Not seen the latest episode, but watched up to the end of the battle last night. Thought it was pretty bad up until the last 30 minutes, and the last 30 minutes had some pretty inexplicable shit in it.
The main crimes were 1) the battle tactics 2) the survival of major characters, all of whom seemed to be able to kill hundreds of 'tireless' zombie warriors with no sweat 3) the destruction of the night king without any explanation whatsoever of what he was about (although I do like that they killed off the 'main' threat before the end) 4) the visual incoherence.
On point 4) - this is what still marks (the best of) cinema out from TV shows, as a general rule. Game of Thrones has been spectacular, with beautiful costumes and all the rest of it, but it's been the writing and acting (up until recently) that have really made it worth watching. I think a sort of TV aesthetic has bled into movies now, particularly franchise fare like the MCU, and it isn't ever really talked about by critics, because it's more or less irrelevant to viewers. Perhaps the nature of TV (multiple writers and directors) makes an auterist vision difficult to sustain. The only boxset TV show I can think of with consistently impressive direction was series 1 of 'True Detective', all directed by Cary Joji Fukunaga. Fincher did some cool stuff in 'Mindhunter', even though I didn't rate the show as a whole.
I can see there's an argument for visual incoherence to communicate the chaos and terror of battle but OTOH it takes a lot of tension out of the viewer's experience when you can't even tell who's killing who (although this being season 8 of GOT, you could pretty much bet on nobody important dying).