This question might sound a little self-contradictory. When I say well-made, I mean that the acting is strong, the production values are impressive, the action scenes are well-choreographed, the dialogue is believable, etc. And what I mean by formulaic is that it's just the same stuff we've seen before -- a nasty baddie threatens to destroy or take over a planet or planets and the good guys beat them in the end -- and there's nothing more than that. Sort of a plot in which you could stick the characters from Star Trek or the Avengers or Harry Potter, and the film would still work just as fine. For instance, the original Saga has some of those formulaic elements, but it also gave us a lot of unique things, especially for its time -- the first 20 minutes following a stuffy robot arguing with a chirping trashcan on wheels, a sort of Eastern religion combined with super powers (the Force), a teenager whose uncle doesn't want him to leave the moisture farm, a hermit with magical powers, the greatest master of the Force a 2-foot tall creature who speaks with the wrong word order, the villain being revealed as the hero's father, the other main villain running both sides of a war to gain power and tempting the guy prophesized to kill him to be his ally, etc., etc. And to give you an idea of where I'm coming from when I say a well-made formulaic film. I'd say both the 2002 Spider-Man film and the new Star Trek were pretty well made but also pretty formulaic. (Star Trek is really almost a remake of SW without any of those original elements mentioned above). So what would your reaction be if the new film is a good Hollywood film and nothing more? Would you be disappointed if it didn't have any those original elements that make SW unique? What would you prefer -- a new installment that is okay but original and feels like Star Wars OR a new installment that is entertaining but also feels more like a generic by-the-numbers studio film?