I wouldn't describe that video as "balanced" given the tone. In fact there's a few places where the debunking video is making straw man arguments about the author of first video and places where they are just presenting anecdote or opinion as fact. To me the first video felt far more balanced, even if it may have gotten a few details wrong (the second video does at least add some interesting additional context and new citations).

The ironic thing is that debunking video generally agrees with the overall point of the first video, namely that Star Wars did undergo heavy editing and was better for it. I don't think that's an unreasonable claim either because most movies do (a point also made in the first video).

Maybe if the author of the debunking video softened their tone massively it would feel more credible. Unfortunately they come across more like a bruised fanboy (despite the first video not being overly critical) rather than an impartial observer.