As Ratman has said if one found the film engaging as a whole it is unikely such nitpicking would be taking place. Hence why the poor dialogue and wooden actiing in the original films is so often ignored but rabidly criticized in the newer films.
.
I don't think this is the case. My feeling on the dialogue and acting in the first movies is the actors all have very good chemistry and variable acting levels. But the chemistry is there and the casting seemed to work. Even if people weren't the best actors in the world, they had a charisma or spark. I think in the prequels, the dialogue most people have in mind is the stuff between Anakin and Padme. And they just didn't have chemistry and something was really off about the deliveries. I don't know if it was the direction, the dialogue or the actors, but I never once doubted the love between Han and Leia, no matter how cheesy the dialogue. With Anakin and Padme, they just never seemed to be in love.
That said, you also had great actors in the prequels delivering lines solidly. I think mainly it is the Padme and Anakin thing (I didn't really notice an issue until I saw Episode II in the theaters. And it was definitely those Anakin and Padme scenes that pulled me out of the movie.
In the newer movies (the first one at least, as I haven't seen the second one). I feel like the acting and chemistry is closer to the original trilogy. For example, Emo Kylo Ren doesn't work on paper for me (I was dreading it walking into the theater) but when I actually saw him on the screen, I liked the way the actor pulled it off.