I suppose it comes down to whether you decide you want to like it or not. If you want to like it, you focus more on why you like it; if you don’t, you focus more on why you don’t. You can certainly discuss flaws in something you like, but primarily after it’s been established that the thing you like is the thing they like. Kind of like picking on a mutual friend behind their back, as opposed to listening to someone who hates their guts.
It’s not even really that. It’s just nitpicking I can’t stand. Yeah, you can nitpick and find seeming logic flaws in the plot or whatever. But it’s just as easy to find reasonable excuses for them. For me, these kind of little things ultimately don’t matter in regards to the movie’s quality.
That depends. The criticism of the logic behind the hyperspace kamikaze might be a bit of a nitpick, but it is a symptom of larger issues surrounding the slow chase, which is the backbone of the film. That entire sequence is built around the idea that all the rebel cruisers are being chased at a slow pace by the enemy, who conveniently cannot catch up or hit the good guys with their lasers or torpedos for 75% of the runtime of the movie (I can’t remember, if the film provided an explanation for why Hux didn’t send a squadron of fighters, which were very effective earlier in the film), with the element of suspense centered around the idea, the good guys are running out of fuel. Add to this the mutiny, which is based on two rebel leaders not communicating, leading to a side mission, that ultimately goes nowhere. I don’t think this largely plot driven sequence was well written, even if several parts had some entertainment value. Despite not liking the way Luke was handled or for what purpose, I think RJ did much better on the Ach-To and throne room sequences, which were both clever and suspenseful, as was the final confrontation between Luke and Kylo.