system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: The Star Wars prequels were good movies but got negative reviews because of purists and elitists fans

The prequels were good movies. They had better fight scenes, better use of CGI and had pretty interesting story. But the reason many people hate on it and it got negative reviews is because of purists who feel that the prequel do not fit into their view of what Star Wars is. Since they grew up with the original trilogy they have a sense of nostalgia to them, and when the new movies came up they felt their nostalgia threatened by them. An example is the riddicilous criticism against Jar Jar. Many people complained that he was comic relief and was just a strange looking alien with a funny voice. But the easily forget that this is basically what Chewbacca was in the original trilogy. This kind of hypocritic criticism plagued the prequels and led to many critics to give them a much lower score than they deserve. Most likely those reviewers grew up watching Star Wars and now have the nostalgia for the original and hate for the new prequels. Most people I know that only seen the prequels or seen the prequels before the originals like it. But most who don't were often influenced by the purists fan and went in watching the movie with an already negative mindset.
gpt
So your standards for what makes a good movie are:

* good fight scenes
* good use of CGI
* pretty interesting story

Leaving aside the fact that the prequels aren't what most people would call interesting... What about writing? Dialogue? Acting? Practical effects? Continuity with the established universe? Character arcs that make sense, or, god forbid, move you in some way? Emotional resonance?

It sounds to me like your standards are just lower than most -- you don't care about much beyond being mildly entertained for two hours, which is fine.  But if you serve me a hot dog and call it prime rib, I'll probably object.