ride. Or immediately after the cut to black where it pans over the dead soldier, the camera follows through the window and we see George MacKay running through that fallen French (I think it was French) city.
Like it is almost dream-like in that if you actively think about it, it doesn't make sense but in the moment you accept it. It is like a magic trick, that if you are actively looking for how it is performed, you might notice the rabbit is already in the hat. But if you just go with it, you will smile when he pulls the rabbit out of the hat.