I guess at the end of the day Hammer and Studio Canal want to sell the product and I imagine will play down the use of DNR and other shortcomings to achieve this end. To be fair to them, the fact they went back and completely re-did the DNR-hell which was the intro sequence (as well as corrected the sound issue) is a tremendous credit to them. They also have excellent communication with fans and consumers through their blog.
When I first got into BDs about a year and a half ago I would have probably thought this a very decent transfer but now I've had the chance to watch a lot of them, with transfers good and bad, from waxy to pin-sharp, I realise I would much sooner have grain and even debris on the picture as long as resolution is high. I do not want companies to blur out detail for the sake of a 'cleaner' or 'smoother' image. Eureka are fabulous at leaving grain intact, and often leaving a bit of print damage, for the sake of maximising resolution and detail. This was also achieved with the Quatermass transfer.
I also think DNR looks particularly bad, hence is ill-advised, with strongly coloured films such as Hammer's lovely technicolour productions.
Anyway these are just my opinions and as you say its all subjective. I'd be interested to know your stance when you've watched it