Why wasn't "The Force Awakens" done this well?

Rating: 8/10 (3 April 2017)

Disney made a complete pigs ear of their first attempt at Star Wars so it comes as a massive surprise to find they've done so much better with this prequel. Given the lead times from shooting to finished film it can't have been the public criticism of the first. I must therefore assume that someone at Disney knew they were selling rubbish and had the clout to correct it for the second effort. Well done that man / woman or committee.
This is everything that the first one wasn't. The clichés were dropped, the tie in to the original films was (largely) dropped. They bothered to include a decent story without a pointless comic relief character like Finn. This is aimed squarely at an adult audience unlike Awakens with the baddies behaving like true baddies and not some 10 year old's idea of them.
The only real fault was with the cgi in resurrecting actors from the grave or their youth. It's still obviously cgi and I'd rather see a look-a-like actor or actress doing the job than a cartoon character.
I'll finish with a couple of points I'd like to whine over and they're both of a rather inconsequential nature.
1. Why is storm trooper's armour not stick proof? 2. Why does Hollywood insist on an English accent (you know that really posh one that all British actors and actresses have to adopt to get work in Hollywood) that comes from just a small percentage of the accents we have?