My tldr: the author Kate Guadagnino describes her changing assessment of TSOM from being obsessed with it to being dismissive of it.
The obsessive stage included being hooked by the songs' earworms and reading a book bio from the actress playing the oldest child. [js2 corrected]
The dismissive stage is noticing that the Nazi depiction is too tame and not historically accurate of all their evils. In other words, she now sees the movie more like critics who derided it including Pauline Kael and Joan Didion.
I think I've captured the essence of her essay but I didn't find it to be interesting. Perhaps other readers who upvoted the story to the front page can tell me if I missed something.
To me, an analogy would be writing about not listening to Prince's song "1999" because she's come to the realize that annihilation from nuclear war is a terrible thing. She saw the photos of Hiroshima victims and was horrified by the layers of burned skin peeling off. Therefore, to write a song that has bouncy major chords with a dance beat about nuclear destruction is "empty". Even though she loved the song as a teenager, she will now bid "farewell to '1999'" and tell us all about it.
Or one could write an essay about no longer visiting the Disney amusement ride, "Pirates of the Carribean" because it trivializes the real violence in the 1500s[1] of slavery and murders (including beheadings).
I think the author wants to convey that switching the perspective about TSOM from the naive innocence of "songs with hooks" to a more enlightened criticism of "inaccurate Nazis" as a maturation.
I disagree and think it's perfectly reasonable for people to continue watching TSOM reruns for the "doe a deer a female deer" and not care that it doesn't try to be a Ken Burns documentary film.