We, the old timers who know how great film can look, are the ones that were/are not so satisfied with Colorplus.
Now, I can bet the greatest amount of film sales is for the people 22 years of age and younger, who are into the "lo-fi" look, who scan their films using (ugh) Epson flatbeds or even (yuck) smartphone camera adapters, the guys who like to shoot expired film and enjoy light leaks... those guys are OK with getting any kind of image and it's normal that they would be just fine with Colorplus.
I still think Colorplus is a dull film. I wish Kodak Gold 100 (GA 100-6) would be available again! It was grainy, but OH what colors would you get!
Completely agree with this. No modern films have the color or the skin tones of Kodak Gold in its heyday. Even better was the short lived Ektar 25 and Ektar 125 which had incredible color, great skin tones, and virtually zero grain. These films were miles better than the modern Portra emulsions, which seem to do very weird things with blue skies. Skin tones on Portra 400 are awful too.
Yes, I have thought it unfortunate the distinct lack of seriousness or concern for quality in the way many people approach film use today. Film has such a beautiful look, and it seems like in the past more people sought to understand it and make their pictures represent this.
I am thinking that nowadays, the best bet for skin tones, is probably Kodak Ektachrome E100 with a light- to medium-strength warming filter or CineStill 800T with an 85B or equivalent filter. It is possible the daylight balanced films from CineStill can also do well with skin tones, but I think tungsten balanced film with the 85B filter often has a nice look.