I like the WB period stuff well enough, but the live shows usually make for a more engaging "jazz" experience, although "jazz" is not really the point of any of this stuff in the first place, so I can see how if that's what you're looking for, you're not gonna be well-pleased, because it ain't really there, nor is it supposed to be.
What is there, I think (and this thought only strengthens as the distance grows larger) is Miles deciding that he's going to take on "pop" and win - on his own terms, with his own esthetic, wigh his own representations. Now, some might call that "selling out", but I think you can make at least just as strong a case that it's an act of defiance. After all, the notion is that "pop" = stupid, shallow, and simplistic, and none of the WB-era music (especially in concert) is ever all that, especially texturally. Wasn't Miles always a texturalist? For that matter, wasn't Miles always about not "settling" for being ghetto-ized or pigeonholed, musically or personally?
I'm not saying that anybody who doesn't like it is wrong, because that would mean that you have no right to look for what you like/want/need in music, and there's no way I'd even begin to suggest that. I'm just saying that the music has worth on the terrain that it sets out to conquer.