I start with a precisation: the liturgical reform that happened during the Second Vatican Council is part of a longer process that intellectually start in the XIX century (with the birth of the liturgical movement, that wanted to restore the 'roman rite' in his 'purity'), factually started during the papacy of Pius X (new order of the Divine Office, reform of the rank and the day of festivities, promotion of a more frequent Communion, promotion of liturgical uniformity and gregorian chant), had an intellectual change between the two World Wars (the interest shifted from the Roman Rite to a 'apostolic liturgy' rapidly identified with the so-called 'Apostolic Tradition of Hyppolytus'), had an accelleration during the papacy of Pius XII (that created the new Holy Week, abolished the baptismal rites of Pentecost, proposed a new form of the Divine Office and in the Mediator Dei created the filosophical basis for the subseguent operations stating that 'the rule of the prayer have to follow the rule of the faith') and finally with John XXIII we entered in the final phase: the Missal he promulgated in 1962 have a very different rank of festivities and he started to abolish the Octaves and he challenged the unreformability of the Roman Canon (the millenary Eucharistic Prayer of the Roman Church) adding the name of st Joseph in the Communicantes.

Then came Paul VI and we had another accelleration: in 1965 he promulgated another Missal with many semplifications and rubrical changes and the possibilty of the use of the vernacular in orations, readings, prefaces etc. then we had another rubrical semplifications, the possibilty to adopt the vernacular in all the parts, then more Eucharistic prayers (the three officials plus more adopted locally in unofficial way) and finally the final Novus Ordo Missae in the 1969-1970. The process continued in the '70 with the adoption of many local variants (as the Zairese Rite, the Swiss and Brasilian Eucharistic Prayers etc). Then the process stopped, both for natural collapse and for the reaction of John Paul II.

I did all this approssimative resume of the entire history to explain that in this process there was many steps, and no step could be separated from the others.

The receptions of every step could be very different and not necessary unreformable and linear.

I put some examples:

- in the diocese of Gorizia during the rogations and other rites there was a local rite and was used in some parts the friulan language. The imposition of the Roman Ritual and the exclusive use of latin language happened in the 1926. Then in 1970 there was a return to some of the ancient practices (source);

- exhamining some Missals in a parrocchial archive I notices the name of the S. Joseph was added in pen to the Canon and there was no Missal with the insertion printed, so probably the paris never bought the missal of John XXIII and probably never followed all the new rubrics;

- I read that during the Council in many Third World Countries many places still used the pre-Pius XII missals, because it was onerous to buy the new missal and scarce communications. Also there was some resistance to this reform (in fact the oldest Traditionalist Catholic group started in Mexico in the '50 and for first thing refuted this changes);

- during the papacy of Paul VI many episcopal conference and bishops started a parallel and local liturgical reform, the in many cases superated in speed the official reform': for example in 1965 in Italy circulated a semi-official translation of the Canon (if remember was approved by a bishop) that inspired the official one; another example is that in the sixties the French and Dutch bishops approved many local eucharistic prayers, still used in the seventies.

There was a conflictual and complex relation between the reform that was made by the experts in Vatcan and what happened in many countries: the official changes inspired radical local changes and in many ways the official ones received and/or moderated many of them. Also many experts and bishops that ask for changes and modifications that were refuted introced them later in the translations in the local languages.