The ignorant layman critiques the master

I have become quite the movie aficionado throughout the years. I think I have a fairly diverse taste...I will cop to enjoying 13 Going on 30, Madagascar, Kingdom of Heaven, Crash, etc....everything from comedy to adventure to westerns to war movies to "chick flicks" to sports flicks, etc.
I guess the point of that would be to say I have seen movies made by quite disparate directors...and, truth be told, enjoyed most all of them. I think John Ford accomplished the auteur, along with Welles, probably a couple others who do not come to mind right now. Certain directors, producers, and actors just have that "feel" where you instantly know it is their flick.
This was prompted by my latest foray into the dark reaches of my mind where I am indeed a dork and nerd...fresh off having watched Episodes 1 & 2 of Star Wars last weekend...twice each..once in Spanish (thanks, Gabe, for that suggestion...you were dead on, it helps a lot) and once in English, I saw Episode III...and now am watching 4 - 6 to get the feel for the "whole" story as Lucas has repeatedly stated it is meant to be viewed.
Unlike Episodes I & II, which I have on DVD, IV - VI are on video...and these particular ones have about 20 minutes each of Lucas expounding on his craft. He spends a great deal of time talking about the need to eliminate black lines, to shoot a scene from various angles...and that is where the heading comes into play.
How many people ACTUALLY notice these things? I have often heard directors and producers talk about needing to have a shot from a particular angle...or how much money they spent on the helicoptor to get their establishing shot...
Ironically, if memory serves, that particular interview was with the director of "No Escape", a Ray Liotta vehicle set entirely on an island. I know this from the written words...yet he talked about shooting a particular scene from angles he did not like because he had to spend too much money for the helicoptors...to give an overhead view of the island...for like, I don't know, 5 - 10 seconds?
Seriously, would my view of the movie have altered any if I had not seen the island from above? Smurf no. It was just as good either way. Okay, poor example...that movie blew chunks. But the point is still valid.
Directors seem to spend a lot more time deciding things that most viewers will never notice. They seem to believe the establishing shots are more important than the story itself, and that shooting a car from under it or above it is more important than the events leading up to it.
Sometimes these angles are important. Take, for example, a situation where the drama and/or tension arises from relative positions...say, a hide-and-seek portion of a chase. Showing each participant and perhaps vague clues in the background without explicitly showing the relationship of the characters makes sense.
By contrast, two people walking the beach, such as Sandler and his co-star in Spanglish, it is not so important to get those side views...unless you are trying for the cheap sex heat when her skirt blows...but since the import of that particular scene had very little to do with sexual chemistry and a lot to do with mental chemistry, that particular shot detracted from the impact of the scene...not added to it.
The point is simple. Sure, Lucas makes much better movies than I do, as evidenced by the documentary on needles for diabetics, but I really think people such as him spend way to much time worrying about details that are ultimately of marginal importance, and not nearly enough time giving us quality stories with multidimensional characters. Not, of course, that it will stop me from seeing a couple more bad movies this weekend.
I would write more but the popcorn is done. Get your priorities straight, people.