The "image" of JPII is a conundrum. On the one hand, he was extremely charismatic and gave many, many people a very real hope and a sense of purpose during a desolate century. However, he was and is not Jesus and the "media Pope" is a problem the Church has been dealing with since. The Pope must travel and must smile, etc etc whereas we know a Pope certainly has his work cut out for him just in the Vatican. The Church has never taught that every image and utterance of the Pope is divinely wrought, but media has twisted us into an odd place. "You wouldn't dare criticize the Pope, would you? Look how holy and beautiful he is!". (By media and "us" I am referring to believing Catholics; obviously secular media has no problem criticizing the Pope). In the US there has been a marked shift since McCarrick in the laity for holding the bishops more accountable, which albeit it is proceeding at a much slower pace than any of us would like. But a dam has broken, thank God.
Regarding the US, I mentioned the American church & McCarrick as an example of still-living Vatican power-players shifting blame and it was not my intention to say such problems are unique to America. Indeed, Dziwisz and other players boil my blood like little else.
However.
Despite the early life reverence, I feel that as a grown adult I do now see him in a completely different light - as a man put into a certain role which he has played correctly, and ultimately he has protected an institution that sheltered abusers, corruption, wealth and which ultimately is a cancer spreading over Poland right now, destroying the society from within.
Also not everything is about US - look what's happening in Poland with cardinal Dziwisz, the closest confidant of the pope - I always suspected he was a piece of shit after disobeying the direct testament of JP2 and making money off of it, but now it's been confirmed he's much much worse than just profiteering off a dead pope.