@Nilitch:
I find the fans to be very nitpicky toward their franchise tbh. I'm looking at the 6 other movies and they're not perfect (to put it that way).
Like, the only thing that is that bad in this trilogy is that it's following ep6. The rest is just standard StarWars.
This is the crux of the problem for myself and, from what I've seen online, many others. Had episodes 7 and 8 been part of a reboot trilogy or some other series called Space Fights, there would be far less interest in them (and less money tooā¦), and it is far more likely they would be considered on their own terms.
To summarize why following episode 6 is such a mark against these films for some people:
The original trilogy was first, and therefore set foundation any other films would need to build to or build on. The prequels did a decent job of lining up with the world presented in the beginning of the original trilogy, although there are places where facts do not mesh perfectly. The end of Return of the Jedi provided a good to great conclusion to the saga, depending on who you ask. However, the direction of the story is clear: the major leaders of the Empire have been defeated, the Rebel Alliance has the momentum, and Luke is on his way to rebuilding the Jedi. We do not need to know all of the details of how this will happen, but we have a good idea that it will. Fast forward to the Force Awakens and the state of the galaxy is that everything predicted at the end of Return of the Jedi happened and then fell apart completely off screen. We are told that a bunch of vaguely important stuff happened in those 30 years after RotJ, but it comes across like the underpants gnomes from South Park where there is an outcome in TFA and TLJ that is discontinuous with what came before.
It also doesn't help when the sequels blatantly borrow numerous plot points and imagery from the previous entries in the series to either survive on nostalgia or blatantly subvert it. Had the Force Awakens come out as-is in 1986, I think the reactions would have been overwhelmingly negative. Some people do not mind due to the 40 year time gap between TFA and the original Star Wars, but many still consider it bad practice for a direct sequel to resemble the original so much.
As for being standard Star Wars, that is also contentious. Elements such as pacing, dialogue, tone, general look and feel, character development, etc. are done differently in these newer films than in both previous trilogies. The previous two trilogies were mostly similar in how these things were handled due to George Lucas overseeing everything, so this only serves to further disconnect the newer films from the old.
As for the other six films having flaws, I didn't think there were fans who would not admit that. The original trilogy does have problems. There are some major ones like the Luke/Leia sibling thing not being completely thought out, but there are a lot of little ones like Mark Hamill's portrayal as whiny Luke in the original film, clunky dialogue, etc. that have become a part of the charm of those films. And at best, the common consensus on the prequels seems to be a bunch of good to great ideas brought down by many other less good to bad ideas combined into films that failed to reach their full potential.
TLDR: Since 7 and 8 bear the name Star Wars, they are judged based on the continuity, style, and general context of the previous films and differ in many ways. Some consider these differences to be too noticeable and/or unfavorable, while others consider them nitpicks.
I'm only half-sure my actual points come across correctly in this post. Sorry about that.