I agree. I'm not saying that people can't dislike the retcons or, if they don't fit with their interpretation of the films, consider them plot holes for themselves. But I don't think it's fair to generalize their point of view to the entire audience, either. For myself, Leia living with Padmé presents a number of issues. For one, I have a hard time imagining Padmé willingly giving up one child and living with the other. For another, I think this scenario presumes that Vader would either have to believe she was dead or no longer cared about her and was ignorant of the children. Vader believing Padmé is dead doesn't work for me for a variety of reasons -- chief among them being that Vader seems to be able to sense Luke a number of times throughout the film and because lines like "search your feelings, you know it to be true" indicate to me that it would have been very difficult to pull off a deception of this magnitude on a desperate, very Force-sensitive man. And I certainly can't imagine Padmé keeping Leia if she thought it would in any way put her at risk. Which brings us to the other possibility I mentioned: that Vader no longer cared about Padmé. In my opinion, this not only doesn't make sense, but it ruins the climax of ROTJ. If Vader didn't care about his family, why would he be willing to die for Luke? Why would he sacrifice his life and ambitions of ruling an Empire in order to save someone he barely knows when family doesn't mean anything to him? And, like you said, I think Lucas recognized that Anakin's story needed to end with the birth of Darth Vader. The prequels are the story of his fall. Another movie of him hunting Jedi would be pointless fluff. In my opinion, the intercutting of Vader's birth with Luke/Leia's birth and Padmé's death was perfectly done. I'm not saying everyone has to agree, but I don't think that it's bad just because it deviates from what Lucas said (but, notably, didn't film) twenty years ago.