I respectfully disagree. I don’t really see George as someone who was trying to max out on profits with the Prequels. I see what he did as giving endless creativity to collectors and recouping his investment in order to stay independent. He had to make his investment back in more ways than just the films. It’s the complete opposite of what Disney did with X-Wings and TIE Fighters. They made everything look like the Original Trilogy as they wanted to make something that they felt was Star Wars. It may look like it to some extent but I don’t think it entirely feels like it.

They did carry over a few things but it’s the execution of the ideas that seems to be vastly different. I never saw midi-chlorians as a weakness to the story. I think they add an extra layer when you consider the Whills angle. I equally don’t mind the political storybeats as Star Wars has always been political. I honestly don’t see the criticisms of the Prequels as detrimental to my enjoyment of them.

I would have been right there with you completely if the story that George started didn’t feel incomplete. The difference from my estimate and I could be completely wrong is that Gene Roddenberry got to tell his stories before someone else came into the picture to expand his work or he at least was still involved in some way. I’ve never been the biggest Star Trek fan but I have enjoyed Next Generation in the times I’ve watched it. I’d probably feel differently if I were more invested in the original series.

It’s all ultimately subjective. No one answer is correct but I do think the original creator no matter who they are should be given the chance to complete their life’s work. Unfortunately life doesn’t always go the way we want it to and this is a case of that.