Sorry for the delay:

1. "Partially, but it also obeys your commands", I just re-watched it.

It's a bit vague to work with, since he used that opportunity to explain the inter-connectivity of the
principle, very reminiscent to the unified field theory centered around spirituality.
2. Completely agreed. Most of her victories are plausible. But only on a micro level, taken without a
general composition. But as story arcs on their own they seem poorly implemented.
Usually this happens to a production when there it doesn't possess the necessary space for the creative
team with a benevolent financier that understands the process and refrains from corrupting it.
You know, Hollywood producers insist that a full blown movie takes 14 years to create. Obviously, most of
this is spent in the development phase long before a single word of script is written. Development takes
time. A finely placed idea takes refinement to flourish, and refinement takes talent times effort times time.
Abrams clearly had too much influences hovering all over him to put it all together. His specialty is teasing
the audience and preserving the mystery, but in Lost he eventually showed that he can sell an unfinished
product as a mystery. (I'm a huge fan of Lost, nevertheless)
All of these reasons might explain just why the ideas that work on the story-line level aren't well done in
the final script, as well as directing itself.
A director's task is to imbue the creative team, actors included, with the spirit of the vision he's developed,
and guide and coordinate their efforts so it all fits.
Mostly, a director's work is a balance between camerawork and acting. Not that theyre mutually
exclusive, but it both falls onto a singles persons responsibility and mostly a director doesnt get to excel
at both within a single project.
SW7 shows lots of signs of rust you get with student films. You can clearly see some textbook mistakes.
Directing showing signs of a botched work, patched up in editing but clearly a failed shooting day.
Sometimes its observant to a trained eye that knows the craft, like in the force-pull-choke scene. The
scene is not thought out in the directorial sense. The act of pulling the officer and killing him has no
directors touch, directing the audiences attention. If you want an example of how this works I believe
Road to perdition to be a quite good example. In it you have many scenes and sequences which have
the quality of carefully capturing your attention, and the camera just sucking you into the universe.
Abrams usually delivers on this, but not this time.
You had literally laymans mistakes like that would make a film directing student fail an exam. Because
theyre technical and break immersion. Abrams positively knows this. So, something went wrong there,
and the result suffered. The X-Wing strip and the final island scene. Youll know it when it comes
mistakes that have no possible excuse and would be wrong for an amateur to do.

So, to be more concrete: if her force sensitivity is what gives her the edge its not well told. The idea is
100% fine, 100% in tune with the mythology, the metaphysics and the philosophy of Star Wars, but not
well told.
Let me break it down, for you:
She is a supremely talented force user