I think the difference was that I thought it was an ok movie inhabiting the Star Wars universe and showing the Muggles (or whatever you call No-Mag in the Star Wars universe — “non-Force sensitive” wasn’t it?) as being heroic without the need to have the Force. That’s always been an archetype with strong legs.
I see that your point is slightly different: it was a terrible Star Wars movie. I agree with that point.
The problem was that I was still not sure that the provision of a backstory for how the plans to the DeathStar came to be with (in?) R2-D2 did great violence to overall story. In the 1977 film all we know is that Leia put them in (with?) R2-D2. We just assume she got them from…where? We don’t know. Does the fact that they were sourced by Muggles hurt? I didn’t think it did.
There’s the origin of the flaw in the first place to contend with. We’re now told that What’sHerName’s (I’ve already forgotten it) father did it all deliberately to avenge his wife’s murder. I now see that this attempt to explain was inserted to give MarySue some reason to be a vengeance seeker, and the Dad-sabotaged-the-DeathStar thing was there to connect the plot arc. This is almost exactly the sort of monkeying with the archetype that Lucas did in explaining Darth Vader’s origin. He’s afraid of childbirth? Really? Yuck.
The flaw was already there. The destruction of the DeathStar was baked in, waiting. The heroes’ heroism — the Jedi, the Rebels and the original plan-getters — was all by the by.
Heroes gotta hero. Light struggles against the Dark; it doesn’t get a pass. The struggle matters.
I get it.