Critical analysis is fine and often rewarding. Nitpicking is, to me, pointless, unrewarding, and pointless (repeated to emphasize the pointlessness of this pointlessness to the point of being utterly devoid of point, and thus, doubly pointless). In this day and age where everyone thinks they are a critic and that every opinion is equally valid, a lot of people don't really understand the difference between the two. Star Wars isn't "immune" from anything. But for the most part, I find it a waste of time to dwell on perceived "negatives" because, (1) there aren't any, and (2) it is, again, pointless. I'm not saying anyone else can't. But using your post as an example, the things you call "flaws" don't resonate with me even a little bit as something that could be called a "flaw." For example, there precisely zero invalidation of Vader's sacrifice in this film (or the trilogy). In fact, I find that this film took HUGE strides to reinforce both the supreme evil of Vader AND his sacrifice, both of which the PT undermined in favor of a different take on Vader. And on and on.
And for what it's worth, I also find "this triggered me" disclaimers to be pretty pointless. "Triggered" seems to be an all-too-easy waiving away of rules of social decorum because "this annoyed me, so I don't have to be polite and play nice."