I get what their point was, but for Qui-Gon specifically I would definitely be able to come up with words like: stubborn, passionate, opinionated, compassionate. For the other examples they gave, like Queen Amidala, I would agree with their point that it's hard to quickly come up with adjectives. But I really do think that there's a fully fledged character there in Qui-Gon. The responses to that question probably depend a lot on who you're asking though. If the sample is biased for people who don't care for the prequels in general (or the whole thing is staged, like it may have been for that review) then you might get responses similar to those from the review. Additionally, he only had one movie worth of screen time whereas Han Solo had three (at the time of the review) and so that may play a factor in what people remember. Personally, I have many criticisms of the prequels, but the character of Qui-Gon was not one of them.

Nah, AotC is genuinely worse. Its central plot is a mystery that is never even remotely resolved, and unlike TPM which at least had Neeson to carry it there's not a single character who's entertaining or engaging to watch. It has none of the visual appeal of TPM due to its flat quality, its pacing is utterly dire. And as the romance was billed as the centerpiece it's a pretty big problem for it to fail so spectacularly.

I'd say it is incoherent. Anakin claims Obi is like his father, but we never, ever see that in any meaningful sense besides Obi lecturing Anakin pedantically. And "not true to Guinness but consistent within itself" (which, again, I don't agree with) is still a problem, as these are supposed to be prequels to the movies he was in and depicting a relationship that's faithful to the one he described.

I totally buy the friendship in RotS. It's one of the better parts of the film. But in AotC it's nonexistent.