I think it’s usable as a tool in some areas, but you have to keep in mind that it fundamentally has less artistic merit and it’s not the real thing. It can never have the same intentionality or creative process as a real person with skill. It does help people who don’t otherwise have any talent or skill to produce something functional, but functional is not the same thing as good or valuable. It can be a fun toy to play around with, but should not be taken seriously as a medium.

No one says that they’re a chef because they can microwave food, even though the food is edible and cooked. Pressing play on a music player doesn’t make you a musician, even though music is coming out. “Oh but I had to come up with the prompts.” Okay, you handed a robot some very detailed instructions. The robot still did it, not you.

In the case of fanedits, it’s probably useful for generating voice lines or deepfakes for actors that we wouldn’t be able to get otherwise. But that’s purely functional, it’s not the real actor and never can be. That’s why it’s best used for small adjustments to tweak exposition dialogue, and so far that’s mostly how it’s been used here, as far as I can tell.

The prequel CGI argument is just lame and hangs on the “the prequels were underrated” meme culture of the last decade. Even if there were a lot of real models and sets, the green screening and CG quality were still glaring problems, especially in parts of episodes 1 and 2. Most of the practical effects in the original trilogy still hold up better. No disrespect to the visual effects artists who worked on the CG. And at the very least, they were artists who had to actually do the work and adapt real concept art.