There really isn’t anything that separates this franchise from things like Star Trek or Harry Potter beyond window dressing. If anything, this franchise made the franchise model a more commonplace thing to the detriment of cinema.
As Patrick H. Willems said, these are just family movies about space wizards. It’s not that deep.
It’s all in how you look at it or want to see Star Wars I find in the case of George’s films. It can work as he describes but it can equally work as so much more than that but not everyone wants to go in that deep as the Disney era films gleefully demonstrate. They want to enjoy it for the surface level thrills. There’s nothing inherently bad about that but George himself has spoken about all of these things I talk about. It’s just it goes right pass the majority of the audience. There’s nothing inherently bad about that either but there’s a lot there if you know where to look. This is why I’m a strong firm believer in artistic expression and visual literacy. There’s examples of things Patrick misses in Star Wars like the way shots are constructed and are actually in fact within George’s six films because of where his focus is with watching them. There’s nothing wrong with that per say but I think with any great work of art you should be able to broaden the way you see it and understand the author’s intentions. It may not be to your personal tastes but that doesn’t mean there can’t be more going on.