If there's a lesson here concerning Star Wars, I'd argue it's simply that a content company like Disney, which is clearly what they've become, can't just look at all IP as having the same qualities and potential for mass production.
In other words, Star Wars isn't Marvel, and it isn't Potter, and it isn't any number of other properties that translate well either in modern cinemas or in modern theme parks. It's still highly successful in many, many ways, of course, but it was created under completely different circumstances: it was born in a particular time and place (both physically and culturally) that it's more tied to than something like Marvel's universe, it began life as a standalone film and not as a series of ongoing monthly comics or a planned multi-part epic (no matter how much Lucas liked to say he always saw it as a 9 episode series), it also was born in the medium of film instead of print, and it's not a franchise that places a premium on locations and tangible world building.
Basically, if you want Star Wars to perform at the box office like the MCU, where you can pump out movie after movie each year and just watch the profits roll in bigger and bigger, you have to first recognize that it's not designed like that in the first place. Marvel has decades of material and characters to draw from, again due to its nature as a monthly publisher and the ongoing serial nature of most comic book superheroes. Star Wars was never like that: it was a single film that spawned two sequels, various extended universe material of wildly inconsistent quality (though I appreciate they brought Grand Admiral Thrawn back), and then had an absolutely awful prequel trilogy later on. Much of the supposed "deep lore" people attach to it is often just dialogue that had to get thrown in to make characters feel more fleshed out...like, consider the Solo movie depicting Han making "the Kessel run"...who cares about the Kessel run?! It was a throwaway line in the original movie to allow Han to brag about his ugly ship, not some mythical moment absolutely needed in an origins movie. There's also the consideration of wanting Star Wars to be "timeless", so it can constantly appeal to new generations of fans; it certainly can, I say that as someone born two years after Return of the Jedi was released, but whereas something like Marvel constantly reinvents itself over the years in terms of tone and how it approaches modern audiences, the original Star Wars was very much of its cultural time and place, so it might not be as "evergreen" as some have assumed with younger audiences.
Similarly, it's not a franchise focused on unique, fleshed out places. Star Wars is the series that has "the desert planet", "the ice planet", "the forest moon", "the swamp planet", etc.; people like me who grew up reading a lot about Star Wars know the names of those places, but the average fan doesn't care, and more importantly the movies themselves don't spend a lot of time developing these locations, either, because they're secondary to the events of the plot. This is a strike against Star Wars as themed area material; not totally disqualifying, mind you, as I'm sure the completed GE will be just fine, but it can't hope to compete with something like Potter, where everything from the buildings, to the shops, to the food, to the drinks, to every tangible thing you could want to experience is focused on in great detail in the books and films, and thus become destinations for park goers.
You know what would fit these qualities? Something like Tolkien's Middle Earth; tons of lore to draw from and make tons of stories around, plus a high attention to detail concerning locations, foods, scents, music, and other place-making elements that would contribute to themed area entertainment. But Star Wars isn't that, never was that, and trying to act like it can be that the same as any other property is a fundamental misreading of what Star Wars has always been.
Aaaaaaaall of that said...I still think people whine too much about the sequel trilogy; I'm really not ever sympathetic to the whole "ruining muh childhood!" argument, and there was always this nasty undercurrent among a lot of the loudest negative voices that I've been very uncomfortable associating with at all. I'm sorry, the prequels were just so bad, so the worst I can muster against the new ones is "they're kind of pointless". For the past couple of years I've framed it that, as a guy in his mid-30s, I'm of an age where I could grow up loving the original Star Wars trilogy, really disliking the prequel trilogy, and just being bored with the new trilogy.
/sarcasm
