Just got back from Midway. It's OK. It felt a great deal like a standard recounting of events-style war movie. Acting was passable, CGI had that glossy look of B-level work, probably because the budget was comparably low for a movie with tons and tones of CGI. It didn't dehumanize the Japanese and gave them a few solid moments of character work, especially Yamamoto and Nagumo. Personally, I thought the way they did it was probably the right choice, you go from 1937 through Pearl Harbor to Coral Sea to Midway. Without that I suspect most people would need five minutes of a title crawl to fill them in so they understood the battle. It also subtly poked holes in a few pieces of the mythology (Torpedo 8 dragging down the fighters, etc.). Several off the battle scenes were actually fairly exciting. It also doesn't show everything moment by moment so you don't see Yorktown being hit and such things. I also like how it showed the attack of the Nautilus and how it drew the destroyer behind instead of just showing the trailing destroyer.
Personally, anyone who thinks its worse than Pearl Harbor probably hasn't watched that movie in a long time from where I'm at. No love story, minimal jingoistic BS, and while CGI they are the right planes and ships. The Pearl Harbor attack is both more condensed and vastly more watchable. They do put small bombs on the Devastators. . .
It's not great but it's solidly OK. I suspect part of the problem is that it's almost more of a docudrama; the actors are there to propel the plot and not a whole hell of a lot else.
It had some scenes of Zekes chasing Dauntlesses thru mountain passes--did the movie show anything about the early airstrikes that went from Pt Moresby to hit Lae/Salamaua (I think?)?