The way I see it, any of the changes takes me out of the movie.
The intended effect of these changes is to make these movies seem like they are part of some perfectly cohesive "Star Wars saga" that emerged from some perfect original vision, but I don't think there's been a single moment that I truly accepted that reality. I can tell that movie was made in the 70s or early 80s, dude!
These CG creatures and montage of late 90s/early 2000s locations do not look like they belong there... and when I see it, the fourth wall is shattered. I'm thinking only about the moviemaking process at that point. And the thing is, I think even new audiences - kids, even - see right through it just as I do.
The Harmy editions are refreshing. A 1977 movie looks like it's from 1977 (but clean), and you can enjoy the whole thing from start to finish without your brain going "does this make sense? If this movie is 40 years old, why does it have CG? When did they add this new sequence? Do I like it? Do I believe it?"
I think there are individuals out there that "accept" the changes of the SE and don't notice or think about them much. I also think such people are outliers, ones who don't think about the passage of time and from when each of these movies was released. Most audiences, however causal, have some knowledge that these movies came out before the advent of CG or the prequel era of settings (re: ROTJ celebration scenes), and they understand that they are seeing effects technology and prequel-era scenes which couldn't possibly have been originally placed side by side. I think the average human response to these anachronisms is bewilderment. It's a feeling of uncanny. It's a feeling of being taken out of the movie.
