The way I see it is this way:
Would you want Seven Samurai restored so that the optical wipes there had been redone using modern technology, the crew wires and reflections painted out, camera bounce stabilized, some makeup and special effects retouched to seem realistic and a 7.1 Dolby TrueHDD audio remix?
Would you want King Kong with all the opticals digitally redone, the stop-animation smoothed out a bit, all the goofs and effects errors cleaned up with digital touch-ups? And a new 7.1 DTS audio mix with a couple re-done sound elements for extra punch?
Doesn't it sound absurd to even be contemplating these things? I mean, think about it, digitally re-compositing things in Seven Samurai and giving it a 7.1 audio mix? Painting out the effects errors in King Kong? Why would anyone even have such bizarre thoughts in the first place? They're old films, classic films, so you leave the films alone, clean them up so they look as best as the film pieces can, and present them as the films were, with their original audio in mono. Just like they have been.
Yet it has become normal to think about Star Wars in terms of alteration. In a reverse situation, the idea of presenting the film exactly as it is and leaving in all its flaws and original elements gets responded to with inquisition.
I think the base matter in all this--aside from the precedent of the 1997 SE, which started this all and without which such a discussion would not even be had--is that Star Wars is still contemporary and new. The films are still being presented as "new" or "modern" material, and so there is the expectation that it must match--at least as much as possible--the new material being made as well. "It's all one Saga." And so the idea of having the film mis-match--even contradict--the contemporary version is distasteful. Lucasfilm has been trying to re-write the OT in terms of its story focus, and they've also been trying to in terms of its aesthetic.
The bottom line is that the films aren't seen as "Classics." People have not fully let them go, let them be as they were with all their charms and flaws. They are still treated as though they were modern films. Seven Samurai, jesus you don't mess around with that, it's an old classic and you should respect the film as it was. King Kong, how dare you think about touching a frame of those pioneering effects, that's like re-painting the Mona Lisa. But Star Wars--why would you want all that grain and those bothersome matte lines in there? And mono sound with all those old sound effects, please, this is the modern era of 7.1 sound. What's the difference, the story is the same, the effects are the same, it's just improved so you can enjoy the experience more.
Unfortunately, it is like re-painting the Mona Lisa. Films like Star Wars and King Kong are to the fine art of motion pictures as the Mona Lisa and Sistine Chapel are to painting. Extreme? Actually no. It may seem weird to make such grand comparisons, but cinema is a very young art and movies like King Kong and Star Wars are not only genre cornerstones but cornerstones of the medium itself, some of the most pioneering, influential and culture-shaping examples of the art medium. People take cinema for granted, it's "just entertainment," but then Mona Lisa is "just a painting." That's why when I hear people write off complaints--"Oh, 'it's like crapping on the Mona Lisa,' grow up guys." I think Frank Darabont said that, and people like Lucas I think have expressed similar sentiments. Unfortunately, it is exactly like crapping on the Mona Lisa as far as cinema is concerned. I would expect classic films and Star Wars in particular to be treated the same as you would treat a classic painting.