criterionforum.org

This is one of maybe half a dozen films I've ever had to stop while watching at home and never returned to again. I was so appalled by the relentless
nostalgia and slavish devotion to not just a specific era of filmmaking, but a production company's output during a window of time. It's why I also gave up on
Stranger Things during the early part of its second season. I'd gladly rewatch Young Sherlock Holmes or Poltergeist; I don't need to see
a soulless imitation of it.

As your statement even indicates the film has plenty of soul even if it is not the kind of soul you enjoy. The film is passionately to the point of irrationality in love with the possibility of the past. The film isn’t nostalgic because it lacks the perspective of the present. The past is true and in fact the only truth to the film and what comes later is irrelevant. Comparing the film to Explorers which is explicitly about nostalgia is helpful here. By contrast Abrams offers no adults and never ruptures childhood instead suggesting an infinite possibility.