I don't have any issue on the aesthetics as these are subjective. On any point on the spectrum of utilitarian and flamboyant you win/lose some audience effect. The trick is to rest on the spot where your target audience's visual preference resides.

The issue here (at least on the front page and mobile screen) is the Information architecture. Putting the graphic first before the tagline pitch is not very effective (the graphic is a visual aide not the other way around) and a form instead of a call to action button doesn't also work. The next set of info is too far below the fold, etc.

I can see that its layout is inspired by the Facebook logged out home page. But this is not a household-known social network but an app that does one thing and a bunch of extras so the goal is not to dazzle then cause action but to inform to cause action.

In my humble opinion this exercise took some important aspect of the product backward in terms of informing users more efficiently and I would imagine the load times (for the website) also adversely affected. Im not saying you should scratch this redesign but refine this version more and hopefully iterate to one that is pretty and informative (and faster!)