I'm with
@DEFCON 1, except that I read the opening. I read it, but if it's bad, I don't even notice, because I will just make something else up. You might think that would mean that I noticed that it was bad, but it's not so much that - it might be perfectly good, but just not what I would do. I don't think about it long enough to decide which it is. I just make something else up instead.
Like the above Baldur's Gate example. I've run it, but I don't remember what might be bad about it because I don't remember what I kept of it. I may have used
something, but I may have thrown it all away. This goes for the whole adventure, so I don't tend to notice the "bad bits".
I ran "Out of the Abyss" twice, and both groups had fun being Drow Prisoners! I think the opening of OotA was one of its better parts. The
middle was harder. My memory of that Adventure would lead me to criticize it mostly for the fact that there's not a lot in there that gives a DM any insight on what to run for ANY GIVEN SESSION. It has a campaign story, but very little info on what to do TODAY. It's a lot of work for a DM, and probably pretty bad for a new DM to run.
I could see a lot of groups flubbing that opening, though! Does that make it "bad"?