Absolutely. It's not that the idea is inherently bad, but it doesn't work as a twist in the middle of a trilogy that clearly intended for things to go in a different direction. I do look forward to seeing what Johnson can do with his own Star Wars movie(s) but I just really don't like what The Last Jedi does with what it's given. Luke dying isn't itself a bad thing, for example, but the way he died was really lame and they did him dirty for most of the movie already. Killing off Snoke simply meant Abrams had to either introduce a new bad guy or bring Palpatine back, someone to fill the role Abrams evidently intended for Snoke.
A lot of people use the "no trilogy is planned out" argument to defend what's going on with the sequel trilogy but what they often miss is that a singular vision still usually defines the direction a trilogy takes. They have a rough idea of where they want to go, even if they don't know how they'll get there, and even when things change and evolve that singular vision ensures the spirit of what they're doing stays intact. Having the second movie in a trilogy written and directed by someone different to who wrote and directed the first and third movies is kind of a recipe for disaster if they aren't on the same page and Abram's recent comments imply they definitely weren't.
