I think The Hobbit movies have gotten an unfair rap as of late.
I keep hearing from friends and critics - Well, they're just not as good as The Lord of the Rings. Um OK, I guess I would agree with that. But there is more to it than such a simple and broad statement.
First, The Hobbit is a book for children, the LOTR is for adults, so don't expect an adult movie here, Jackson is being faithful to the original intent of the material.
Second, Jackson, ever since King Kong, seems unable or unwilling to edit himself. What the LOTR had that his movies don't have since is restraint. Too much power and creative control over his own products have led to the inevitable conclusion of all successful directors, which are over-long and bloated films mired in their own ego and inability to self-edit. (cough...Kill Bill...cough).
Third, whether it was the inability to self-edit or the perennial money grab from stretching two movies into three, it should have been two movies. Then Peter, feel free to do the same thing you did with LOTR and have all the wonderful extra scenes for Blu-ray, so when you gouge viewers for the umpteenth time with yet another expanded box set of the same movie, they may feel like they actually got something out of the deal (cough...George Lucas...cough).
It almost seems like I am arguing my main point against myself. But in the end, The Hobbit movies are quite good, albeit not up to snuff with LOTR, but they really couldn't be regardless, could they? It just isn't the same story, the same mythic sweep, the same epic nature.
My advice is get over it, sit back, and enjoy. Or maybe there is a new Tyler Perry movie you are waiting for?